Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 241. (Read 2032248 times)

I am not disparaging Monero (and if I am successful Monero will receive a significant use case because of my efforts, assuming Monero hasn't been subsumed by a BTC side chain). Rather I am suggesting they direct their energy to leveraging BTC instead of XMR side chains. I have a specific suggestion in mind in that regard, but that suggestion will be published with my other work (however it gets published and I hope asap).

I accede to the vaporware implication. I wanted to make some points about the overall economics, then of course it is time to shut up and implement. Before we implement, we should understand well where we are headed, so we don't waste effort.

---

No that isn't an accurate way to visualize it. But transactions don't have to be sent to the block chain. Will publish asap for peer review. Allow me a little bit of time to figure out how I can profit on my discovery while also releasing into open source and also maximizing the odds that I am not a target of retribution nor jealousy.

In bts avg size of tx is 100 bytes thus 10MBps bandwidth needed which is doable TODAY. In your example it's 4000Mbps for 0.5kB blocks
So your design doesn't use a blockchain, strictly p2p? The Bitcoin ala BitTorrent?

nice games overnight:

Lol suuure, there is a difference between talking about the future and creating the future, guess what Monero devs are doing?

...

TPTB

+ 1

Larry Summers either does not understand the difference between "capital" and "debt", or else he chooses to fuzz the issue (as you suggest).

I would bet that Summers (Harvard professor and all) knows what he is doing...

Beware, beware of doublespeak (Newspeak).

*   *   *

You quote Summers (re The Bernank's blog):

"...his blog with a set of thoughtful observations..."

Is he joking, ignorant or trying to fool us again?  I have my opinion...



EDIT:

Canada wants to fingerprint incoming tourists.  (S) Korea fingerprinted ME in 2012.

Canada apparently has very similar problems in regards to the USA.  I bet that all of us will see that almost every .gov has the same set of problems re no money / getting more money.

On Secular Stagnation: A Response to Bernanke


Central banks have backstopped and prevented defaults to the $250 trillion of global debt.

So there is $250 trillion in debt sloshing around the world and yet Summers refers to this as "capital".

So his "solution" is NIRP and a cashless society to prevent anyone from escaping paying negative interest rates on their wealth. And use this resource extraction to continue to backstop the $250 trillion of debt in the world. In order words, Summers thinks we are stupid enough to be a dog chasing our tail wherein the excess "capital" is money we are expropriating from ourselves to prop up "capital" that would otherwise evaporate in a contagion of defaults. And then claim this excess capital that we stole from ourselves (via NIRP) is what is causing the excessive market demand for return of capital (aka safe haven) and thus NIRP.

This is the definition of insanity. And he isn't stupid enough to believe his nonsense. He is obviously scamming us.



Obama Is Targeting Your Retirement Accounts


Canada to Fingerprint Foreign Travelers

Canada’s Hunt for Cash Turns Against Trading Profits in Retirement Funds

Bandwidth is the bottle neck to scaling block size decentralized on home connections.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability#Network

100,000 x 0.5 KB = 400 Mbps connection at least.

http://www.nngroup.com/articles/law-of-bandwidth/


With internet connections in many countries still below 5 Mbps download (and consistent download rates are lower than that), that means 10 years or more to scale to that level. And to achieve micropayments a single order-of-magnitude increase over Visa scale is not likely sufficient. My guess would be 2 - 3 orders-of-magnitude within the first 10 years after launch.

Also bear in mind that perhaps 90% of the world doesn't yet use a credit card for internet purchases, so Visa scale 10 years from now is likely to be closer to 100,000 TPS.

Bottom line is crypto-currency can't scale by having every node see every transaction. Also it is an enormous unnecessary waste of internet bandwidth and there are many other reasons such a design is not desired.

Tl; dr?

You can't limit which experiments will be attempted on pegged side chains. Why do I need 250 pages of noise to tell me otherwise?

The paranoia is because hard forks create two copies of the same BTC value. If both survive that is 100% debasement. Afaics, Blockstream's pegged side chains eliminate the need for hard forks and thus resolve this issue.


