- Aug 22, 2015
- 1,558
- 4,695
@Bloomie
Any hint about blockstream's long term plans? Is it LN for BTC or bust?
Any hint about blockstream's long term plans? Is it LN for BTC or bust?
To be honest, I didn't care enough to stick around for their presentations, but LN and magic panda/pony shows took the main stage from what I saw. As you would expect, some of the informal conversation in the room revolved around "bcash is hijacking the name etc" but it wasn't the right place to debate them—entertaining to meet the trolls in real life though. Overall, their space felt kind of dorky and not a fun place to be compared to booths run by younger and more charismatic teams.@Bloomie
Any hint about blockstream's long term plans? Is it LN for BTC or bust?
I had confused Michael Novogratz's intent to launch a Fund with this just a benchmark index which is not a fund but just an index. I suspect a hedge fund if pegging to this index would make BCH quite volatile and force the value of BTC and ETH up as BCH increased in value.looking at Mike's fund https://news.bitcoin.com/novogratz-benchmark-index-cryptocurrencies/
I'd say they are relatively bullish on BCH. The above allocation weighted on the market capitalization is 2.23 BCH for every 1 BTC at today's evaluation. So the capital going into the fund has acquired a relatively large proportion of BCH when looking at the current market capitalization. Bitcoin Core boycott astroturfers incoming.
Not perfect, but it's a good start.The suggested model would have miners vote on specific development proposals via multi-signature transactions using their keys. A simple majority signalling support via code in OP_RETURN would trigger a release of the funds, while no code would indicate objection to the proposal. There’s no option to abstain from voting.
The proposal would include details on how much funding was required, and how much of the block reward would be used. The idea is for proposals to have a finite funding limit, rather than receive ongoing regular payments.
None the less I do think he is wrong about the value in crypto being digital commodity ie digital gold.
I've been thinking about this for a while - aside from the two extremes (doing it entirely via gentleman's agreement donations vs. changing protocol dash-style to "tax" via consensus), it alsos seem possible to do it a third way: form a P2Pool alliance that incorporates a small (say, 0.5%) "tax" as a rule of said pool. You are free to not join, just suffer higher variance.I hope they are not planning to mess with the basic structure of incentives. Otherwise, they would be getting dangerously close to the model proposed by the charlatans of Dash and the like, and I would hate to go through another schism in order to avoid it.
If you are a miner who wants to give money to a developer, just do it out of your own pocket!