Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
- Thread starter cypherdoc
- Start date
Hey guys!
Just pondered: Isn't a properly hardforking Bitcoin instead of a softfork actually more of a sign that the community is closer to consensus?
Just pondered: Isn't a properly hardforking Bitcoin instead of a softfork actually more of a sign that the community is closer to consensus?
- Dec 16, 2015
- 2,806
- 6,088
@albin : maaku is pointing to this link as w.r.t. flexcap:
http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/scalingbitcoin/hong-kong/a-flexible-limit-trading-subsidy-for-larger-blocks/
and writes this summary on Reddit:
http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/scalingbitcoin/hong-kong/a-flexible-limit-trading-subsidy-for-larger-blocks/
and writes this summary on Reddit:
I wouldn't put too much stock in this idea since he also claims "We have entirely exhausted the capacity for on chain scaling."
molecular
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 372
- 1,391
Definitely. In fact a proper hardfork "ensures" consensus by kicking non-consenting nodes off the network. It's a much more honest and clear approach than softforking.
Imagine we hardforked to Bitcoin Unlimited (as an example). That would send a signal "to the outside" that we have found -- at least for now -- a workable solution (or workaround) for our scaling issue and that we have buried the differences for now. Trust in valuation would sky-rocket and so would price.
Norway
Well-Known Member
- Sep 29, 2015
- 2,424
- 6,410
Last edited:
- Aug 28, 2015
- 517
- 1,679
The price is rising on low volume out of The Great Wedge. One difficulty I have with bitcoin is that if I didn't sell at 160$ then why would I sell if we bubble back to $1200 again! The price returning to retest such levels makes the claim that bitcoin will become the universal permissionless payment ledger for the internet that much bolder, and as such makes the argument against holding that much more difficult to counter.
As the market cap rises so does bitcoin's ability to soak up more capital, which becomes a virtuous circle of positive feedback incorporating increasing levels of confidence and capital to support it as an asset layer.
One thought I have been ruminating is the idea I see promulgated by people who wish the price to fall that the halving is 'priced in'. My first reaction to this is that such people actually simply don't understand markets, because understanding markets is about understanding how people and in particular crowds of people think in unison during price movements. Prices move and human brains fit that change to a narrative comprised of news and the flow of current and future events. In one sense the market is constantly pricing the halving in every second of the day. The difficulty is that the price is also constantly changing every second of the day and as the halving approaches closer it will become more newsworthy and the acute knowledge will disseminate into the minds of those who have been watching bitcoin for some time and wanting to jump on board. At this stage anyone looking at charts will see that bitcoin could plunge down lower or burst back higher to retest the mid-600's and beyond. As I wrote on bitcointalk about six months ago, the end of the long bear market will seem completely obvious in retrospect, but when the price was hovering at 200$ it took balls to keep buying bitcoin!
Each successive halving should probably generate diminishing returns to the investor, but what it does is hopefully generate a media and speculation frenzy around bitcoin investing every four years - well done Satoshi.
The price could travel either way over the next few months (given our profound disagreements with the direction of Core development with regard to the original Satoshi design). But a situation where the price casually takes out $500 dollars in the next few weeks and then spikes upwards suddenly as the halving hits the headlines seems such an easy situation to engineer that I hope it occurs. One of the main reasons in my mind for why there will certainly be at least one more bitcoin bubble is that there is too much money to be made for those orchestrating such an event for it not to occur.
We are at $450 now and there is no FOMO taking place. Hold on to your hats, as July approaches things are about to get interesting!
As the market cap rises so does bitcoin's ability to soak up more capital, which becomes a virtuous circle of positive feedback incorporating increasing levels of confidence and capital to support it as an asset layer.
One thought I have been ruminating is the idea I see promulgated by people who wish the price to fall that the halving is 'priced in'. My first reaction to this is that such people actually simply don't understand markets, because understanding markets is about understanding how people and in particular crowds of people think in unison during price movements. Prices move and human brains fit that change to a narrative comprised of news and the flow of current and future events. In one sense the market is constantly pricing the halving in every second of the day. The difficulty is that the price is also constantly changing every second of the day and as the halving approaches closer it will become more newsworthy and the acute knowledge will disseminate into the minds of those who have been watching bitcoin for some time and wanting to jump on board. At this stage anyone looking at charts will see that bitcoin could plunge down lower or burst back higher to retest the mid-600's and beyond. As I wrote on bitcointalk about six months ago, the end of the long bear market will seem completely obvious in retrospect, but when the price was hovering at 200$ it took balls to keep buying bitcoin!
Each successive halving should probably generate diminishing returns to the investor, but what it does is hopefully generate a media and speculation frenzy around bitcoin investing every four years - well done Satoshi.
The price could travel either way over the next few months (given our profound disagreements with the direction of Core development with regard to the original Satoshi design). But a situation where the price casually takes out $500 dollars in the next few weeks and then spikes upwards suddenly as the halving hits the headlines seems such an easy situation to engineer that I hope it occurs. One of the main reasons in my mind for why there will certainly be at least one more bitcoin bubble is that there is too much money to be made for those orchestrating such an event for it not to occur.
We are at $450 now and there is no FOMO taking place. Hold on to your hats, as July approaches things are about to get interesting!
Richy_T
Well-Known Member
- Dec 27, 2015
- 1,085
- 2,741
I don't think the halving is fully priced yet but I also don't think the outcome of the halving is properly understood by many yet, especially with the lack of the safety valve of allowing more transactions per block.
If the price rises significantly close to the halving, I will likely move a proportion of my funds to an alt to hedge.
