Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Economics and Policy' started by cypherdoc, Aug 28, 2015.
This guy continues to kill it. He's got the energy I don't have:
Actually, I just thought of something in regards to SC's.
Who the heck has an incentive to run a full node just to hold a SC blockchain and relay TX's? If the SC is lucky enough to be merge mined, are they the only ones who will bother to hold a SC blockchain? Probably.
Surely that is dangerous as a highly centralized system?
Cripplecoiners trapped in an inconsistency.
On the one hand they argue that a large miner can attack a small miner by taking advantage of propagation latency by producing large blocks which gives them a head start on the next block.
But on the other hand, they try to discredit Peter_R's paper (that uses that same latency argument against them) by saying that that latency is essentially eliminated by things like the relay network and IBLT that allows almost instantaneous block transmission.
So do we have a problem with block latency or do we not ?
That has been my position since Feb 2013. However, the quote is incorrect: the risk is not that governments can more easily curtail Bitcoin usage while it remains a niche system, but simply that some other cryptocurrency will fill the gap and it won't have a limit and it may have a few fundamental design improvements such that it is unassailable by a crippled Bitcoin.
We just don't know which one that will be! So we are unlikely to get in on the ground floor. Cypher mentioned this a few months back. Getting on-board with the right cryptocurrency just once is challenge enough, having to do it a second or even a third time becomes ever harder, if not impossible. It is inevitable that cryptocurrency is the future of money, so having recognised this years before most people then how gruelling would this be? To know about the change, support the cause for years, debate the right way forward on forums, and still not get personally well positioned with an investment in the successful new currency before the great paradigm shift away from fiat.
Additionally, while Bitcoin has a libertarian ethos, and returns power to the people. If it trips up then the new successful cryptocurrency could be a Central Bank-driven alternative with all the major banks participating, like this example with "mintettes".
Centrally Banked Cryptocurrencies http://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.06895v1.pdf
Glad to hear it went well Peter. Can someone let us minions know when it's published online for us to view.
This is the transcript for Peter R's talk:
Ugh there's so many transcription errors in that link
Guys, feel free to post the corrected transcript in the XT Development forum.
so Peter, what kind of reception did you get for the presentation afterwards?
> so Peter, what kind of reception did you get for the presentation afterwards?
It was very positive. Between the end of my talk and now I think I've been approached by about 40 people congratulating me, including Trace Meyer, Stephen Pair (BitPay), Jim Harper, and many other. Apparently Gavin said positive things about it to, but I haven't personally spoken with him yet.
I was a bit worried about the last few slides. I wanted to be scholarly, yet I didn't want to hide the truth just because it was controversial. Several people said they thought I dealt with those issues respectably and in a light-hearted way.
wow, even Trace. as you know, he's been lobbying hard for small blocks via his interview series with Adam Back. Adam is an advisor to Armory, which is one of Trace's investments.
that's a good sign that he congratulated you along with the others.
again, great job.
Important thread :
Don't you think in case of debt implosion the UST will be also in trouble?
What will make the money goes to the UST whereas the US debt isn't more sustainable than that of the other countries? I mean eventually the UST will collapse also.
Do you think it will first rise when the treasuries of other countries are collapsing (as the last man standing) and only afterwards collapses ?
And what will make the capital prefers UST rather than USD? If basically the two are money, to me it seems they should follow the same path.
Peter_R, I think perhaps you single-handedly might have changed the trajectory of this discussion. Everyone seems to be saying your presentation was the best of the day and the technical crowd, in the technical scalability conference, shouts 8mb (which I take it to be a shortcut for saying bip101 as only bip101 has a number 8 in it) showing to all very clearly where the "technical consensus" lies.
im watching the live stream of scaling bitcoin. as an academic, its great to see these guys coming together like this. i look forward to seeing a "journal of bitcoin" one day.
does anyone have a link to the day 1 talks?
So far they only have the afternoon session posted, but here is the channel:
Maelstroms? I like maelstroms:
Did they say that there is no proposals discussion in the scalability workshop? Then perhaps someone can inform me whether they think the lightning network and other off-chain solutions are proposals because there were at least 4 presentations dedicated to it.
Maybe we need a new blockchain with a new bitcoin, a bitcoin2.0 chain that adapts and evolves? The current situation is terrible, they are not playing fair, and the miners seem to be confused....
Should we move on to a new chain? If we don't the "free" market will...
Just raising it as a thinking out loud discussion
That's what XT is ; a new blockchain.