That does not necessary follow. Paradigm shift technical changes can alter trends of adoption. Your poll asks for a larger block size. It does not ask which other chain attributes, whether it is a pegged side chain, and which block size people will choose. For example, let's assume GavinCoin (XT) sticks with 20MB blocks (or even 8MB) in a hard fork (i.e. not a pegged side chain) but doesn't have the necessary opcode to support pegged side chains (without federated servers), and Blockstream offers a pegged side chain with 4MB blocks and the necessary opcodes. The majority might choose the later, while MPEX et al short and sell their coins in the XT, while the XT supports can't retaliate by selling their BTC in the pegged competitor.

You incessantly make overly generalized, myopic assertions which do not consider all the details and ramifications.

It appears that when considering an issue, your state machine has only perhaps one or two variables in it.


You make an assumption that the market in question will be symmetric in quality, but above I have explained a scenario where there is an asymmetry and thus the free market may not be able to override MPEX's asymmetric advantage.

If XT will be reformulated as a pegged side chain, then MPEX's threats will be nullified. But in that case, there is no longer a hard fork for us to consider (at least not with the attribute of two competing copies of the same BTC value).

I miss the old days...

Maybe bitcoin devs can read into the code to see what they did to perhaps increase efficiency in btc blockchain. Even though they are different codebases.

i haven't looked at Bitshares forever.  can you summarize what that has to do with the Bitcoin blockchain?

lol, and after first second they will rest for 5 years ? :-)


1000k TPS is 86 400 000 000 transaction per day

I did read it as 100k TPS.. actually 1M TPS is doable on high end servers (todays architecture) and 100k TPS easily on todays desktop computers.

"On a two year old 3.4 Ghz Intel i5 CPU this could be performed at over 180,000 operations per second. On newer hardware single threaded performance is 25% faster."

Seemed like a complete refactoring to make lean tx processing to achieve higher TPS effectively.

I don't read that as them "claiming 100k TPS". They identified serially having to write utxo set as the bottleneck and they estimated a high-end server could do 100k TPS on that problem.

bitshares claims 100k TPS with ease.. very likely 1000k that is possible with todays avg personal computer:

https://bitshares.org/blog/2015/06/08/measuring-performance/

reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3929x3/bitshares_now_handles_more_tps_than_visa_and/

I'm sure that like most experiments, the very first time it is attempted it will be a total mess and many people will run around proclaiming that it can never work.

Choosing new names for at least one of the forks is going to be messy. How about a BIP that deterministically chooses names based on the first block on each side of the fork?

Yeah, it sucks. Can't just leave and go somewhere else.

If I could "fork earth", I probably would.

Anyone coming along?

Bitcoin is the first "voluntary consensus" system I think we've seen. Other systems may be centrally decided or democratically decided, but in all cases once a decision is made you have to follow it. For example we have:

• The FED - Small group of people make all decisions. No one else has any influence over said decisions. Once a decision is made, everyone is forced to follow the FED's decisions or go to jail.
• Democracy - Large scale popularity vote, everyone gets to include their voice (in theory, we all know there are problems in today's "democracy"). Decisions (in theory) follow the opinion of the majority. Once a decision is made, everyone is forced to follow the decision or go to jail.

In both cases, once a decision is made you have to follow it or go to jail.

Then enter bitcoin. Everyone gets to choose which system or path to participate on. There is some form of centralized decision (the devs) but people are free to ignore them. Decisions also come down to a large scale popularity vote of sorts and most will follow the economic majority.

However there is no requirement to follow either the devs or the economic majority. Any group of people can tell the rest to f'off and follow their own path. They will be isolated and excluded from the majority, but they are not stopped and if later proved right the majority might just come back to join them.

This is unique as far as I can see, I am looking forward to seeing how the 20MB fork plays out largely as the first real test of how well "voluntary consensus" works in practice.

200 years ago the very idea of trying democracy was considered a "grand experiment" (one that many predicted would fail). I think a key failing of democracy however is it is still binding. Today "voluntary consensus" is the grand experiment.

https://www.coinprices.io/articles/the-hard-fork-no-need-to-worry-bitcoin-upgrades-harness-free-market-consensus