Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended • Hacker News Board

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#251

Post by tim333 » Fri, Nov 10, 2017, 4:06 PM UTC

saalweachter wrote: post #250

tim333 wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at the graph from Stocks For The Long Run it's been about the most constant thing in value over a 200 year time frame http://www.pacificinvestmentadvisory.com/graphics/stoxGraph.... I daresay constant is not great. Goes up is better.

That graph is kind of meaningless since gold was pegged to the dollar pre-1970s. Well, vice versa.

To some extent though it illustrates that after 200 years the value of $1 of gold was something like $1 in real terms while the value of a paper dollar became 6 cents. Even if that only kicked in after the 1970.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#252

Post by bonestamp2 » Fri, Nov 10, 2017, 4:16 PM UTC

b1daly wrote: post #221

bonestamp2 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know everyone is going to say it is, but what if it's not a bubble... What if the huge demand and very limited supply is the driving factor behind the current price? I mean, even if you don't like bitcoin, there are a thousand more coins and there might be something in there for everyone... but you typically need to buy bitcoin first before you can get most of those coins.

Generally, huge demand and limited supply are necessary for any bubble to get going. I can see no way that the Bitcoin price is not a bubble. It's rise in price is none-the-less astonishing, and is somewhat a testament to the soundness of the security model. The whole system does require new money coming in all the time to maintain current price levels, as miners need to sell their bitcoin to get paid. It's less than…

> huge demand and limited supply are necessary for any bubble to get going

Does that mean gold is in a bubble? I mean, who are we to say either way? Bitcoin is arguably more useful than gold and it's supply is known with great precision. You could say that Gold is more speculative in a way since somebody could be sitting on a stockpile that is equal to half of the known supply.

> The whole system does require new money coming in all the time to maintain current price levels

That's only true for the next few years, then no new coins are created.

You can't see how it's not a bubble but frankly, I have trouble seeing how we can say it's in a bubble. Maybe it is, but I don't think anybody knows how to evaluate bitcoin... it's not like anything we've seen before.

When IBM started selling computers, their roadmap didn't include home computers because they didn't think that anyone would ever want a computer in their home. We understand the implications of bitcoin now about as much as IBM understood the impact of computers back then.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#253

Post by sctb » Fri, Nov 10, 2017, 10:20 PM UTC

grover_hartmann wrote: post #246

lawn wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are no real technical arguments against increasing to 2MB, only political. The main actors against a block size increase are Core developers who are also part of a company called Blockstream. Blockstream's business model is about selling side chains. But why use side chains if you can use on chain transactions instead? Well if you limit on chain scaling users would be forced on to your side chains... The moveme…

Go back to r/btc with your propaganda.

We just asked you to stop breaking the guidelines with unsubstantive comments. Would you please stop? We ban accounts that won't.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html