Topic: -- Bitcoin Transaction Fees to Sky-Rocket - Bank Takeover - page 2. (Read 4661 times)

Why you lose so much time and energy creating a non-existent, purely theoretical conflict and arguing about it?

I see. For some reason I thought you might give a reasonable, intelligent answer instead of act like a douche.

It is inefficient and highly unlikely to have a new digital fiat currency replaced every few years.  There is a lot of planning, funding, supply and logistics, etc., which goes behind creating, backing, maintaining and globalizing a new currency.

No, they will choose one digital currency [and in my mind for whatever reason, there is a near ZERO chance that it will be Bitcoin] make the necessary adjustments, like get rid of the silly semi anonymous accounts and the even more silly 21 million limit and then force it on the rest of the public which have not get bowed down and worshipped it and dilute and inflate that new digital fiat for the next 40-100 years just all the fiats before it until it is worthless.  

Exactly like all the fiats before it and by then the old fools [who ate all the lies and begged for more, and fell into the biggest financial trap of their lives will all be dead and new sheep will be born and they'll eat the same exact lie and give up their freedom for a new shitty fiat] just like the dollar was a wonderful and new fiat back in 1934 and 99% of today's idiots have no clue what happened in 1934-1935 which is why it's guaranteed to happen again right now, in ~2015.

If anything, we now have the stupidest [collective] people that this planet has ever seen, all herded together at the same time for the biggest sheep slaughter the world has ever seen and they're gonna beg for this new wonderful fiat, nay, store of value, on their knees, which will make everyone rich.  Bhahhahaaaaa.

Welcome to history and economics 101.  

PeerCoin?

Oh, you mean PeePeeCoin (PPcoin)?

Need I say more?


Techies often have zero imagination which is why the Woz was saved by the Jobs.

This is not a problem, because when this becomes a real problem, Bitcoin will just be replaced by a better cryptocurrency, I hope with proof of stake. It will be forever remembered as "the first used cryptocurrency" though.

In a more pessimistic vision, bitcoin will be replaced with a similarly ill-designed coin, but younger. We will then have a new dominant coin every x years.

What about Peercoin? It has a fixed .01 transaction fee specifically designed to lower transaction spam.

D&T, brother, this wouldn't be a debate without you here, to piss all over my theories.

Welcome!


You got most of that right but not quite.


"Liquidity is deeper markets which damp volatility.  Liquidity is there being a buyer when you want to sell or a seller when you want to buy (correct, and/or a market maker but that goes with a deeper exchanges and better infrastructure which you mention).   All that will come from a larger valuation to the money supply, better infrastructure, and deeper exchanges with more transparency and security."

The larger valuation is not correct.  Your thinking is linear and logical but give it some thought.  What you meant to say was a larger money supply which is similar to valuation as a larger money supply tends to lead to a larger valuation.

Let me explain.

A larger money supply means more actual Bitcoins or ixCoins or dollars.  This absolutely does increase liquidity.

But a larger valuation, the way you stated it implies an increase in value of the underlying fiat which does not necessarily lead to more liquidity.  It could lead to higher demand which could lead to higher acceptability and thus higher rate of transactions but this higher valuation will also lead to more sellers as many will be risk averse or will simply want to book profits.  This is exactly where Bitcoin is today.

So do you think, caeteris paribus, that if Bitcoin goes to $10,000, all of a sudden the swings in the Bitcoin price will not be so bad and volatile so all of a sudden a larger Bitcoin valuation means more liquidity?

Absolutely not.  On the contrary, more buyers will come in, so popularity and transaction rate will increase, but an equal amount of sellers will also increase on the other side so the liquidity has not increased at all.

It's just like saying:  hey, I have 2 Ferrari GTO's and they're the only ones on the planet.  If I put them on sale for $1 there will be horrible liquidity but if I put them on sale for $1,000,000 the liquidity will improve.  See, valuation does nothing for liquidity, it only affects demand, acceptability, awareness, etc.

And the divisible argument doesn't hold water either for liquidity.  The 8 decimal fractional characteristic of Bitcoin is nice for spending purposes but not for liquidity purposes.

For this imagine having $100 for auction.  Would the dynamics of that $100 change on the market as far as selling it, buyers and sellers go regardless if you offered it in $1 bills, $10 bills, or 1,000 pennies?

