Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Economics and Policy' started by cypherdoc, Aug 28, 2015.
He's a mercenary who will support whatever position pays him the most.
It's a racket.
They have a piece of shit show in San Fran that doesn't have remotely the viewership to be a viable show, but if you inflame the SF meetup scene (with your psycho Paul Capestany's and your "I met Greg Maxwell in person and he's the most friendly virtuous man ever"-bloggers) with the vitriol that they want to hear, you can leverage that inclusion on the show to create ancillary businesses.
Like for example look at Tone Vays's business model. Say inflammatory completely uneducated bullshit on World Crypto Network. Insinuate that you're a trader, but in reality you're not, and scam "consulting" clients out of 0.1 BTC an hour by teaching them to use one proprietary really entry-level momentum indicator that he stole from Tom DeMark (and even had coded wrong and pretends he intended it that way!). His TA shows on youtube are amazing, he's literally constantly psychologically abusing and gaslighting the audience by criticizing them for not knowing things that he's not even capable of teaching them.
Jimmy Song is leveraging this exposure into something far more ethical (going around giving coding seminars), but still it's the same game of talking small blocker bullshit to make money.
@freetrader: Amazing. This very forum here seems to me to be the or one of the strongest Austrian economics outposts in the whole crypto ecosystem.
I suspect he's writing something that paints us into the Keynesian corner and them into the Austrian one to ease his mind (or that of his followers) that they are really keen on 'sound money', given the unsoundness of the recent exchange rate.
He also can't stop using the not only false but very harmful dichotomy of store of value vs. medium of exchange.
These folks continue to stubbornly avoid the question of how the miners are getting paid long term. There absolutely nothing sound about their approach, and they'll find out soon enough. Satoshi was way above them.
Look at the fake economics Ph.D.'s coming in and sealioning to his aid on twitter!
I was just thinking about an analogy that might help people to understand why this is a false dichotomy. Money as a tool for storing and transferring value can be compared to a bucket for storing and transferring water. Fiat, supposedly a good "medium of exchange," is like a bucket that's easy to pour without spilling but that has a hole in the bottom, allowing water to leak out over time (inflation). Gold, supposedly a good "store of value," is like a bucket that doesn't leak, but that's heavy and hard to pour without spilling (high transaction costs). But "store of value" and "medium of exchange" aren't really separate functions. The point of storing value is to eventually access via a subsequent exchange. A bucket that didn't leak, but that spilled 95% of its water every time you tried to pour it would be essentially useless. And a medium of exchange wouldn't work if it couldn't do at least a reasonable job of storing its value between exchanges. It'd be like a bucket with no bottom (or a currency in hyperinflation). But the ideal monetary "bucket," the one we should expect to ultimately outcompete all the others, is one that doesn't leak or spill. That's the potential that cryptocurrency offers. And that's why any crypto that sets out to be a high-friction "digital gold" will end up instead as "digital lead."
can't wait to see this new DAA in action, in 1h 45mins
This reminds me of the 2011 period when I was praising the virtues of Bitcoin in the Mises forum: since I had a strong background in Austrian Economics I grasped almost immediately the awesomeness of Bitcoin as perfect money and I thought that that would be obvious for most of the members there.
Boy, if I was wrong: I had everybody against me apart from a few of the very first bitcoiners like Peter Surda (great economist!).
That thought me that reading a book of Austrian Economics and understanding it are quite different concepts (at least for most of the people there), even if someone is able to remember random citations here and there.
Little did we know back then that we were all Keynesians without 1MB4EVA/segwit/layer-2 vaporware.
remember its MTP...
BUIP 073: Go "Bagatell Berserk" with BU's funds
i thought this was pretty funny https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/7conef/incoming_rbitcoin_just_doubled_their_mod_team/
@adamstgbit That is funny, lol!
Somewhere on rbtc I read that 30% of HP was taken offline a while ago. Does anyone know anything more about this?
EDIT: I am asking because I am wondering about the effects a malicious chain-reorg of Cash (which is still relatively cheap) would have on the whole game.
The Core team all time argued against attacks and so forth. Yet we saw a lot of attacks against XT nodes etc.
I wouldn't be surprised if something like this happens, maybe even during a massive market action BTC->BCH.
I would expect for the majority miners to retaliate and mine just BCH, attacking BTC.
Would this be catalyzing the upgrade? I think it would definitely send massive shockwave throughout the system and likely also start a massive bear market. But who knows.
right, apparently there is a BTC pool (~30%) that plans on forking off to segwit2x regardless of the cancellation. they are removing hash power from BTC hoping to lower dif, so that forking off with 30% is possible.
but i find it hard to believe they will be mining a unofficial unsupported no-value fork for ~3 weeks at high diff
@adamstgbit : Right. But what do you do with HP that you do not use publicly? You either move it around, switch it off because it isn't profitable (which I find hard to believe) or use it in private for nefarious purposes.
Societies (= collectivism) never survive. Societies prosper until they collapse, and they collapse because they prospered, until they don't (on diminishing return on additional investment in additional complexity). Tainter's law. It always works until it doesn't:
maybe they can mine BCH and help find 6 new blocks so we see the new DAA work
@Zarathustra: Societies are only one example of increasing complexity.
Look at religions, for example. Complex rulesets, evolving over millenia.
I do believe there is a certain (maybe low) amount of increasing complexity underlying these longer, more hardened (due to outside pressure) societies. Looking at the current state of affairs? You surely have a point.
I am not saying I am a fan of the Catholic church (but take their doctrine on societal organization any day above Luke's interpretation), but they are - in a way - a 2000 year old society.
Scientific and technological discoveries and interpretations are another such thing.
--- Double Post Merged, Nov 13, 2017 ---
@adamstgbit: Maybe. But 30% might be eerily close to orphaning weeks of the cash chain to try to destroy it. The difference to 'unorphan the right chain' the miners need to put in might be small, but accumulating over weeks it might be significant and might mean days of no service.
Will we see all chains stopping while the miners collectively work to resolve the damage? Voluntary checkpointing? Or will folks (mostly) behave?
I have simply seen too much stuff to not think of these kinds of scenarios.
--- Double Post Merged, Nov 13, 2017 ---
But catholicism didn't prevent the society from collapsing. Male gods have been invented 10'000 years ago, and that stupid idea still 'prospers'. It was the birth of the tragedy.
your just FUDing so you can buy BCH ahead of us.
i'm watching you.