Author

Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 357. (Read 2032266 times)

legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
May 14, 2015, 05:34:47 AM
Found an interesting game-theoretic idea on blocksize no one seems to have mentioned before:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/35kxdu/mentor_monday_may_11_2015_ask_all_your_bitcoin/cr5fqz


It's a bit rough, but the core idea seems like it could have potential. It's kind of like a Nash equilibrium that disincentivizes miners from tormenting others by creating too-large blocks when the cap is removed.

I agree this has potential. It'd be a clean, permanent solution with nothing arbitrary about it. Sometimes we just don't see the simple things?

Too-large-blocks are already disincentivized by their slow propagation and resulting higher orphan risk. I read that many pools already use a "soft limit" well below 1 MB because of this. It would probably make most sense for a miner to calculate the cost of the orphan risk (needs some assumptions, I guess) and contrast that with the potential additional tx fees being earned and make tx inclusion decisions based on that calculation.


what will happen when block propagation will be O(1)?
(see: https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/e20c3b5a1d4b97f79ac2)
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
May 14, 2015, 05:18:23 AM
Found an interesting game-theoretic idea on blocksize no one seems to have mentioned before:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/35kxdu/mentor_monday_may_11_2015_ask_all_your_bitcoin/cr5fqz


It's a bit rough, but the core idea seems like it could have potential. It's kind of like a Nash equilibrium that disincentivizes miners from tormenting others by creating too-large blocks when the cap is removed.

I agree this has potential. It'd be a clean, permanent solution with nothing arbitrary about it. Sometimes we just don't see the simple things?

Too-large-blocks are already disincentivized by their slow propagation and resulting higher orphan risk. I read that many pools already use a "soft limit" well below 1 MB because of this. It would probably make most sense for a miner to calculate the cost of the orphan risk (needs some assumptions, I guess) and contrast that with the potential additional tx fees being earned and make tx inclusion decisions based on that calculation.


I think it makes sense economically (meaning this is what is going to happen when humans meet and trade). That is why I noted the missing "unlimited" choice in the poll. What can happen, is that the new 20 MB blocksize is programmed into the reference code, but many will just set their own limit, making it soft.

donator
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
May 14, 2015, 04:28:06 AM
Found an interesting game-theoretic idea on blocksize no one seems to have mentioned before:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/35kxdu/mentor_monday_may_11_2015_ask_all_your_bitcoin/cr5fqz


It's a bit rough, but the core idea seems like it could have potential. It's kind of like a Nash equilibrium that disincentivizes miners from tormenting others by creating too-large blocks when the cap is removed.

I agree this has potential. It'd be a clean, permanent solution with nothing arbitrary about it. Sometimes we just don't see the simple things?

Too-large-blocks are already disincentivized by their slow propagation and resulting higher orphan risk. I read that many pools already use a "soft limit" well below 1 MB because of this. It would probably make most sense for a miner to calculate the cost of the orphan risk (needs some assumptions, I guess) and contrast that with the potential additional tx fees being earned and make tx inclusion decisions based on that calculation.
legendary
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
May 14, 2015, 03:48:19 AM
Found an interesting game-theoretic idea on blocksize no one seems to have mentioned before:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/35kxdu/mentor_monday_may_11_2015_ask_all_your_bitcoin/cr5fqz


It's a bit rough, but the core idea seems like it could have potential. It's kind of like a Nash equilibrium that disincentivizes miners from tormenting others by creating too-large blocks when the cap is removed.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
May 13, 2015, 11:31:04 PM
-

when you first registered March 2013 the price was $34.

do you feel silly now?

 Huh

I spoke to rpietila in January on Skype. I got around to writing a syndicated article "Bitcoin : The Digital Kill Switch" by March and joined the forum to share it.

Around that time of Dec. 2012, I was suffering severe tinnitus, difficulty swallowing, and other adverse symptoms in a tail-spin collapse with my Multiple Sclerosis (after sending it into complete remission at the end of Sept using high dose vitamin D3 for week, then quitting). I was distracted on fighting to survive.

At the time I didn't know I had M.S.. I thought it was expected long-term head and throat effects from high # strain HPV infection I contracted in 2006.

well then, you should feel even worse.

in Jan 2013, the price was 13 and you've been a FUDster ever since.
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001
May 13, 2015, 10:19:31 PM


Intelligence and beauty finally meet on a hot date. This lady has the full package that many in this community would do wonders for. That's right I said it. And dark eyes usually don't suit me too well.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 13, 2015, 08:54:56 PM
-

when you first registered March 2013 the price was $34.

do you feel silly now?

 Huh

I spoke to rpietila in January on Skype. I got around to writing a syndicated article "Bitcoin : The Digital Kill Switch" by March and joined the forum to share it.

Around that time of Dec. 2012, I was suffering severe tinnitus, difficulty swallowing, and other adverse symptoms in a tail-spin collapse with my Multiple Sclerosis (after sending it into complete remission at the end of Sept using high dose vitamin D3 for week, then quitting). I was distracted on fighting to survive.

At the time I didn't know I had M.S.. I thought it was expected long-term head and throat effects from high # strain HPV infection I contracted in 2006.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 13, 2015, 08:50:43 PM
Armstrong opened my eyes to reality.