No, because in the end you're still only selling $100 which is a very finite amount. Your supply will not satisfy the demand even if you break up the $100 into a billion pieces because at the end of the day you're still selling only $100 dollars and people are wanting dollars and few will want 1 penny.

And I realize that this is where your larger valuation theory comes from but watch Bitcoin at $400, it's no more liquid than it was at $100 because buying begets buying and the higher valuation brings in more and more buyers and richer buyers and soon the greed and herd mentality kicks in and along with other market dynamics so nothing will increase liquidity other than first and foremost:  more of that particular product and secondly, the other factors you mentioned like more efficient and deeper exchanges.

So absolutely, ixCoin offers something which is very much needed but I don't know if a double amount of coins and a savings of 18 years and that amount of energy is an amount which will make a big enough difference with the given massive demand and poor current market exchanges and efficiencies.

It's almost like saying you'll improve the market liquidity for those 2 Ferrari GTO's by adding 2 more.  That is the absolute best way to improve liquidity of any asset or fiat but I'm not sure if another 10 million coins next year would be enough to make such a massive switch to a different coin.

5,000 posts?  That's weak sauce, son.

I'm aiming for the big boy's post count, Death and Taxes, and I also want the phoney coins under my name to end in a nice tinge of piss-yellow(piss-yellow) which means I desperately need to make me some Bitcoins with which to bribe this alleged anti status quo establishment who will then reciprocate my actions with a nice yellowish emblem to set me apart from the normal sheep.

And luck ain't got nothing to do with it, son.

This is simply how I do.

And, son, nobody do what I do the way I do.

Thanks for your input on ixCoin.

From a valuation point of view, do you see anything about ixCoin that stands out?  In the 6 months I have been here it has struck me as very odd to see ixCoin track Bitcoin nearly perfectly.  It's positively correlated to Bitcoin which is not the case with every other alt coin.

But why?  The inflation rate is twice as high as Bitcoin so ixCoin should be constantly dropping in value relative to Bitcoin.  And why are all the other alt coins negatively correlated and ixCoin is positively correlated?  IxCoin even went down with Bitcoin some 5 months ago when Bitcoin went down to $68 from $120. 

I wasn't awake yet when Bitcoin went to $266 and back to $50 and back to $120 so I don't know if ixCoin was tracking Bitcoin during those moves.

But there is something odd about ixCoin.  If you research it you will keep finding things that don't add up.

Yup liquidity isn't the issue so ixCoin doesn't solve anything there, but expending less energy on POW is surely "better" by anyone's logic whether that is via improved efficiency of hardware, or a shorter duration.

I mean, does anyone SERIOUSLY believe that we will still be using the original BitCoin in 2040?

EDIT:  Just read up quickly on ixCoin, it doesn't offer anything more than potentially reduced energy consumption over the long term.  Once you hit maturity, a lot of the miners would move off it, as the incentive to "mine" it is much less, the ones that stay eat up the fee's and overall power use will be less.  I suppose, it could make a good window into the future of what could possibly happen when maturity is hit with BitCoin.....if we are still using it of course.

You know you are the archetype of what!?
Who is the sheep doesn't need any explanation here
I am sure you can, by the end of this month, reach 5000 posts for sure!
Good Luck

Bitcoin is perfectly divisible, another 10M or 200 quadrillion coins wouldn't improve liquidity.  Liquidity is the able to exchange with minimal friction.  Liquidity is deeper markets which damp volatility.  Liquidity is there being a buyer when you want to sell or a seller when you want to buy.   All that will come from a larger valuation to the money supply, better infrastructure, and deeper exchanges with more transparency and security.

I'm not well versed on ixCoin or its architecture, don't get much time out of eMunie to read up much more than a quick skim.

So is it a Satoshi based client that uses SHA256 but with a much earlier max unit time?

If so then I kinda agree it would be "better", but wouldn't it still suffer the same bloated blockchain issues and overall problems with keeping up at high volume?

At best it would be a "better" stepping stone to something else, but it still has a lot of the root problems if that is the case, so aside from that, there is no incentive for BTC holders to change ship

There is one very important benefit which ixCoin has over Bitcoin when you take into consideration mass adoption and the financial markets and that is:  Liquidity.

That may not seem like much but if Bitcoin is great then an identical twin with more liquidity would be considered greatest.  And that's exactly what ixCoin is.  

