Topic: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell - page 5. (Read 46270 times)

It's how forums work and what they are for. I'll bet you are annoyed cause you can't use bitcointalk, the forum Satoshi used to launch bitcoin as your circle jerk echo chamber for BU and r/btc lie spreading.   Every-time you post bullshit, I'm going to call you out for having no knowledge on the subject of bitcoin or economics, and every thread you pollute with your fear uncertainty and doubt about things you don't understand and a future you know nothing of, all you will do, is fill up the forum with me pointing out you have knowledge or understand of the subjects you are speaking of.

And its is certainty withing my right to correct you and expose your "shenanigans" as its a public forum

Yes, and I would be very happy if you wouldn't.

It is annoying when I am replying to someone else and you feel the need to chime in and address me directly.   


 

It doesn't surprise me that you don't know the definition of socialist. Especially since you have never read a book on economics, or Marxism, or communism (or socialism).  I couldn't be more capitalistic in nature and my beliefs. I HAVE read The Wealth Of Nations and it is the basis for capitalism and I agree with it completely and whole heatedly and it absolutely explains how Scotland thrived with private banking cap reserve system because the banks were allowed to compete on a free market.  Again, I will cite and quote my claims if you try to argue them.

You have done nothing but show you know nothing about economics and you have not read a single book on the subject.

You are the one trolling.  I am replying to your posts.  You are saying you won't debate me while constantly opening and responding to back forth discussion. I have done nothing but call you out for not having an argument and constantly citing fear uncertainty and doubt.  That is the entirety or your argument that we need to be afraid of the uncertainty which should cause doubt.  I'm convinced you don't actually realize that there is nothing scientific about that.

Blimey, a socialist loony lefty on here. Rule number 1 - never debate with a socialist.

Goodbye.

Won't be baited into a false debate with you... all you're doing is proving again your trollishness and bumping the thread.

You weren't addressing anyone with anything.  There was no argument you put forth and it wasn't based on anything.  You literally FUD away any reasonable argument. 

"lightning is bad because I don't understand it and I refuse to consult and research expert explanations and therefore it is complex and will be bad".

WTF do you think you are a fooling?

whatever you want it to mean.  I wasn't addressing you.

That was the only line in the bitcoin.pdf you read and you didn't understand it.  And LN couldn't be closer than a p2p cash system, and its exactly what finney and szabo imagined bitcoin to emerge to be.  It makes perfect sense, its inline with nash, szabo, and hayek and Austrian economics.

It's not at all a rational argument to come on a forum and say "ya but we should be fearful uncertain and doubtful about the future because it might get complex".

Theres no more room for shenanigans nor is your use of the word shenanigans referring to anything real or any real worry.

wtf does this even mean?

No there is no more room for a abuse at all, you have stated this lie as fact.  It's a way of spending your bitcoins that you have, but in micro-increments.  There is nothing more complex to fear about it nor have you shown or put forth anything to fear.

You are just saying "we should it because of an uncertain future no one knows about or is predicting"

It all depends on how far we deviate from the original P2P cash system.

The more complicated and layered it gets, the more potential for all kinds of schemes and shennanigans.

As it is now, even with LN, the fact that people could settle their transactions anytime makes it hard
to get around the fact that Bitcoin is a digital asset, not a debt instrument.

Still, even now, lets say there was a big company "petty cash quick payments" where you kept
a channel open for a long time and used it like a credit/debit card.... the longer you go without
closing the channel, the more room there is for abuse and owing more money than you have.

Ya there is no bank.

So in this case, is it more like full reserve banking than factional reserve banking?

Cheers!

Factional reserve system is good and great and there is really no other system, because it makes sense for banks to loan money that they don't particularly have provided they choose decent customers for those loans.

It only gets bad if their is a monopoly on the money supply and if government will bail out bad banks, because then their is no reason for the banks to only make good loans.

LN with bitcoin is like a defacto fractional reserve system, you can't really loan more money than you have so it always has a perfect standard. But what it will do is put pressure on the existing fractional reserve system to make better and good loans.

Bitcoin is the missing link to fractional reserve banking.  So you can understand why ignorant people like One thinks macro-economics (ie fractional reserve banking) is evil, because they don't understand that Smith Hayek Nash all predicated their arguments on an open market in which its not just the government that prints money and bails out banks.

No "lightning network account" is not a real thing.  In essence you are basically commiting an amount of bitcoin in one transaction without sending (but locking them from being spent otherwise until you settle all the future transactions).

