bitsko
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 730
- 1,532
Ray Dillinger doesnt like that the ledger is plaintext; making the remainder of the criticisms moot.
Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
- Thread starter cypherdoc
- Start date
BldSwtTrs
Active Member
- Sep 10, 2015
- 196
- 583
I think it's a valid criticism from those who don't understand CSW's point that "high transaction volume=privacy", who are 99.9% of people involved in crypto right now.
Most BTCer still have not took the black pill, which is the acceptance of the following logical conclusions:
- BTC will end up a 1984-level nightmare in term of privacy protection
- BTC will end up not being censorship-resistant due to mining centralization
- Small blocks are a scalability dead-end
- Small blocks aren't a viable economic security model
Dillinger taking the black pill is interesting. This is the necessary first step before taking the white pill (ie. 2 other blockchains addresses each of these shortcuts, in their own way). I think more and more BTCer will come to the same conclusions in 2021.
Last edited:
bitsko
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 730
- 1,532
I would venture the result of a cypherpunk concluding segshit is a failure will lead to their complete exit and/or support of tech such as monero, as opposed to an acceptance or support of BSV or BCH.
I'm pretty sure high throughput bitcoin is intuitive to nearly all hackers and tech genius, but also im pretty sure that BSV/BCH is not recognized as high throughput bitcoin by these individuals, but rather it is seen, if seen at all, as a scam or shitcoin or a scammy shitcoin.
I would think the 'capitalists' currently investing in technocollectivism due to the relative failure of all other forms of investment would be more likely to change their view over time than the cypherpunks.
However, these individuals invest in the 'winner', which may be enough to keep the arrangement as it is indefinitely.
If the BTC price doubles every four years what does it matter how bitcoin is supposed to function
I'm pretty sure high throughput bitcoin is intuitive to nearly all hackers and tech genius, but also im pretty sure that BSV/BCH is not recognized as high throughput bitcoin by these individuals, but rather it is seen, if seen at all, as a scam or shitcoin or a scammy shitcoin.
Post automatically merged:
I would think the 'capitalists' currently investing in technocollectivism due to the relative failure of all other forms of investment would be more likely to change their view over time than the cypherpunks.
However, these individuals invest in the 'winner', which may be enough to keep the arrangement as it is indefinitely.
If the BTC price doubles every four years what does it matter how bitcoin is supposed to function
Last edited:
Not just CSW saying that. Ray doesn't even see BSV as Bitcoin, those things he says apply to BTC, BSV is not even on that radar.
@bitsko moving forward the time for talk is over. The only thing left to do politically and in bitcoin is to demonstrate solutions and invite people to participate in the benefits that will need to be indisputably obvious.
What's happening now politically is driving economic policy and it looks like it's going to create a division within societies and between nations that's going to end in conflict.
Those victims within nations are going to be politically manipulated to vent frustration towards other nations, it's a mess and it's going to get messier. until people move towards something like BSV.
Can we stop giving CSW credit for macroeconomic concepts elucidated here on this very thread by many of us starting back in 2011 and in the many years since? I mean seriously, I think he's probably been lurking this thread for talking points over the years; yes, I don't think he's Satoshi.
bitsko
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 730
- 1,532
I've thought that myself. Certainly, he has kept up with those discussions. But, I don't think he's taking credit in any official capacity. He's been accused of non-academic plagiarism when I think he's just an idealist trying to convey information to make a point. I mean anyone can google anything nowadays and he knows that. Not sure what you mean by saying you don't think he's Satoshi. We are all Satoshi. His particular viewpoint doesn't seem to reflect anyone else from the early days. I'm sure the early devs were mostly concerned about bug swatting and alphabet agencies. His story is consistent and does make sense from the point of view of someone wanting to maintain a law enforcement background. For all he knew, it could have all come crashing down in many ways. I have no doubt he was a primary member of whatever Satoshi Nakamoto was and his claim to be the leader is just a matter of semantics.
