Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 251. (Read 2032248 times)

It's awakening Socialism (built on and inextricably linked to cronyism and totalitarianism) that bothers me in that respect.  That's one of the big reasons that Bitcoin has captured and held my interest, and is probably the biggest reason I dislike XT so vehemently and am so excited about sidechains.


I didn't know that.  Thanks for sharing your expertise in numerology.  edit - now, how about that code?

And when the dying NWO socialism expropriates all wealth, even that which can be accounted for?

Do you dismiss this as very unlikely? You will not even hedge against this outcome?

Have not Dark Ages occurred every 2 x 309 years or so throughout human history? Do you know which of the two alternating cycles we are on now? In short, do you know what time it is?

Have you not viewed at least the first of the following linked presentations? You are doing yourself a massive disservice as an investor if you don't review the following. Are you aware of the Reese commission report? (of course not, because all the copies of this Congressional report were bought up and destroyed)

Few people argue that federated methods are much more than a kludge, but as Maxwell points out in the recent announcement vid it is not clear that Bitcoin's native method of consensus, ideologically pure as it is, is devoid of fault or failure modes.  I've long argued that a federated scheme or similar would be a good auxiliary fall-back (mostly to discourage superior resource attacks from even being attempted.)  For this reason it hardly breaks my heart that necessity forces development of federated schemes which, temporary or not, deserve some degree of love.

Properly implemented federated methods absolutely ARE fundamentally different than many of todays crop of off-chain solutions.  With great effort a decent federated system might be able to inconvenience me and/or steal a tiny fraction of people's money in the micro-seconds before they were found out, but that is a completely different thing than, say, Coinbase who could freeze (and spend) all of the BTC I have in my account and everyone else's account as well.

Dead right.  I'll happily use XT as a sidechain, and especially if others are going to subsidize my activity in exchange for my allowing them to spy on me.  None of my BTC input is going to be red-listed because I can account for all of it, and I'm happy to register my XTsidecoins for buying all kinds of trinkets under the watchful eye of Big Bro.  As long as any frozen XTSC I hold eventually auto-revert to BTC in the case of a taint freeze-out or other failure I'm as happy as a clam.

I've a strong suspicion that interest in sponsoring XT will dry up if it cannot be the primary source of truth in the crypto-currency space, and it looks a lot like sidechains will beat them to the punch allowing Bitcoin to remain (and significantly extend) it's distributed infrastructure support base.

Way to go Blockstream.  You guys rock!  Not even all that far off the schedule I predicted near the beginning of the year IIRC.

Anonymous cash has been the preferred form of money for the last centuries. It is only with the advent of Bitcoin in the last ~7 years that has opened the possibility of a traceable digital token for some delusional "one-world-one-block-chain" bitcoiners think its a silver bullet for every problem in the world, mainly against the system and its power-grabbing freaks they say to fight against.

http://www.wired.com/2015/06/tech-behind-bitcoin-stop-next-snowden/

Federated servers are just a hack to be able to test prior to getting the necessary softfork. Without the proper two-way peg where coins are secured by an SPV proof against the Bitcoin blockchain, this is fundamentally no different than any other off-chain solution where coins are being held in some form of custody.

This is a key point on my todo research list. Federated servers don't work? Or wouldn't be trusted by the market?

The two-way peg requires a soft-fork, and unless some significant rework of the idea has happened that I'm not aware of, the current prototypes perform the peg with federated servers.

It's entirely possible within the current development environment for any of a number of devs to prevent this from ever happening indefinitely.

Also, the only reason you would need a Lightning network sidechain is if the softfork opcode changes Lightning requires never make it into Core, which is the exact same political situation as getting a two-way peg in the first place.

You started it! You demanded to know my name, accusing me of me being Armstrong (when you know damn well I am not, this was a sly ploy of yours to build a case against me), etc.. You even printed my name in your post and demanded I confirm it. That was before vokain said anything.

And you wonder why people would like to kick your a$$.


The audacity you have.

Now you throw your toys because you can't control them.

And you play the sympathy card. You are so damn predictable. Manipulative control freak.

Surely you recognize the great disadvantages of gold as I explained upthread? No one could refute my question about who they will sell their gold to when all the gold dealers have been shut down as they are now in France, and recently extending to Belgium, etc..

There is no economy-of-scale in trading gold. But crypto trades at a distance and (not for Bitcoin) anonymously, thus economies-of-scale are easily attained.

It is no contest. Gold is dead forever. Fuhgeddaboudit.


When the mining refuses transactions without KYC, then you will not be anonymous in Bitcoin. I have already explained how this will come about over time.

You are digging your expropriation grave with Bitcoin.

If it is any consolation the boys wanting to play with their big blocks XT toy will be able to run it as a Sidechain, in a sandbox, keeping the mess to a minimum. And we can all learn valuable things for when bigger blocks make sense.