You have to do that its part of the process.  And then you can incrementally decide to send promissory notes to the receiver.

So you make an initial bitcoin transaction that allows you to commit to micro-payments via any communication method. That's it.

The only person I've seen pushing the "fractional reserve" myth is kiklo, but I can understand how it might have easily spread.  Since the total sum of BTC being transacted is still locked in place on the main Bitcoin blockchain, no more and no less can be transacted on LN.  Whichever amounts are being transacted on Lightning, they are always "backed" by an equal amount of bitcoin.  No coins can be created out of thin air.

In your opinion is it a good design? Could it lead to a fractional reserve type of banking system based on blockchain backed BTC? Could a user receive and then transact in these promissory notes without having opening a blockchain based channel? (i.e., they can just open a lightning network account instead?)

You KNOW these posters are monkeys.

Lightning is very easy to understand, and I sympathize with the fact that the experts haven't explained it well to us (I include me in us) laymen.  

The SETUP for a LN/LT is tricky and technical, I had to watch the Poon/Thad video many times to understand at all what I was watching, but then I realized something.  Once its setup, once the technicals are in place, from a laymen user perspective that wants to understand, it is simply promissory notes that you can't reneg on.

So you COULD literally send them by mail or text or email or messenger etc.

They say "I promise to pay x from account y"  and its cryptographically guaranteed. Then you can send another message/transaction saying "I promise to pay x.5 from account y".  

From a users perspective, you see nothing and do nothing, like a tap credit card or a mobile payment processor.

And I repeat I am not an expert but I am leagues beyond Quickseller that made a ridiculous claim both parties need to be online to make such a transaction.

My initial information on LN came from an old bitcoin news article. So it may have been poorly misunderstood from the article writer, or from my readership. It also might have been refined in design a lot since then.
At some point I might decide to take a greater interest in understanding it. I can't learn everything at once though. So yes, feel free to point out when I am being absurd. I did say I thought I probably needed to understand it better!

It's a great attitude and you will obviously grow your knowledge.  But I'm still going to make fun of you for trying to learn about LN from a group of people who OBVIOUSLY don't' understand it. Seriously what are you doing in this thread, rather than learning from the discussions the experts are having and the papers they are writing?

Multiple posters in this thread showed CLEARLY that they do not understand LN's.  What more will you get from a group that doesn't understand what they are talking about?

See this is the thing.  You are calling hypothetical experts "so-called" experts, but experts really actually ARE experts. And saying things like "I take experts opinions with a grain of salt" is not understanding the term expert.  What is happening is the experts explanation is difficult for you to understand and its causing you to take their explanation with a grain of salt which really means you are assuming you are smarter than them and you are listening to your own subjective opinion because thats the easier route than taking time to understand what the experts are saying.

No this isn't true all, many people cannot read an experts paper because it is too complex for them.  That's why you and others continually quote the one line you think you understand from the bitcoin.pdf which you think says "bitcoin is supposed to be scaled to be a coffee money because that is what cash is and banks are evil" but it doesn't say, its actually a technical paper.

New discoveries and truths do not come from silly discussion about conspiracy theories by a group of posters that are unwilling to understand the expert opinions on a technology.
No, you see I actually read books on economics.  And I am probably the only person familiar with John Nash works ideal money which is 20 years of lectures on the subject of the macro-economic implications of the introduction of an international e-currency with an asymptotically stable inflation schedule.  You have claimed to have read 100 books and write on mises (refuse to prove it) and you think macro-economic science is rubbish.  And you are laughing at me for being "economic illiterate"?

I think real economist understand that predicting the economy is like weather its not at all an exact science because we don't enough information to solve the complexity.

No.  You see Austrian school of economic theory is exactly what I am citing when I say predicting the economy is not possible.  Hayek, which I have also read, explains this and I will quote and cite if you try to argue. 

I think what you are REALLY saying is you have been calling for FUD for many many years, and you are reading other FUDster economists that have been doing the same.  Calling always for a complete collapse of the financial system (and bitcoin will emerge as the savior).

That's all just a symptom of not understand macro-economics, which you admit you don't, and it cause a chicken little sky is failing outlook which, yes, many many people will have because most people also don't understand economics.
My agenda is to come into threads where posters are making ridiculous claims and assertions about economics and bitcoin, and to challenge them to produce a single economic book they have read. You do not do research, this is not research, this a thread full of posters with no intention of doing research titled "fuck the experts".