Zarathustra
Well-Known Member
- Aug 28, 2015
- 1,439
- 3,797
yes, it is a big conspiracy. CSW, wife, ex-wife, sister, Calvin, Shadders, Connolly, Jimmy etc.. All under one blanket. Omertà! And all of them know that the true satoshi will never appear and oppose.
Happy New Year!
Another steady step forward.
xiaohuiliu.medium.com
Deploy a Contract and Call its Methods with a Few Clicks
sCrypt IDE v0.5.0 allows users to deploy a contract to testnet and interact with it without writing a single line of code.
xiaohuiliu.medium.com
Dark coins are being delisted.
bittrex.zendesk.com
To understand the significance of this and see which coins will eventually be affected, one needs to know what money tracing is, how and why it is performed in legal proceedings and police work, and how tracing differs economically from the kind of mass surveillance that enables tyranny.
Governments, and therefore exchanges, will crack down on any untraceable coin because it thwarts centuries-old procedures used in, for example, British common law; this does not mean governments will crack down on coins that disallow mass surveillance (such as Bitcoin with very large blocks, each person having millions of addresses). Some governments such as in North Korea or possibly China may, but I think most won't, partly because this would disrupt longstanding law regarding private money and break a bunch of other things.
Pending market removals 01/15/2021
The following markets will be removed on Friday, January 15, 2021, 23:00 UTC. BTC-XMR, ETH-XMR, USDT-XMR BTC-ZEC, ETH-ZEC, USDT-ZEC, USD-ZEC BTC-DASH, ETH-DASH, USDT-DASH, USD-DASH You must perfo...
bittrex.zendesk.com
To understand the significance of this and see which coins will eventually be affected, one needs to know what money tracing is, how and why it is performed in legal proceedings and police work, and how tracing differs economically from the kind of mass surveillance that enables tyranny.
Governments, and therefore exchanges, will crack down on any untraceable coin because it thwarts centuries-old procedures used in, for example, British common law; this does not mean governments will crack down on coins that disallow mass surveillance (such as Bitcoin with very large blocks, each person having millions of addresses). Some governments such as in North Korea or possibly China may, but I think most won't, partly because this would disrupt longstanding law regarding private money and break a bunch of other things.
BldSwtTrs
Active Member
- Sep 10, 2015
- 196
- 583
Besides, how Monero (arguably the most technically effective "privacy coin"), for example, is untraceable?
It is possible to selectively disclose the history of an address to a regulator or a police officer, when needed.
And on-chain plausible deniability (which, effectively, is what Monero's cryptography does) doesn't prevent off-chain analysis.
When you add KYC/AML procedures + various mandatory on-chain self-declaration + blockchain network analysis + internet trafic analysis + whatever other forensic analysis method, you can perform traditional police work, even with privacy coins.
And which exactly is the legal document that would allow such a ban? Does this document exist as of today? Are you making a prediction that such text will eventually come to pass? Most western countries operates under the rule of law, which implies some limits to any "legal creativity".
Besides, it seems that with the same rationale, you could argue for the ban of end-2-end encryption: There is too much communication data for allowing mass communication surveillance, end-2-end encryption makes police work harder, therefore end-2-end encryption should be banned.
Last edited:
bitsko
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 730
- 1,532
good lord is this the BTC top and the BSV bottom
33000 and 0.005
back when people said that segshit couldnt handle high prices due to the subsequent congestion and rush to exit, it was under the assumption people use the actual segnet.
as it stands the best way to use segshit is to interact entirely with a trusted third party who utilizes top of the line database technology
33000 and 0.005
Post automatically merged:
back when people said that segshit couldnt handle high prices due to the subsequent congestion and rush to exit, it was under the assumption people use the actual segnet.
as it stands the best way to use segshit is to interact entirely with a trusted third party who utilizes top of the line database technology
There are lots of totalitarians working on that, if you're not full-time opposing it with an army of lawyers good luck preventing the new laws, it's just a matter of time. The people who want totalitarian control can print money endlessly and are employing lawmakers full time, and we're complicit in funding them in part when we pay tax.
