Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 274. (Read 2032248 times)

Given my insight into a design you haven't yet seen, I can conclude that you are conflating issues. The changes in design necessary to make a crypto-currency impervious to 50% attack also enable real-time, decentralized transactions. You assume that real-time requirements correlate with less robust defense, but like all things in technology the devil is in the details and generalizations by n00bs are virtually ALWAYS incorrect.

Another example of incorrect generalization upthread was the assumption that off-chain anonymity could match the autonomy and End-to-end Principle of on-chain ring sigs. On detailed study, this assumption is incorrect and leads to entirely incorrect decision process on unwavering, fanatical, unbalanced support for a dominant Bitcoin.

You all are demonstrating the same quality that you lament about the masses, which is they aren't well informed. You see how that shit works? It is a fact of human nature that specialization is not ubiquitous.

Eventually you are going to have to admit that I over the past years have specialized myself on these issues. However it doesn't imply I am omniscient so I am keeping my ears open here and reading everything with keen interest and I will backtrack and mea culpa as necessary. (not wanting to be boastful and I'd much prefer to be a quiet force, but I am forced to pound my chest a bit here because I want to get some traction on working towards the solution we all need)


Precisely. Yet Bitcoin "Core" and "XT" (forks or proposals or camps) are both being attacked from all potential directions of escape, e.g. Core folks support pegged side chains yet this can result in a Fascist side chain which makes MP's defense impotent (did you miss that implied point in my prior post?).


The cartel has always worked in long time frames (decades and even generations) and relatively small investments such as a few $billion here and there (given their $3+ trillion Black Budget fund admitted by former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and documented in numerous other ways hence) to wipe out a resistance in order to usher in the $300+ trillion wealth grap in the NWO. Come on, you guys are not even bacteria on a flea's ass.

Why do human's have such myopia with conceptualizing relative size?


Instead of playing Whack-A-Mole with hash redesigns, what you could do is adopt my design and use the pegged side chain to spend off of Core and into my design. But then you are supporting the BTC value of the Fascist coin. Much better you will spend your BTC into the Fascist coin and sell, then buy my design.

You will have no other choice than to come into my lap (or the lap of someone who copies my design or creates a derivative).


Smooth, I and others have been down that rabbit hole of technical analysis and that doesn't buy you anything. You will still be in Whack-A-Mole mode.


You are describing what I am working on.


Pegged side chains should not be ignored. Clearly we are moving to a paradigm where users can choose technology independent of the coin value. This is an important development and I haven't fully analyzed the ramifications yet. I've shared the logic I have thus far on pegged side chains. Feel free to teach me anything I missed in my absence from the prior long thread discussion on them.

I value more than anything a robust and flexible defensive capability.  The closer a system gets to 'real time', the less I value it for this exact reason.  From a system analysis point of view, I know how much easier it will be to defend when one has the time and flexibility to take whatever defensive measures are necessary to meet whatever attacks are mounted.

As I've said for years, and I heard Todd promote the concept fairly recently, a system which can probably defend against and attack is much less likely to experience one in the first place.  Core will be quite popular with a lot of us old-timers at the very least.  It will obtain a fair degree of hashing power.  Overcoming this will be costly.  If we can ensure that days-long attacks are ineffective even if they do change the system cycle frequency for the worse, it's going to be expensive to attack on pure sha256 hashing power.  And even if that somehow proves to be sustainable in the long term we are not just going to walk.  Worst case scenario we could change the POW slightly and relegate the current (and likely future) datacenters full of ASIC to the trash heap.

(I actually favor a hard-fork which kicks out the whole current POW algorithm and replaces it with a randomly selected CPU friendly collection of algorithms.  I'd think strongly about favoring such a fork over core (MP) if some trusted group did one in time for the Hearndresen XT attack.  The idea, of course, would be to promote distributed mining like back in the old days.)

Thinking back, I think the Blockstream guys were projecting an expectation of several days to be confident of a peg operation.  I wonder if they are considering some of the possible defensive needs I mention here when they made that projection.  IIRC, the explanation was roughly that they wanted peg operations to be deeply buried in the chain.  Defensive measures  could be one reason for that I suppose.

MP's WMD juxtaposed with pegged side chains WMD means any fork to a coin with a 50% attack vector is impossible. The freedom to fork is threatened with WMD from both sides. See my prior few posts of the logic.

Afaics, the only viable path forward is to invest out of this dilemma into a superior crypto-currency.

You will have the world's eugenics blood on your delusional hands...

Are you saying path dependency applies to the ledger as well?

Your logic of collective action arguments may apply to "the masses," but Bitcoin remains usable by those who understand such things, which is globally a decent-sized (and rapidly growing) economic bloc. There is no collectivism in a system where you can fork off or otherwise "exit in place" at will. The logic of voice vs. exit is the dominant dynamic in the Internet economy, which is unburdened by the usual territorial considerations.

This is why the cartel need Blockstream's pegged side chains as a defense against MP when they implement the Fascist side chain. This is why Blockstream has received all the $millions. Ditto 21 Inc. The cartel is funding the WMD.

They are going to burn MP's hands up to his armpits one day.

iCe brigade, why can't you see that TPTB have fooled you into supporting your own demise. Do you enjoy being dogs chasing your tails? Please send this to MP.



P.S. Dirty HLarry and I share the middle name "Henry".

The majority of the masses will use the winner-take-all, Fascist side chain. Checkmate.

You don't win against TPTB by playing their game. They are the masters of the Logic of Collective Action.

