101–110 of 130 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What asset backs dollars?
The tax-collecting power of the US federal government, backed by the world's largest military.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason no one has countermanded the changes implemented in Bitcoin Core is that none of the changes have been unreasonable.
The most recent so called "segwit" change set that core pushed out recently looks to have strong enough opposition to it that it will never activate and the Bitcoin Ultimate implementation has strong support among a vocal and growing group of users. I would be surprised if core holds the control it currently does in a year or two.
The faith can be relatively easy to undermine, of course. In 2013, bitcoin plummeted from its high because of a December move by the People's Bank of China, which banned mainland banks from dealing in the cryptocurrency."
Is this not a contradiction? Clearly it shows the value of Bitcoin responds to political events in the same way as any currency does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're both under- and overestimating the worlds' government: - You're under estimating their capability to shut down trade in bitcoin. Sure, they won't be able to stop you from running the software. But they have the ability to stop any transfer into/out of the digital world. That part is quite easy to proof: real-world usage of bitcoin requires exchange for regular currency. And bitcoin was founded on the belief th…
> You're underestimating their capability to shut down trade in bitcoin. You overestimate the willingness of the police force to prove that they are willing to risk their lives and die for what they believe in. In fact, they won't. Ultimately, they count on the army to do that, who won't either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the "value" of gold is by arbitrary societal agreement--there is very low natural use-driven demand compared to the froth from people using it as a store of value. That agreement, in a game theory sense, comes from the original time when participants coalesced around gold because it had the properties that seemed most appealing (limited supply, difficult to fake, measurable, transportable) as a store of value…
However much that is true - gold is still a physical product, impossible to reproduce, has some utility, it's a luxury item, and it has been established as a 'currency' for the last 5000 years. Which is a long time. So aside from some nice properties, it's like the 'original bitcoin'. We really don't need another.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The market will, and has decided that what you're claiming is wrong. The point that other cryptocurrencies are better implementations is moot, bitcoin is 8 years old and still working very well. I'm not saying Bitcoin is perfect and complete, it does need to scale, but to claim it has failed is ridiculous. Bitcoin development (or developers) will not implement something that isn't vigorously tested and could jeopardi…
>The market will, and has decided that what you're claiming is wrong. Here's the podcast where the bitcoin "market" fails NPR in just the first few minutes: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/06/29/484029238/episo... I said bitcoin has failed to scale because the miners who have consensus control won't accept any of the forks to increase blocksize. Bitcoin hasn't failed once, twice, but five times now with BIP 10…
The "market" didn't fail NPR, a single transaction took longer than expected due to the transaction fee being too low at the time being sent. That's how markets work, and it's OK if you don't understand markets, but don't run around claiming that something has failed because you haven't taken the time to learn.
> I said bitcoin has failed to scale because the miners who have consensus control won't accept any of the forks to increase blocksize. Bitcoin hasn't failed once, twice, but five times now with BIP 100, 101, 102, 103, and 109.
That's not "failing to scale" because you don't know the end result. If bitcoin implemented those bip's and failed as a network it also "failed to scale" but even more it now failed as entirely.
> If you think existence is proof of success, then I have some very successful beanie babies to sell you.
Show me the current market for beanie babies, and I'll show you bitcoin's CURRENT tx volume, price increase over time, and market cap. It's not existence as proof, it was to show you that one needs patience. Bitcoin's utility is increasing. These other projects have 0 utility. If you disagree please show me anytime other blockchain projects real utility, that's not speculative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't keep tabs on them all, but in terms of technical aspects I think Monero stands the most likely to be a good substitute for the Bitcoin users. ZCash seems popular, but it's privately-run with a U.S. based company and can pull some strings to assist in de-anonymizing users. They basically claim no liability for it's users which means it may be too comfortable with authorities for Bitcoin users. Other than that…
How can the Zcash company deanonymize users? I haven't studied their system, but that sounds completely against the design goals. (Not to mention to mention the personality of those Zcash core developers I've worked with in the past at leastauthority.com. But security engineering is about not having to rely on their probity.) I don't understand what you're saying about liability and authorities either. In online disc…
>A powerful attacker could potentially fabricate an additional block solely for a targeted user. Spending any coins with respect to the updated Merkle tree in this “poison-pill” block will uniquely identify the targeted user.
If ZCash works with that person or organization, then they're able to deanonymize the inputs on the transaction. As a privately owned U.S. company they can be compelled to do this with authorities.
For most people this doesn't matter, but for the type of user that bitcoin attracts, I think they would care, which is why I think Monero is probably better for them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The market will, and has decided that what you're claiming is wrong. Here's the podcast where the bitcoin "market" fails NPR in just the first few minutes: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/06/29/484029238/episo... I said bitcoin has failed to scale because the miners who have consensus control won't accept any of the forks to increase blocksize. Bitcoin hasn't failed once, twice, but five times now with BIP 10…
> Here's the podcast where the bitcoin "market" fails NPR in just the first few minutes: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/06/29/484029238/episo... . The "market" didn't fail NPR, a single transaction took longer than expected due to the transaction fee being too low at the time being sent. That's how markets work, and it's OK if you don't understand markets, but don't run around claiming that something has fail…
The end result of not accepting BIP is failing transactions. We know this, because it even happened to NPR. Who are you really trying to convince here?
You're also confusing asset value with success for a currency, even as we're entering a Bitcoin bubble from the Yuan crash. Show me a successful developed currency that has the same volatility of bitcoin.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Here's the podcast where the bitcoin "market" fails NPR in just the first few minutes: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/06/29/484029238/episo... . The "market" didn't fail NPR, a single transaction took longer than expected due to the transaction fee being too low at the time being sent. That's how markets work, and it's OK if you don't understand markets, but don't run around claiming that something has fail…
Payment systems aren't successful by failing transactions. That's definitively not working, no matter how you spin it. The end result of not accepting BIP is failing transactions. We know this, because it even happened to NPR. Who are you really trying to convince here? You're also confusing asset value with success for a currency, even as we're entering a Bitcoin bubble from the Yuan crash. Show me a successful deve…
Not accepting BIPs and failing transactions aren't mutually exclusive, you can't assert that something that hasn't happened caused something else.
I'm not trying to convice anyone of anything, just point out how wrong you are so that others don't take your FUD as fact.
And no, we were comparing markets, bitcoin and your beanie baby example. Never did i say bitcoin is a successful developed currency. Keep trying though.