The inequality that comes from government stimulus is just fueling more division and frustration that ultimately gives more power to the government who say more law and law enforcement is what they need to fix the problem.
Covid just exposes an incomprehensible number of crazy authoritarians. Look at the police in Canada arresting people for having a house party on new years eve, neighbour calling the police Anne Frank snitching style because of a family of 6 gathering unlawfully.
Laws are failing people at an exponential rate, it's the law that is creating unemployment, and it's the law that is trying to fix it by inflating the money supply, the benefactors are those with assets, not the people asking for money, the people with means are complacent and being rewarded for it while those without are being alienated and impoverished, they ask for more government intervention and laws to fix the problem which just expatriates the inequality accelerating totalitarianism.
People need to work (create wealth) in order to prosper which is now being impeded by law. Totalitarianism is going to accelerate quicker than most people can imagine.
Last edited:
@bitsko insulting aside, we can actually predict what would happen with BTC by looking at the founding principles of Monetarist Theory MV=PT on the MV side quantity of Money multiplied by the Velocity of money is equal to Prices multiplied by the number of Transactions in an economy.
M and T are constrained and P is parametrically constrained as it is pegged to actual value of goods and services in the economy so it decreases as the market grows (because bitcoin is deflationary).
In conclusion, as the network effect of BTC grows Transactions are forced off the network and the increase of Velocity on the network is accommodated by larger transactions, making it less and less practical for the general population to access bitcoin on-chain.
The concern is BTC will become more and more centralized, as people depend on 3td parties to access it, or as I think most BSV'ers and BCH'ers predict the network effect will stop growing and the limiting of Transaction capacity would impede network growth.
Well, I'd say BTC's network is growing and it centralizing is inevitable. I also think the age of centralized control of money is coming to an end. So in the big scope of things, Bitcoin is but a puppy and the stage has only just been set.
Last edited:
bitsko
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 730
- 1,532
it got cut off from all the most poppin casinos
Post automatically merged:
of course that means if someone buys a modest amount it will shoot up because there is no liquidity
Post automatically merged:
as far as what he is up to; he offered to help sue coinbase, which will cement a continuing lack of liquidity for bsv in the near future
Post automatically merged:
Last edited:
bitsko
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 730
- 1,532
there are several. one in a slack with csw, a dev slack, one community using social media onchain, one in china im not too familiar with.
reddit was largely abandoned afaik
a lot of bagholders still wishing for a digital signature to rescue their losing gambles, but at this point I propose that a signature by craig wright ought not change the market fundamentals; as if a digital rock meme was at all reasonable to argue against in the first place- I see no reason for those investors to change their thesis in the case that craig wright can sign a satoshi key.
instead of 'by the time I sign I will have proven beyond a reasonable doubt I am satoshi in court'
it may be by the time there is a signature it is irrelevant to the market. In fact, it is already irrelevant to diehard BSV and BTC investors/gamblers and has been for some time.
reddit was largely abandoned afaik
Post automatically merged:
a lot of bagholders still wishing for a digital signature to rescue their losing gambles, but at this point I propose that a signature by craig wright ought not change the market fundamentals; as if a digital rock meme was at all reasonable to argue against in the first place- I see no reason for those investors to change their thesis in the case that craig wright can sign a satoshi key.
instead of 'by the time I sign I will have proven beyond a reasonable doubt I am satoshi in court'
it may be by the time there is a signature it is irrelevant to the market. In fact, it is already irrelevant to diehard BSV and BTC investors/gamblers and has been for some time.
Last edited:
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/22216194/1294541016.jpg)
Trump signs executive order blocking transactions with Alipay, WeChat Pay, and six other Chinese apps
The new orders follow two from August that tried to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat.
This isn't going to end well, the US getting desperate, trying to force countries and people to use USD backed payment systems. One reason is so they can continue to tax with inflation.
Welcome to Law.
This type of thinking is deadly for those trying to build the new monetary system, especially "Digital Cash."
Post automatically merged:
Greg's socks still frequent reddit, so it doesn't grow, not so much being abandoned, still censorship so that killed discussion there too.
Last edited: