@王英清:
I wonder what your perspective is on this development and how it will affect Bitcoin in China:
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/china-joins-the-blockchain-race-with-chinaledger-alliance-cm614734
Of course, East and West are interrelated, so I'm also curious how you view this will affect Bitcoin internationally.
i made a post a few days ago about how i though R3 could only be a good thing for Bitcoin by serving as a stepping stone for banks to eventually explore Bitcoin itself. all this talk about "blockchain" serves to raise awareness of Bitcoin and allows banks and IT companies to experiment with the concept w/o undercutting their national currencies. and that's ok for now; until they discover that "real" security and utility can only come from a "buy in" from the masses. private blockchains won't allow individual participation in security, such as setting up full nodes to assist in record keeping and transmission of tx's worldwide. security will only come from "signing" by the involved institutions trying to perpetuate a blockchain and this sacrifices not only security but integrity. integrity in the sense of the controlling centralized institutions changing the record/ledger when convenient. as i and others have said for years, they will just be shared SQL databases btwn a few institutions that "trust" each other. extending this entire concept to China is a good thing in raising awareness there in Bitcoin concepts and creating competition even tho it's at the private blockchain level. as the article states, coding expertise is scarce in China, which surprises me to a degree. this initiative should change that, which will be a good thing in bringing more competition to core dev coding. it also will bring an ever increasing awareness to the Chinese people. we'll probably see more Bitcoin nodes popping up in China in the near future.
as far as Bitcoin mining in China? i think the Chinese gvt is not so ignorant as to realize that blockchain may not work. it's unproven and anyone with half a brain realizes that gvts and banks are avoiding the real question that Bitcoin asks; that of the integrity of money. aka Sound Money that i always preach about. they know that Bitcoin is a revolution coming from the masses and that it has the potential to change everything about central banking broadly and the USD reserve status more specifically. i don't think China would mind unseating the dollar. if they can't have the yuan become the next reserve currency (i don't think they can) then a neutral reserve currency would be the next best thing. and since China holds the lead today in Bitcoin mining, they shouldn't want to change that, just in case. if in several years it becomes clearer that Bitcoin is gaining traction, they actually might want to facilitate and grow mining. it's about hedging and maintaining a lead.
[doublepost=1462723755,1462722845][/doublepost]here's a nice f/u to the ChinaLedger article:
Garzik calls it “Bitcoin with a training wheel.”
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/jeff-garziks-stealthy-ploy-to-get-bitcoin-onto-private-blockchains/
[doublepost=1462723961][/doublepost]
He goes on: “The private networks, once you get them on Bitcoin technology, it’s very easy to upgrade them to a public network from a private network. That’s my halfway stealthy strategy to get Bitcoin into large institutions. And it’s an amusing game where sometimes you have to just change the name from Bitcoin to blockchain and all of the sudden they’re happy again.” For now, large institutions have not shown much interest in the Bitcoin itself.
[doublepost=1462724951][/doublepost]hmm, of all the core devs, Garzik is the most level headed when it comes to understanding Bitcoin from the business side and acting upon it. yes, BitSat was a failure but that's a concept that will come. at least he tried. Bloq otoh could become quite a force in core development with time. one could argue that Maxwell has also been successful from the business side with Blockstream and their $76M but i don't think that's true. for instance, most of what he says from the economic side of things is usually dead wrong or ignorant. he and the other core devs (& Back) also have a totalitarian attitude. if that's too extreme for you then it IS fair to say he (Maxwell) doesn't know how to get along with ppl. and when push came to shove, why did he choose Blocktream vs Bitcoin (giving up his commit rights)? but back to Garzik:
“They don’t have this depth and technical expertise in terms of blockchain like we do,” Garzik said. “Outside of Blockstream, we have the most core developers on our team of the other companies. The differentiators are expertise, software and as well as being on the market and being well-known.”
his long time experience with RedHat surely is a big advantage with open source tech. and his position on the blocksize debate has been more intuitive and compromising compared to Blockstream. as i said before, the more participation and competition that enters the Bitcoin space, the better.
i wish him and Bloq the best of luck.
[doublepost=1462725341][/doublepost]btw, Garzik is the second major player in the Bitcoin space that has admitted that they will help the private blockchain space perpetuate their fallacy,
as long as they get paid. Sam Cole was the other one. at least these two are honest about it; guys like Tim Swanson are not.
