$5000 per coin will never happen if PoW mining is allowed to continue

[kokojie]

Don't kid yourself, the users, since they are overwhelmingly in favor of the change, will accept the cap raise. The miners will do nothing and also accept the cap raise, because the miners will usually do whatever the users are in favor of. Also, since it's actually beneficial to the miners to raise the cap, why would they oppose it. So there, your Bitcoin cap raise, done!

So you are suggesting the users are incentivized to lower the value of their savings and damage the credibility of one of the foundational principles of bitcoin that is considered a Prohibited change (Requiring unanimous consent where even 1 user objection will block the switch) ?
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Prohibited_changes#Require_unanimous_consent

Lets lay the cards out on the table.

Why are many of the delegates within Bitshares motivated to merge but not all the users?
How would this change be much more difficult to accomplish with Bitcoin than Bitshares?

I'm not discussing the reason why the user would approve the cap raise in Bitcoin, the assumption is the user already overwhelmingly approved the change. ok?

You were saying PoS system can change the cap, PoW system can't. I'm just proving the PoW system can also change the cap, just as easily.

Btw, bitshare users also overwhelmingly approved the merge, why are you saying they aren't? there's a vote thread in bitshares forum, go read it.

[inBitweTrust]

Btw, bitshare users also overwhelmingly approved the merge, why are you saying they aren't? there's a vote thread in bitshares forum, go read it.

Where did I make this claim? I am agreeing with you that a majority approve and a minority disapprove. That is the problem. Democracy is the first 51% attack! The minority investors who disagree are being fleeced.

You were saying PoS system can change the cap, PoW system can't. I'm just proving the PoW system can also change the cap, just as easily.

Assertion, with no evidence supporting. There are differences to Bitcoin and Bitshares that make changing the 21 million dollar limit far less likely, if not impossible. Can you think of them?

[DumbFruit]

Not only that, the miner shills are insulting everyone else, by claiming their useless PoW mining is the sole reason Bitcoin has any value.

A huge part of the utility of Bitcoin is that it attains Distributed Consensus among hostile parties. This Distributed Consensus has only been successfully achieved with the use of Proof of Work. All Proof of Stake coins to date must be closely monitored and maintained by it's developers or they fall apart.

Without Proof of Work, and therefore Distributed Consensus, Bitcoin has no feature that makes it competitive among existing currencies.

[kokojie]

Btw, bitshare users also overwhelmingly approved the merge, why are you saying they aren't? there's a vote thread in bitshares forum, go read it.

Where did I make this claim? I am agreeing with you that a majority approve and a minority disapprove. That is the problem. Democracy is the first 51% attack! The minority investors who disagree are being fleeced.

You were saying PoS system can change the cap, PoW system can't. I'm just proving the PoW system can also change the cap, just as easily.

Assertion, with no evidence supporting. There are differences to Bitcoin and Bitshares that make changing the 21 million dollar limit far less likely, if not impossible. Can you think of them?

Well, I am Bitcoin stakeholder, and I disagree with the blocksize hard fork. Am I being fleeced? Don't be ridiculous.

[kokojie]

Not only that, the miner shills are insulting everyone else, by claiming their useless PoW mining is the sole reason Bitcoin has any value.

A huge part of the utility of Bitcoin is that it attains Distributed Consensus among hostile parties. This Distributed Consensus has only been successfully achieved with the use of Proof of Work. All Proof of Stake coins to date must be closely monitored and maintained by it's developers or they fall apart.

Without Proof of Work, and therefore Distributed Consensus, Bitcoin has no feature that makes it competitive among existing currencies.

Nope, just the contrary, PoW systems are proven to be easily attacked. PoS systems are proven to be very difficult to attack, in fact zero PoS system has been successfully 51% attacked so far.

[kokojie]

A huge part of Bitcoin's success is thanks to PoW.

OP can't see the forest for the trees.

OP should fork Bitcoin to proof-of-whatever and let it compete with Bitcoin. Someone, for the love of all things holy, please fork Bitcoin to proof-of-whatever and release it so we can put these endless debates to bed.

No, Bitcoin's success is thanks to its early start, to Satoshi's innovation and to the efforts of the community. PoW had very little to do with it. If Bitcoin had used PoS from the start, it would probably be more successful, and we might already be seeing $5000 per coin today.

[inBitweTrust]

It is interesting to study Bitshares as a DPoS test case example where a social 51% attack is stealing funds from the minority dissenters:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10214.0

Reasons delegates mostly approve the merger:

1) Conflict between BTSX and VOTE. ( One developer was able to leverage his time creating a competing DAC betraying what investors paid him to focus on. This is than used to motivate stakeholders and other delegates into accepting a dilution in hopes of not introducing competition. )

2) Complexity. Invictus created a clusterfuck with multiple tokens PTS/AGS/BTSX/ and multiple DACs. The merger is a hope to clean up this confusion

3) Need for capital infusion.  Invictus and developers are blowing through their IPO cash and will soon run out. Additionally, they realize they are so far behind and competition is so fierce they need a ton of capital to not get squashed with a big marketing campaign

[DumbFruit]

Not only that, the miner shills are insulting everyone else, by claiming their useless PoW mining is the sole reason Bitcoin has any value.