Edit: the only defense is as I wrote upthread; remove the 50% attack from mining. It is critical that we redesign crypto-currency.

How much was your rent and cost-of-living?

I pay $350 per month for two-storey, modern, fully furnished 4 bedroom house in Davao, Philippines. I pay $40 monthly for 1 - 2.5 Mbps down / 0.25 - 0.7 Mbps up. To get faster I would have to move into an office complex in a few designated areas and forsake many other lifestyle choices.

Note: F2Pool (a.k.a. Discus Fish) rejects 20MB but supports 5-10MB. Certainly not an argument against an increase.

My point about the reduced hashrate is if the masses move onto the Fascist side chain (Coinbase, Circle, Paypal, etc) which they will do implicitly without even knowing it, then the cartel has an incentive to use small amount of hashrate to destroy any remaining competition from the original Bitcoin chain.

Ha, any "death by 1000 paper cuts" (sorry closed today try again next week) money is not money in my opinion. That was a very delusional post. Are you guys really thinking like this? There is no value whatsoever and you will be a few fools holding on to a store-of-value that has no bid ever again must be moved into the Fascist coin to get a bid.

The argument has been the unit-of-account advantage for a dominant currency. As you (and recently rpietila in the Economics Totalitarianism thread) astutely point out, there are overriding priorities for what we want from money that have less do with unit-of-account.

Bitcoin isn't even a unit-of-account, although it is more widely accepted than any other crypto-currency by far. Yet still I forsee Bitcoin protecting neither my stores-of-wealth nor my ability to do commerce without a 1000 papercuts. Thus I am not contented with Bitcoin as the only dominant money.

I am 90% sure that at least 25% of the readership of this forum shares my articulated perspective. That is a huge market for an altcoin and enough to give it critical mass.

IMO Monero's delimma is they didn't map out a currency usage for it (except for rpietila's game project). But I just had an epiphany on that earlier today (at 2am) and now forsee Monero as an integral part of any project I might do. It turns out Monero can do something that Bitcan't can't (pun intended), which is essential to my current strategy (subject to change).

Appears this forum is under DoS attack again.

Google, done.

Good morning!!

Would any of you guys care to comment on these two articles that assert that :

1) We are already hitting the 1MB block limit "an average of more than four times per day so far in 2015"

and

2) The 'real' speed of the Bitcoin network is only 2.8 TPS - "largely a result of increasingly complex transactions, often using multiple inputs and outputs"

https://tradeblock.com/blog/bitcoin-network-capacity-analysis-part-1-macro-block-trends

https://tradeblock.com/blog/bitcoin-network-capacity-analysis-part-2-macro-transaction-trends

Thanks!

Btw, I had deduced this about you.

If we are truly facing a potential global Dark Age, it is possible that all the diversification you can muster won't help you. In that case, being undriven to attempt the moon shot can be the crash and burn scenario.

Odds would normally overwhelmingly favor your cautious stance, but I don't think we are heading into a normal business cycle correction. I believe Martin Armstrong's 309 year cycle model of civilization change. It is also so happens that all of his models are converging towards a major crash at the same time, e.g. the 25 year War Cycle model, the 51.6 year ECM, the pandemic model, etc..

I believe we are headed into a tempest on the order of the fall of Western Rome with the technological differences, i.e. a propaganda war with virtual realities and a technological totalitarianism. TPTB have the technological and political circumstances to drag us into a top-down Technocracy that slow burns into eugenics and death by a 1000 paper cuts.

We hackers have the potential to create efforts which thwart such a dire outcome.

For all you Bible believers, the calculations for the Tribulations and Jesus's return (Google "Abdomination of the Desolation" and "Marshall Swing") point to 2015.75 as the beginning of the Tribulations. I am not basing my decisions on Biblical numerology. Just noting I am aware of this.

However even I am skeptical about the degree to which a waterfall crash can implode all diversification over short time intervals. The collapse of Western Rome into the Middle Ages was not a process that could be observed in a single lifetime. Although apparently the localized collapse from 1.2 million to 30,000 population of Rome was mostly concentrated over decades.

I'm not the one CONCERNED about how zero fee transactions taking a little longer will cause yet another Death Of Bitcoin.   

iCELatte - - > CONCERN TROLL!

Constructive content?

Foolish mortal...T H I S  I S  B I T C O I N T A L K !

Keep going... at least I am aware my posts are bereft of constructive content.

Varus was there too.  Bron, Tyrion, Tomlin, and Jaime are good Lannisters, unlike Sexy Evil Circe and the rest.   

The point is Bitcoin much harder to attack than even King's Landing's well defended walls.  Satoshi build BTC to last through any external siege or internal coup.

No matter how great his hubris or wicked his witchcraft, Gavin the pretender to Satoshi's throne and his fleet of pirate ships are going to get r3kt in this battle.

Good summary here:  https://www.coingecko.com/buzz/bitcoin-leaders-speak-up-block-size

Includes the first media coverage I've seen of MPEX's economic doomsday weapon, the GavinCoin Short:

The bold above is happening in real time we get to see empirical evidence very soon. Still home advantage to the central authority who can push there winning card through with a soft fork by offering miners extra revenue for merge mining SC's

And surprisingly there is an idea that can dethrone the central authority by catering to the majority who use the network and run the protocol and many who have an invested interest are watching, and the central authority says the ignorant majority are just ignorant, listen to us we're experts.

So looking at the pole above, it may be causality but there seems to be wisdom in the consensus of the herd. So I think you may end up being wrong let's see.

I hope you are.