I'm pro Bitcoin and pro Litecoin. I hold both so I am biased for those two for sure.
Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 1019. (Read 2032266 times)
Lots of bias-ness in this thread.
I'm pro Bitcoin and pro Litecoin. I hold both so I am biased for those two for sure.
I'm pro Bitcoin and pro Litecoin. I hold both so I am biased for those two for sure.
Hahah btc getting bitchslapped as usual.
Gold is money, everything else is a fad. Remember that, kiddo !
Gold is money, everything else is a fad. Remember that, kiddo !
You might be interested to read the discussion Vitalik came over and had with the nxt developers where he comes to the conclusion that nxt does things much better then it looks on the surface
https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/bounty-for-successful-nothing-at-stake-attack/msg60114/#msg60114
To quote vbuterin
"So basically you use transactions-as-proof-of-stake. That sounds reasonable; it's as good as I can think of at this point, although it has the moderately-serious-but-not-fatal flaws that I described in my On Stake article. I eagerly await a full whitepaper description and open source code of your complete protocol so both myself and more formal academics can properly whack at the specifics."
Also Nxt cannot be forked back more then 720 blocks so that alone would thwart the attack mentioned in your paper. Not to mention the economic clustering feature and transparent forging that's in development...
Just like with bitcoin, I'd thought you be more aware that systems evolve. Just looking at their surface and taking them at face value is incredibly short sighted.
https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/bounty-for-successful-nothing-at-stake-attack/msg60114/#msg60114
To quote vbuterin
"So basically you use transactions-as-proof-of-stake. That sounds reasonable; it's as good as I can think of at this point, although it has the moderately-serious-but-not-fatal flaws that I described in my On Stake article. I eagerly await a full whitepaper description and open source code of your complete protocol so both myself and more formal academics can properly whack at the specifics."
Also Nxt cannot be forked back more then 720 blocks so that alone would thwart the attack mentioned in your paper. Not to mention the economic clustering feature and transparent forging that's in development...
Just like with bitcoin, I'd thought you be more aware that systems evolve. Just looking at their surface and taking them at face value is incredibly short sighted.
like i've said before, Vitalik's understanding of "fairness" doesn't impress me. so how does he apply his view of the world into Ethereum and now NXT? probably the same way.
you talk like NXT is a guaranteed success and everyone who disagrees with you is shortsighted. you may be right; but again you may be wrong.
...
The perspective is skewed as we are comparing Bitcoin which is over 5 years old to Litecoin which is less than 3 years old. Uneven metric for comparison.
...
The perspective is skewed as we are comparing Bitcoin which is over 5 years old to Litecoin which is less than 3 years old. Uneven metric for comparison.
...
Invalid. As I noted on page 530:
...
Where was Bitcoin when it was at 2.75 years old?
...
Where was Bitcoin when it was at 2.75 years old?
...
No. You said that further upthread too, and I let you get away with it, but this is the 2nd time, so...no! You cannot compare the time-since-inception independently for each since Bitcoin CREATED the entire crypto-currency ecosystem from scratch and had to fight that nasty battle solo. All cryptos are basically coat-tailing on the interest and groundbreaking that bitcoin has done.
So if Litecoin has any merit at all, it *should* show A LOT more relative interest/market-cap/whatever 2.75yrs into its lifecycle versus bitcoin 2.75yrs in. Litecoin has the benefit of letting something else pioneer the space; and that was the actual hard work.
Using any metric about Litecoin 2.75yrs-in versus Bitcoin 2.75yrs-in in order to supposedly demonstrate some sort of comparative long-run litecoin validity is just broken...
Perhaps you are somewhat right but at the same time comparing 5.5 year Bitcoin to less than 3 year old Litecoin is also skewed no matter which way you try to debunk it.
It is the same as trying to compare as I said previously a Bill Gates to a newly created 18 year old millionaire. You can't compare them as one has had much more time and exposure.
As is the same as Bitcoin which has had much more time and exposure.
"scratch and had to fight that nasty battle"?...lol you make as if Bitocin consciously fought anything. Bitcoin is a protocol and payment network and it doesn't have a conscious to "scratch" and "fight" anything.
A math problem does not fight to keep its absolute truth of its value by just being what it is....2 + 2 will always equal 4 and it doesn't have to fight to be anything but 4 as the answer.
Please stop trying to attempt to make Bitcoin out to be a self-conscious system that had to do such things and should be given credit when it also benefited by the exposure it has had and over the time it has been around.
To say otherwise is also a broken argument.
...
The perspective is skewed as we are comparing Bitcoin which is over 5 years old to Litecoin which is less than 3 years old. Uneven metric for comparison.
...
The perspective is skewed as we are comparing Bitcoin which is over 5 years old to Litecoin which is less than 3 years old. Uneven metric for comparison.
...
Invalid. As I noted on page 530:
...
Where was Bitcoin when it was at 2.75 years old?
...
Where was Bitcoin when it was at 2.75 years old?
...
No. You said that further upthread too, and I let you get away with it, but this is the 2nd time, so...no! You cannot compare the time-since-inception independently for each since Bitcoin CREATED the entire crypto-currency ecosystem from scratch and had to fight that nasty battle solo. All cryptos are basically coat-tailing on the interest and groundbreaking that bitcoin has done.
So if Litecoin has any merit at all, it *should* show A LOT more relative interest/market-cap/whatever 2.75yrs into its lifecycle versus bitcoin 2.75yrs in. Litecoin has the benefit of letting something else pioneer the space; and that was the actual hard work.