A huge part of the utility of Bitcoin is that it attains Distributed Consensus among hostile parties. This Distributed Consensus has only been successfully achieved with the use of Proof of Work. All Proof of Stake coins to date must be closely monitored and maintained by it's developers or they fall apart.

Without Proof of Work, and therefore Distributed Consensus, Bitcoin has no feature that makes it competitive among existing currencies.

Nope, just the contrary, PoW systems are proven to be easily attacked. PoS systems are proven to be very difficult to attack, in fact zero PoS system has been successfully 51% attacked so far.

I could write a program that could never be successfully attacked. In fact this is done all the time for banking institutions. If it fails you just roll it back and reimburse any trouble it caused. Have you had any problems with your USD bank account being hacked? I haven't.

What have we proven exactly? That you don't even need PoS or PoW to have an excellent cryptocurrency?  

[bitcool]

A huge part of Bitcoin's success is thanks to PoW.

OP can't see the forest for the trees.

OP should fork Bitcoin to proof-of-whatever and let it compete with Bitcoin. Someone, for the love of all things holy, please fork Bitcoin to proof-of-whatever and release it so we can put these endless debates to bed.

+1. Couldn't be said better.

OP has made it clear that he's a big fan of DPoS, BTSX. The competition is already there, just let the free market decide which one is better.

[kokojie]

Not only that, the miner shills are insulting everyone else, by claiming their useless PoW mining is the sole reason Bitcoin has any value.

A huge part of the utility of Bitcoin is that it attains Distributed Consensus among hostile parties. This Distributed Consensus has only been successfully achieved with the use of Proof of Work. All Proof of Stake coins to date must be closely monitored and maintained by it's developers or they fall apart.

Without Proof of Work, and therefore Distributed Consensus, Bitcoin has no feature that makes it competitive among existing currencies.

Nope, just the contrary, PoW systems are proven to be easily attacked. PoS systems are proven to be very difficult to attack, in fact zero PoS system has been successfully 51% attacked so far.

I could write a program that could never be successfully attacked. In fact this is done all the time for banking institutions. If it fails you just roll it back and reimburse any trouble it caused. Have you had any problems with your USD bank account being hacked? I haven't.

What have we proven exactly? That you don't even need PoS or PoW to have an excellent cryptocurrency?  

cryptocurrency can't use the bank model for distributed consensus. But both PoW and PoS can be used for consensus, with just one difference, Bitcoin PoW spends $500 million USD per year to do it, and PoS won't.

[redsn0w]

Not only that, the miner shills are insulting everyone else, by claiming their useless PoW mining is the sole reason Bitcoin has any value.

A huge part of the utility of Bitcoin is that it attains Distributed Consensus among hostile parties. This Distributed Consensus has only been successfully achieved with the use of Proof of Work. All Proof of Stake coins to date must be closely monitored and maintained by it's developers or they fall apart.

Without Proof of Work, and therefore Distributed Consensus, Bitcoin has no feature that makes it competitive among existing currencies.

Nope, just the contrary, PoW systems are proven to be easily attacked. PoS systems are proven to be very difficult to attack, in fact zero PoS system has been successfully 51% attacked so far.

I could write a program that could never be successfully attacked. In fact this is done all the time for banking institutions. If it fails you just roll it back and reimburse any trouble it caused. Have you had any problems with your USD bank account being hacked? I haven't.

What have we proven exactly? That you don't even need PoS or PoW to have an excellent cryptocurrency?  

cryptocurrency can't use the bank model for distributed consensus. But both PoW and PoS can be used for consensus, with just one difference, Bitcoin PoW spends $500 million USD per year to do it, and PoS won't.

But for you is it a real problem these 500 million usd /year ?

[kokojie]

A huge part of Bitcoin's success is thanks to PoW.

OP can't see the forest for the trees.

OP should fork Bitcoin to proof-of-whatever and let it compete with Bitcoin. Someone, for the love of all things holy, please fork Bitcoin to proof-of-whatever and release it so we can put these endless debates to bed.

+1. Couldn't be said better.

OP has made it clear that he's a big fan of DPoS, BTSX. The competition is already there, just let the free market decide which one is better.

I'm a bigger fan of Bitcoin, minus the PoW mining. I hold 10X more in value in Bitcoin than Bitshares.

[kokojie]

Not only that, the miner shills are insulting everyone else, by claiming their useless PoW mining is the sole reason Bitcoin has any value.

A huge part of the utility of Bitcoin is that it attains Distributed Consensus among hostile parties. This Distributed Consensus has only been successfully achieved with the use of Proof of Work. All Proof of Stake coins to date must be closely monitored and maintained by it's developers or they fall apart.