I knew he was preparing a case against me.

What I wrote is I'd like for you to do some sport with me. Comparing the talent of your claimed black belt to my hobbiest messing around with boxing. I specifically wrote "for sport of course" and "inside the ring" meaning an agreed upon match.

Because you are one of those guys who brags about things but I'd like to see if you can actually put up when I shut you up. You backed away from the challenge as the weasel coward you appear to be. Why are you bragging about being a black belt on your bio if don't like a sport challenge? If you are truly a black belt, then you should be able to destroy a boxer. You see, I think all those titles are bullshit. There is a big difference between talents of people who claim be a "black belt". And I think you can be smothered and overpowered easily because you look feminine in your photo and you act feminine in your postings.

I also said that I grew up in and around your town. So isn't just "your town".

And if you've been put at risk of physical harm because some people who were defrauded by HashFast would like to break your legs (I wasn't one of their victims), then whose fault is that? Surely you are smart enough to have deduced the risks of what you were promoting at great 3000 BTC profit to yourself.

Blockstream is killing altcoin economics, because Bitcoin users will be inclined to prefer the pegged side chain version over the altcoin so they don't have to deal with volatility in their Bitcoin unit-of-account.

However, if there are out-of-band applications of the altcoin which refuse BTC for ideological reasons (knowing that the ultimate outcome of Bitcoin is to move all zombie masses onto a centralized ledger KYC pegged side chain), then those users who want that out-of-band application will not invest in the pegged side chain version and instead will invest in the altcoin.

The point is that users who want anonymity will congregate away from Bitcoin. But Monero can be 50% attacked and it lacks this out-of-band application I have in mind (and couldn't support it without changes to the mining algorithm). If there is a pegged side chain with all of Monero's attributes, then I no longer need to hold XMR and instead will be holding BTC in addition to my coin.

I made an entire thread on this out-of-band application, but readers appear to be oblivious.


That is not enough anonymity for those with wealth who will be expropriated by the coming global contagion collapse of socialism. And that is key point! You've entirely missed the boat on this one. You are siding with the zombie masses who will vote for expropriation and unwittingly their own collapse.


Until there is something that Bitcoin can't do and where BTC is not accepted because Bitcoin is a sly, imminent KYC expropriation paradigm. So now you know how such a coin will be marketed. Prepare your counter-arguments.

Good one MOA.   



Adam Back is the real Doctor of Cyphers.  And Nick Szabo has forgotten more about tech, gold, and economics than OP will ever learn.

OP is just a "Faster, please" gadfly opinionating from the code-free comfort of his armchair.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.   

there are those of us who can do anything MPEX can do.

maybe more. 

should we be concerned?  not that i don't trust you or anything  

So you are implicitly asserting he will agree to lose the decentralized, pseudonymous characteristic of Bitcoin? Because once the masses are on a pegged side chain with mandatory KYC, the miniscule minority Core chain can be 50% attacked to force it to have the KYC attribute (which means it is also effectively centralized).

Come on now, haven't you seen where this has all been headed?

MP may be a disinformation agent too. Anything is possible. His public role is the Hegelian dialectic employed by TPTB.

According to MPEX, who has veto power in the form of his GavinCoin short, "Bitcoin with larger blocks" is not Bitcoin.

With sidechains now live on testnet, XT ain't gonna happen.  Support for larger blocks among the redditards will taper off as they are distracted by Blockstream's shiny new Thing, especially if the price begins to recover upward momentum.

We will see if your prediction that quasi-permanent 1MB blocks and sidechains will DOOOM BTC turns out to be true, because that's the path we're going down.  Good thing I have silver and XMR hedges in place to compensate for such a scenario.

Moar SideChains buzz! ... sounds like some homomorphic encryption ideas (blinded transaction amounts with verifiable crypto proofs) have been implemented in Elements .. wowsers. This is innovation.

https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/blkstrm/video/elements-gmaxwell.mp4

Bitcoin as a backing for sidechains is eminently compatible with Bitcoin as MP's personal wealth playground.

I dunno if MP is a fraction of the Mr. Big that he and his minions proclaim but I suspect there is at least something to the assertion.  Certainly they are active and certainly they are among the most technically competent and economically literate of the ecosystem participants.

Last time I was paying much attention (early 2015 iirc) MP's seemed fairly allergic to the idea of the masses benefiting by Bitcoin and to the extent that they might by using a Bitcoin-backed sidechain and he seemed to have some resistance for that reason.  I wrote it off to his psychological need to broadly advertise himself as the worlds biggest prick.  I suspect that this need will take a second seat to his recognition that sidechains working as advertised give him vastly more power than vanilla Bitcoin alone.  One way or another, Hearn's fork is a genuine threat to him (and humanity) and something worth fighting off with as much energy, cost, and collateral damage as necessary.