Using any metric about Litecoin 2.75yrs-in versus Bitcoin 2.75yrs-in in order to supposedly demonstrate some sort of comparative long-run litecoin validity is just broken...
...
Looks like cheap coins to me!
I hope it goes lower...nom nom nom.
Looks like cheap coins to me!
I hope it goes lower...nom nom nom.
Hope you're hungry:
huh? there's not much there to eat...
$113M worth is not much?
The perspective is skewed as we are comparing Bitcoin which is over 5 years old to Litecoin which is less than 3 years old. Uneven metric for comparison.
And yes I'm hungry....I smell blood.
...
Looks like cheap coins to me!
I hope it goes lower...nom nom nom.
Looks like cheap coins to me!
I hope it goes lower...nom nom nom.
Hope you're hungry:
huh? there's not much there to eat...
$113M worth is not much?
...
Looks like cheap coins to me!
I hope it goes lower...nom nom nom.
Looks like cheap coins to me!
I hope it goes lower...nom nom nom.
Hope you're hungry:
huh? there's not much there to eat...
...
Looks like cheap coins to me!
I hope it goes lower...nom nom nom.
Looks like cheap coins to me!
I hope it goes lower...nom nom nom.
Hope you're hungry:
well, you know what they say...you borrow small, the bank owns you. you borrow big, you own the bank.
if alts were not in fact a distraction and were not contributing to a zero sum game, then all cryptocurrencies should be falling in lock step.
the fact that alts are falling disproportionately more indicates to me, at least, that alts are in fact a distraction and subtracting from Bitcoin in a zero sum game and are in the process of being flushed.
the fact that alts are falling disproportionately more indicates to me, at least, that alts are in fact a distraction and subtracting from Bitcoin in a zero sum game and are in the process of being flushed.
It's not easy to measure that fact without any accepted indexes, but using the indexes I've been calculating, over the last two weeks, alts are down 37-40%, whereas BTC is down about 20% (varies, depending on times of the day, but that's pretty close).
I'm not sure alts are going to be flushed. In the early twentieth century, there were, believe it or not, more than 1000 automobile manufacturers in the US. Of course, that was narrowed down to The Big Three with really just a couple of other important players over a 70-80 year period. My guess is that we'll see a similar winnowing down of alts.
Of course, with auto manufacturing, you've got immense overhead costs. You've got assets backing up debt. If a company isn't cutting it, liquidation is imminent. With cryptos, you can imagine these useless pieces of code floating around and still being listed on exchanges. There isn't quite as much urgency for a resolution. So it may NOT be the case that, say, Poloniex is going to end up trading only 5-7 alts.
But I'd strongly suspect that we will work towards an equilibrium where only a handful of alts matter, and it will be obvious which ones.
must involve some sort of default.
The great trap of humanity is to accept that the ruled should obey completely opposite standards compared to the rulers. It is the source of all evil and most suffering in the world, and it's everywhere.If unlimited borrowing with no thought of repayment followed by strategic default is acceptable behaviour for governments, and multinational corporations, and central banks, then it's acceptable behaviour for individuals too.
If any of these agencies or their cronies want to contest the ethical nature of such a course, they can lead by example or GTFO.
well, you know what they say...you borrow small, the bank owns you. you borrow big, you own the bank.
Quote
I've been waiting for and was very excited for Open Transaction too... But where the hell is it? It's been years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJKWDC4q5rA
Very exciting. Looking forward to the eventual release of a more user friendly client. I desperately want voting pools to take over. Nxt multigateway just happens to have the first deployed and in use version of one.
must involve some sort of default.
The great trap of humanity is to accept that the ruled should obey completely opposite standards compared to the rulers. It is the source of all evil and most suffering in the world, and it's everywhere.If unlimited borrowing with no thought of repayment followed by strategic default is acceptable behaviour for governments, and multinational corporations, and central banks, then it's acceptable behaviour for individuals too.
If any of these agencies or their cronies want to contest the ethical nature of such a course, they can lead by example or GTFO.
do students like being entrapped as debt slaves?
Student loans are the escape route that looks like a trap.I'm in the middle of a blog post describing exactly how enterprising young people with access to them can use them in that exact manner.
must involve some sort of default.
do students like being entrapped as debt slaves?
Student loans are the escape route that looks like a trap.I'm in the middle of a blog post describing exactly how enterprising young people with access to them can use them in that exact manner.
do students like being entrapped as debt slaves?
Quote
I've been waiting for and was very excited for Open Transaction too... But where the hell is it? It's been years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJKWDC4q5rA
You've clearly missed the point. Bitcoin was not designed to be an extensible platform, it was designed to be a currency. The two can help each other.
You're also missing the point. Incorporating new features into the Bitcoin ecosystem does not require changes to the Bitcoin protocol.Anything NXT can do, Open-Transactions can do using Bitcoin (or any other curency) as its basis, without requiring any kind of special token.
We know they are the project that is actually trying to solve real problems instead of P&D their appcoin, because they don't have an appcoin.
Also the fact that so many people flock to the appcoin P&D platforms instead of OT shows how much they are interested in solving real problem.
I've been waiting for and was very excited for Open Transaction too... But where the hell is it? It's been years.
if alts were not in fact a distraction and were not contributing to a zero sum game, then all cryptocurrencies should be falling in lock step.
the fact that alts are falling disproportionately more indicates to me, at least, that alts are in fact a distraction and subtracting from Bitcoin in a zero sum game and are in the process of being flushed.
the fact that alts are falling disproportionately more indicates to me, at least, that alts are in fact a distraction and subtracting from Bitcoin in a zero sum game and are in the process of being flushed.
Jump to: