- Aug 28, 2015
- 517
- 1,679
Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
- Thread starter cypherdoc
- Start date
VeritasSapere
Active Member
- Nov 16, 2015
- 511
- 1,266
Much is possible at this point. I am a habitual holder myself, I can not help myself, I just hold everything and I do not let go. Its been working out well for me so far. 
agree completely.
imagine if we had no cap. or even one with 20MB. there would be no problem right now. it is 99% finished and only needs to function as money. and money is simple, like cash. all these distractions with smart contracts, LN, SC's, etc are merely attempts at tapping into (siphoning) already established value in Bitcoin towards these core dev for profit projects. they are the very definition of corrupt.
Bagatell
Active Member
- Aug 28, 2015
- 728
- 1,191
- Dec 16, 2015
- 2,806
- 6,088
Potentially time-cricital question incoming from Jihan (Jihan Wu?) on BU mining compatibility with Core:
https://bitco.in/forum/threads/is-it-legit-to-claim-that-bitcoin-unlimited-is-core-compitable.928/
I've paged theZerg in-thread and via Slack, but if any of you have more direct access and can check if he's aware and able to respond?
It could of course be someone else named Jihan too, but the question remains the same. I suppose we might need to elaborate on the FAQ...
https://bitco.in/forum/threads/is-it-legit-to-claim-that-bitcoin-unlimited-is-core-compitable.928/
I've paged theZerg in-thread and via Slack, but if any of you have more direct access and can check if he's aware and able to respond?
It could of course be someone else named Jihan too, but the question remains the same. I suppose we might need to elaborate on the FAQ...
Last edited:
Christoph Bergmann
Active Member
and funnily this will have nearly zero effect on bitcoin's price.
Aaron Van Wirdum on bitcoin classic slack (#welcome channel) was asking some questions about RBF.
At some point the question inevitably touch the economic side of the things.
And guess what what he said?
I'm not here to discuss economics
https://bitcoinclassic.slack.com/archives/welcome/p1456946218008788
unbelievable, really.
At some point the question inevitably touch the economic side of the things.
And guess what what he said?
I'm not here to discuss economics
https://bitcoinclassic.slack.com/archives/welcome/p1456946218008788
unbelievable, really.
Ethereum can send transactions in a few seconds, and can handle today an order of magnitude more transactions than Bitcoin. It's also the leading platform for most future cryptocurrency applications. That's worth a lot right there at a time when the Bitcoin network has chosen stagnation and irrelevance.
The programmable blockchain is critically important to a financial platform in order to allow the protection of millions and eventually billions of dollars worth of ETH in accounts from hackers with built-in financial safeguards. See:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/45u4rt/the_killer_apps_of_ethereum_are_monetary/
Bottom line: Neither Bitcoin nor Ethereum are being priced at their current utility. Both are being priced as incredibly out-of-the-money-options on the possibility that they will replace a significant proportion of the global monetary system.
I think Ethereum is more likely to succeed at that task than Bitcoin, due to the architectural advances and the self-inflicted suicide Bitcoin Core is presently engaged in.
that's pretty frickin huge.
@Matthew Light
What ETH does have going for it what Mike Hearn called a benevolent dictator, which is what is best for an open source project. This is a person who is in control of the vision, Linus is a good example, and is needed to keep a project on track in a direction everyone agrees with. If people disagree they can fork to a new dictator.
Satoshi was the benevolent dictator initial and then Gavin. The project was unified and strong throughout that period. Then when Gavin gave up check in control it all went to hell, that says something.
I still think ETH's price is crazy and have zero holdings now, but it does have a person in charge with a clear mission, that makes the project very strong despite the fact ETH is still largely in development still.
What ETH does have going for it what Mike Hearn called a benevolent dictator, which is what is best for an open source project. This is a person who is in control of the vision, Linus is a good example, and is needed to keep a project on track in a direction everyone agrees with. If people disagree they can fork to a new dictator.
Satoshi was the benevolent dictator initial and then Gavin. The project was unified and strong throughout that period. Then when Gavin gave up check in control it all went to hell, that says something.
I still think ETH's price is crazy and have zero holdings now, but it does have a person in charge with a clear mission, that makes the project very strong despite the fact ETH is still largely in development still.
except that we've documented many times in years past that Vitalik has the wrong vision and doesn't really understand economics.
albin
Active Member
- Nov 8, 2015
- 931
- 4,008
@sickpig
My guess is that Von Weirdo is planning another artificial point-counterpoint type article that's really a thinly-veiled hit-piece, and he's going into classic slack just to say that he went and researched opinions.
I'm thinking much like how his Segwit article was presented as though some seemingly random ahole Toomim guy told him some weak-ass stuff, that the super-genius God-King-Emporer of all Bitcoin programming Lombrozo luckily chimed in to refute.