And I'm not sure how to quantify or qualify an extra 10 million coins and some 2 decades in saved mining time but that kind of added liquidity, to have it now instead of in 2033, would be a huge bonus if you look at Bitcoin from a Bankers' or Wallstreet's perspective.  

It's actually such a huge plus that it could prove to be absolutely necessary in which case they'll find a way or an excuse to kill Bitcoin and you'll know it was an excuse if they all get behind ixCoin - a coin with near zero following which should have died long ago.

So you don't agree that people in general, the masses, are sheep?

In that case, I'm sad to tell you, that you're one of them.

Baha baha baha baha. 

lol! Well doesn't matter if he's an idiot or not, or what his posts before are, on this occasion is he right to have concerns.

No one has a solution for this problem, not a real one, not even the "core devs"...."increase the blocksize"

Why people bother themsleves to start answering a thread which has been started by a self-confident idiot!
Just look at his (vlad2vlad) posts: he believes he knows pretty much above the 99% of guys here, he calls people sheep, he thinks he has the future already 100% predicted by him at hand, and in particular argues the concerns about what a currency is by referring to the practices of ancient greeks lol, while neglecting the most obvious most important example of global dollar
Is it really wise to even notice what a 200 hours 3000 posts self-confident mouth says?!
Look at his previous posts in other threads, just to see what I mean! This guy needs to be taken serious, to be known genius, his wounded complexes needs healing

Well there are 3 ways to success

1.  Be First
2.  Be Better
3.  Bullshit

Bitcoin was first, so it will quite rightly be a success, whatever yardstick you use is up to you, but, it has major holes in it and no one around here seems willing to admit that.   

Furthermore, NONE of the alt's that use the Satoshi codebase will de-thrown it, I don't care what fancy POW or POS you use, or novelty features you add, because at the foundation, you have the exact same holes in the system as BitCoin.  You might find success for a while, but any ALT will always be #2 to BitCoin, and eventually it will suffer the same problems and die.

IMO (and I may sound biased) there are 2 contenders and 2 only, Ripple is one, and eMunie is the other.  Yes yes I know that eMunie is my creation, but there is NOTHING out there in development that comes even close with regard to feature set and scalability.  Both of these have been written from the ground up, use different designs and take into account some of these gaping holes in BTC/ALT

I'm not 100% sure about Ripple, it has enough design positives for it to be a contender, but there is a lot of stigma around it still....it could surprise us though.

So, back to my list

1.  Be First - BitCoin
2.  Be Better - Ripple/eMunie/something else
3.  Bullshit - Alt's, or more specifially, Satoshi based alt's

Lol, it's not you, it's them.

People here, in general, are clueless and they tend to drink the Roger Ver Koolaid and they just repeat anything they hear in the media about Bitcoin.  The positive things that is, which are starting to accelerate just as I also said it would.  In the next few months the media frenzy will begin to get frothy.

I just wish I could figure out what will cause Bitcoin to suddenly die or what will give rise to another really big crypto, as big as Bitcoin or close to it.

Cause I can think of geo-political reasons, competitive reasons from banks, corporations and the govt or maybe even an unexpected design flaw in Bitcoin, but in such a case, ixCoin would also have the same flaw since it's a near exact clone.

Hard to say.

I've brought this up a few times on here, even in the main BTC forum.....my thread got closed before I even got started.

Everyone just says "buy a bigger HD" and doesn't seem to get the point or understand the real problems behind processing at Visa type scales.

Point is, turn your BitCoin client off for a week, then load it up, it'll take you at least 10 mins to sync even on the fastest connection with a beasty PC....

BitCoin is averaging what?  60k transactions a DAY, a week is 420k transactions and it takes 10mins to sync, VISA does as you rightly say 100k a second at peak.....HELLO!??!??!?

I gave up trying to point out the issues when everyone is obviously a lot smarter and has much more experience with high volume, low latency systems than me and my lowly resume, even though I worked on these types of financial systems for 4 years.

EDIT: and before anyone states "just use a web wallet service"....isn't BitCoin supposed to be decentralized, and by using a limited number of available web wallet services, makes BitCoin centralized?  

Plus, VISA ploughs millions into infrastructure, so some startup with a few 100k is going to put in place that same infrastructure that can process the same volume?  Come on!