Without Proof of Work, and therefore Distributed Consensus, Bitcoin has no feature that makes it competitive among existing currencies.

Nope, just the contrary, PoW systems are proven to be easily attacked. PoS systems are proven to be very difficult to attack, in fact zero PoS system has been successfully 51% attacked so far.

I could write a program that could never be successfully attacked. In fact this is done all the time for banking institutions. If it fails you just roll it back and reimburse any trouble it caused. Have you had any problems with your USD bank account being hacked? I haven't.

What have we proven exactly? That you don't even need PoS or PoW to have an excellent cryptocurrency?  

cryptocurrency can't use the bank model for distributed consensus. But both PoW and PoS can be used for consensus, with just one difference, Bitcoin PoW spends $500 million USD per year to do it, and PoS won't.

But for you is it a real problem these 500 million usd /year ?

Of course it's a problem, I'm being charged 10% tax on my Bitcoin holding, for something that is easily replaceable and useless.

[DumbFruit]

snip

cryptocurrency can't use the bank model for distributed consensus. But both PoW and PoS can be used for consensus, with just one difference, Bitcoin PoW spends $500 million USD per year to do it, and PoS won't.

This would be news to a lot of people. Could you explain how PoS has dealt with the Nothing-at-Stake problem?

[inBitweTrust]

Btw, bitshare users also overwhelmingly approved the merge, why are you saying they aren't? there's a vote thread in bitshares forum, go read it.

Where did I make this claim? I am agreeing with you that a majority approve and a minority disapprove. That is the problem. Democracy is the first 51% attack! The minority investors who disagree are being fleeced.

You were saying PoS system can change the cap, PoW system can't. I'm just proving the PoW system can also change the cap, just as easily.

Assertion, with no evidence supporting. There are differences to Bitcoin and Bitshares that make changing the 21 million dollar limit far less likely, if not impossible. Can you think of them?

Well, I am Bitcoin stakeholder, and I disagree with the blocksize hard fork. Am I being fleeced? Don't be ridiculous.

Way to sidestep the discussion and not address the questions honestly. What does the blocksize hardfork being proposal have anything to do with direct dilution for capital infusion to pay the salaries of developers?

[kokojie]

snip

cryptocurrency can't use the bank model for distributed consensus. But both PoW and PoS can be used for consensus, with just one difference, Bitcoin PoW spends $500 million USD per year to do it, and PoS won't.

This would be news to a lot of people. Could you explain how PoS has dealt with the Nothing-at-Stake problem?

How does PoS deal with a problem that doesn't exist? Nothing-at Stake is fictional, or maybe you could go ahead and show us such attack, I'll be watching.

[inBitweTrust]

This would be news to a lot of people. Could you explain how PoS has dealt with the Nothing-at-Stake problem?

They ignore it and claim it doesn't exist.

[kokojie]

Btw, bitshare users also overwhelmingly approved the merge, why are you saying they aren't? there's a vote thread in bitshares forum, go read it.

Where did I make this claim? I am agreeing with you that a majority approve and a minority disapprove. That is the problem. Democracy is the first 51% attack! The minority investors who disagree are being fleeced.

You were saying PoS system can change the cap, PoW system can't. I'm just proving the PoW system can also change the cap, just as easily.

Assertion, with no evidence supporting. There are differences to Bitcoin and Bitshares that make changing the 21 million dollar limit far less likely, if not impossible. Can you think of them?

Well, I am Bitcoin stakeholder, and I disagree with the blocksize hard fork. Am I being fleeced? Don't be ridiculous.

Way to sidestep the discussion and not address the questions honestly. What does the blocksize hardfork being proposal have anything to do with direct dilution for capital infusion to pay the salaries of developers?

Why would I address something you made up? there is no dilution to pay the salaries of developers, it's a merger of multiple eco-systems into one. Maybe you could provide me a non-existent link to back up your claim, like the last time you made up something from your imagination? I know you have a very vivid imagination. Do you need me to post our PMs to show your non-existent claims?

[kokojie]

This would be news to a lot of people. Could you explain how PoS has dealt with the Nothing-at-Stake problem?

They ignore it and claim it doesn't exist.

Better than ignoring an existing and proven problem, that is PoW 51% attack. Many altcoin has been attacked to death with it.

[inBitweTrust]

Of course it's a problem, I'm being charged 10% tax on my Bitcoin holding, for something that is easily replaceable and useless.

Please do yourself a favor and let your actions match your convictions. Sell us your bitcoins and invest in Bitshares completely since you have so much faith in DPoS and so little trust in PoW. Why don't you invest in BTSX now before the big marketing push that is coming in a couple months! If you are smart you can even take those profits and re-buy into BTC right before the halfing to profit again and than sell those profits for BTSX.

The fact that you don't sell your bitcoins tells the whole story.