My guess is that Von Weirdo is planning another artificial point-counterpoint type article that's really a thinly-veiled hit-piece, and he's going into classic slack just to say that he went and researched opinions.
I'm thinking much like how his Segwit article was presented as though some seemingly random ahole Toomim guy told him some weak-ass stuff, that the super-genius God-King-Emporer of all Bitcoin programming Lombrozo luckily chimed in to refute.
@cypherdoc we are not here to discuss about economics
VeritasSapere
Active Member
- Nov 16, 2015
- 511
- 1,266
Actually one of the things Ethereum does have going for it, is that it was created with several implementations from the get go, so that development would not be controlled by any singular development team. This does give Ethereum an advantage in terms of governance, I do not think any one in Ethereum can claim that there is supposed to be only one implementation like some people are claiming within Bitcoin. Vitalik did have the foresight to do this in the project, at a great cost, it might be one of the main reasons why Ethereum is still so behind in terms of usability.
Though in terms of governance I do not think Ethereum has fundamentally solved any of these problems we are experiencing now, the question is still up in the air however if the governance structure of Bitcoin even works, which if it does not Ethereum might have the same problems. I have said this before but I think if it turns out that the governance of Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed the answer would most likely lie with self funding blockchains, incentivized full nodes and more complex formalized governance mechanisms, all of which Ethereum does not have. Then again a switch over to Proof of Stake would certainly radically change these dynamics as well, how that will actually work I am not sure if anyone even fully understands, time will tell I suppose.
Though in terms of governance I do not think Ethereum has fundamentally solved any of these problems we are experiencing now, the question is still up in the air however if the governance structure of Bitcoin even works, which if it does not Ethereum might have the same problems. I have said this before but I think if it turns out that the governance of Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed the answer would most likely lie with self funding blockchains, incentivized full nodes and more complex formalized governance mechanisms, all of which Ethereum does not have. Then again a switch over to Proof of Stake would certainly radically change these dynamics as well, how that will actually work I am not sure if anyone even fully understands, time will tell I suppose.
Last edited:
- Dec 16, 2015
- 2,806
- 6,088
I knew I was missing the solution to my drive space troubles:
https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-now-introducing-worlds-largest-capacity-15-36tb-ssd-for-enterprise-storage-systems
Bagatell
Active Member
- Aug 28, 2015
- 728
- 1,191
He's a 21 year old kid. FWIW the plan for new Ether issuance after it switches to proof-of-stake is 0-2% per year paid to the stakeholders along with transaction fees.
What really matters is that Ethereum is the Schelling point for people who want scaleable cryptocurrency without Bitcoin Core stupidity. What matters most in a cryptocurrency is network effects, and Bitcoin Core has failed to understand that and hence has squandered Bitcoin's golden opportunity.
[doublepost=1457029673][/doublepost]
Nah, it's all about making cryptocurrency actually safe and usable for the average person, so a hacker can't take their private key and drain their account to zero in a few seconds.
I actually asked about doing that kind of thing with Bitcoin here last year and didn't get much interest. But it's crucially important stuff if you want to actually take over the world as a financial network!
Last edited:
they are doing amazing stuff, Samsung.
[doublepost=1457030437][/doublepost]
i'd buy one in a second if need be for a full blockchain.
[doublepost=1457031294,1457030387][/doublepost]
Satoshi had a fundamental advantage when designing Bitcoin; no one knew about and no one gave a shit.
Ethereum is in a totally different position. it hasn't even decided on it's fundamental security mechanism. yet it has almost a billion in investment money already on the table. the distortions and COI's caused by that fact alone will be interesting to watch in how Ethereum decides to self govern and construct it's protocol going forward. that is totally different from Bitcoin who rewarded, and continues to reward new entrants (based on their risk tolerance, knowledge and forecasting) from a zero valuation.
while it is disconcerting to see all the present turmoil in Bitcoin, i think 2016 will find a solution to the blocksize impasse.
[doublepost=1457031672][/doublepost]
Last edited:
Proof-of-stake has been decided on since well before Ethereum went live - implementation just hasn't been finished yet. Basically they just didn't want to hold up launch and lose development / user / in-the-market time waiting for it to be ready.
More details here:
https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/11/25/proof-stake-learned-love-weak-subjectivity/
https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/08/01/introducing-casper-friendly-ghost/
https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/12/28/understanding-serenity-part-2-casper/
Buying things when they are still rough and unfinished is how you get the best opportunities - I started buying ETH under $2 in January and my total basis is under $3. I remember how incredibly rough Bitcoin was in 2009 / 2010 - I knew I should buy in then, that Bitcoin was potentially far too important to pass up, but I took a pass because things were so rough and unfinished back then and too much work to install beta-quality software, mail off a check to a stranger in another state, etc.
That's how I failed to purchase 2000 BTC for $20 when I had the opportunity. And that's why I started buying at least a modest position ETH as soon as I saw the potential of the platform and the buying momentum.