[doublepost=1461423671][/doublepost]Also, expect to see an emergency hardfork for difficulty adjustment from Core. This should be seen as an admission of incompetence. I think this is probably a point we need to make clear ahead of the fact.
If the price rises significantly close to the halving, I will likely move a proportion of my funds to an alt to hedge.
[doublepost=1461423671][/doublepost]Also, expect to see an emergency hardfork for difficulty adjustment from Core. This should be seen as an admission of incompetence. I think this is probably a point we need to make clear ahead of the fact.
bucktotal
Member
- Aug 28, 2015
- 28
- 54
thats Tony G, a wealthy business man and big time gambler. while he may have turned politician, he most likely own a lot of bitcoins, hence the interest and statements that everyone should buy some. he's quite savvy.
Why spinoffs are a beautiful solution that everyone in all factions should be drooling over, even Core fans as they stand to make big money on us Classic/BU supporters (if they are correct that Core is better 
)
https://bitco.in/forum/threads/bitcoin-unlimited-with-a-new-genesis-block.1109/#post-18388
)https://bitco.in/forum/threads/bitcoin-unlimited-with-a-new-genesis-block.1109/#post-18388
If I'm choosing which software I want to run, I'm going to prefer a project that has an undiluted goal of preserving the Bitcoin ledger.
If the developers of a Bitcoin client have also created a financial stake in a competing ledger, then their interests and mine as a Bitcoin user are no longer as aligned as would be otherwise possible.
@Justus Ranvier
What you're saying would apply to an altcoin.
The great part with a spinoff is it's the same ledger in every sense we'd want it to be, yet a separate ledger in every sense we'd want it to be. Two ledger-copies form one total ledger, and by default no stake changes happen for you regardless of relative value changes of the two ledger-copies.
Whatever interest some devs have in another copy within that total ledger structure, it doesn't affect you unless you want it to. If their interests pull them in a different way than you'd like, you're free to aggressively trade against them if you want, or just wait for them to fail (and for their stake to return to your preferred ledger-copy once again) if you prefer to remain totally safe in all scenarios.
--
Relatedly, we're missing a big opportunity to sell the spinoff idea to Core fans.
"Imagine if there was a way to take the money of every Gavincoin shill, every /r/btc wingnut, every hapless pot-smoking Classic fanatic. Imagine if every Hearnia channeled a new wave of revenue into your pocket by increasing the number of BTC you held. With spinoffs, that XX% of deluded suckers in the Bitcoin space give all their money to you in misguided bets on their Classic/XT/BU pipe dreams!"
Whatever XX is in terms of total percentage of BTC held by Core nonbelievers, Core fans stand to increase their BTC holdings by up to XX percent. If it's 20%, spinoffs mean the opportunity for Core fans to make a quick 20% return (if they are right) while simultaneously bankrupting all the nonbelievers. A great purge that they make money from. Beautiful
What you're saying would apply to an altcoin.
The great part with a spinoff is it's the same ledger in every sense we'd want it to be, yet a separate ledger in every sense we'd want it to be. Two ledger-copies form one total ledger, and by default no stake changes happen for you regardless of relative value changes of the two ledger-copies.
Whatever interest some devs have in another copy within that total ledger structure, it doesn't affect you unless you want it to. If their interests pull them in a different way than you'd like, you're free to aggressively trade against them if you want, or just wait for them to fail (and for their stake to return to your preferred ledger-copy once again) if you prefer to remain totally safe in all scenarios.
--
Relatedly, we're missing a big opportunity to sell the spinoff idea to Core fans.
"Imagine if there was a way to take the money of every Gavincoin shill, every /r/btc wingnut, every hapless pot-smoking Classic fanatic. Imagine if every Hearnia channeled a new wave of revenue into your pocket by increasing the number of BTC you held. With spinoffs, that XX% of deluded suckers in the Bitcoin space give all their money to you in misguided bets on their Classic/XT/BU pipe dreams!"
Whatever XX is in terms of total percentage of BTC held by Core nonbelievers, Core fans stand to increase their BTC holdings by up to XX percent. If it's 20%, spinoffs mean the opportunity for Core fans to make a quick 20% return (if they are right) while simultaneously bankrupting all the nonbelievers. A great purge that they make money from. Beautiful
Last edited:
@Zangelbert Bingledack The thread you linked to is about creating an altcoin via a new genesis block.
Yeah, but the conversation turns to talk about spinoffs and fork arbitrage. That's what I'm talking about (I'd never support an altcoin )
)
Blocstream investor Eric Schmidt, recently joined a Department of Defense advisory panel.
I'm more suspicious of Blockstreams insistence to push for off chain growth over on-chain growth (restricting of the blockchain) for Bitcoin than ever.
It seems like a subversive way to bundle a bunch of undesirable changes in the next hard fork.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/21/us-tech-industry-government-ties-white-house-twitter-uber-china-kathy-chen
I'm more suspicious of Blockstreams insistence to push for off chain growth over on-chain growth (restricting of the blockchain) for Bitcoin than ever.
It seems like a subversive way to bundle a bunch of undesirable changes in the next hard fork.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/21/us-tech-industry-government-ties-white-house-twitter-uber-china-kathy-chen
Yes I read that when you first posted it. The article I posted just confirmed it for me. I guess Google issues in China have little to to with freedom as we understand it. Not to mention Eric Schmidt's visit to North Korea probably was the basis for a comedy.
Latest threads
-
HIRE TREK Tech Corp Today: A Story of Financial Recovery
- lynettegregory262
- 0 replies
-
-
Members online
No members online now.