[...] he has been selling his conferences on world collapse [...]

I like his ramblings about history but don' t like his simplifications of opponents or people with a different view. It really went south for me when he avoided a factual debate with Denninger on his 'one dollar of capital' suggestion in relation to fractional reserve banking.

The beginning of that debate was here, and it went on for a few thread pages.

Armstrong chimed in with a few more blog posts on the subject matter since:

Creating Market Depth: The First Step in Creating an Economy

But I guess we are all Marxists...  Cool

Yes. The cognitive dissonance is that most men would rather contemplate the system reforming than a totalitarian collapse into a NWO.

You all can't fathom a world where the collective can't reform and it literally euthanizes its citizens. And we are forced to fork away from it to survive.

I observe that most men seem to go into a binary mode, either collective reform or I am an island with my gold. They don't look for the synergies of the third and only realistic option at this juncture.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
May 13, 2015, 08:43:15 PM
-

when you first registered March 2013 the price was $34.

do you feel silly now?
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 13, 2015, 08:16:57 PM
Quote
Gold and silver are no longer money. They are illiquid assets that will become incredibly more illiquid in the coming war of private assets.

Gold is very liquid in physical sense, not sure how else you would mean.

My upthread post.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 13, 2015, 07:45:32 PM
if tx's don't have to be "put in blocks" in your altcoin, logic follows that there are no blocks.

Illogical.

i am not a programmer

Ah that likely explains your lapses in logic.

you couldn't have been more correct than me.

Rpietila can I believe probably atest I was buying 1000oz bars below $9 in 2008. For sure he knows I was selling him rounds I minted in the $9s.

btw, you seem to think gvts are going to continue to grow and take over the world.  here's a great chart from Calculated Risk that shows shrinkage of the public sector jobs under Obama and since the crisis.

Thanks for a great example of your myopia and cherry-picking data. This is why Armstrong is correct that those who don't correlate all the data will be blinded.

You forgot that those on welfare are effectively government "employees" (both do no productive "work").

As I warned you, that when we dig into specifics, it will be clear I am correct.




i also think this graph is fascinating.  it shows the US national murder rate heading steadily down since the 1990's.  i'd like to think that might be because of the internet and a spreading social consciousness worldwide as ppl link up.  that means there's hope for a better world perhaps.

Murder is only one type of crime. You must look at total crime and also don't forget to include corruption which is becoming more rampant.

The turn on the chart since the 2008 unemployment crisis began is because the citizens are now enslaved outside of prison in terms of being married to government welfare and long-term unemployment insurance. And also due to the dead-cat bounce of the USA economy to by end of 2017.



also, incremental progress on curtailing the NSA.  and you diss the significance of Snowden?:

https://www.vox.com/2015/5/13/8603193/house-vote-nsa-spying?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=chorus&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_Freedom_Act

your doom and gloom is tiresome.  here's the greatest conspiracy of all:  is Anonymint a paid NSA shill?

Ah so I was spot-on in my assessment of the source of your cognitive dissonance.

STT
legendary
Activity: 4102
Merit: 1454
May 13, 2015, 07:31:26 PM
Quote
Gold and silver are no longer money. They are illiquid assets that will become incredibly more illiquid in the coming war of private assets.

Gold is very liquid in physical sense, not sure how else you would mean.   Just a gram of gold would be enough to be used as money and it has been used this way in well known cases where the national currency collapsed even while no country has it recognised officially as money.
Im not saying it wouldnt be messy, I dont want to be shaving off bits of a coin then putting into a pan to refine it or something.  Sounds alot of effort but hey it could be done, even on a street stall I can use the gold in a basic way.   Whatever the price was, it could be used.  
Where as a stock market can be suspended and those assets are illiquid then, though they might pay a dividend or possibly be traded privately between people if they had a certificate I guess.    Paper contracts like shares or bonds are more fragile in times of extreme stress, I do need my broker to stay open and handle my transactions or Im in trouble, the whole market can hitch at times.   Gold as a stand alone thing is hard to suspend or lose altogether in the same way.

In theory cotton notes like we have are more efficent, its only the people who control their 'printing' who are screwing it up.  Thats the monkeys paw with todays technology and advancement, it can work negatively
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 13, 2015, 07:19:46 PM
Quote
You do realize gold and silver are THE only monies out there that are not “credit based” or derive their values via the credit markets

Gold and silver are no longer money. They are illiquid assets that will become incredibly more illiquid in the coming war of private assets.

The war on cash has been long and ongoing.  Bitcoin is as of now the most stalwart defense, but it is in its infancy.

But a profound paradigm shift is upon us because every human will be always connected with their smartphone, and thus physical cash dies.

And with this gold's black market dies too and becomes incredibly illiquid except for institutions that are in the back pocket of the system.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
May 13, 2015, 07:07:42 PM
then you need to explain this:

I already did. Again I already alluded to the word "orthogonal" which was in one of my posts in this thread which preceded the one you quoted. You can't seem to correlate all my posts on an issue, thus apparently the low reading comprehension.

if tx's don't have to be "put in blocks" in your altcoin, logic follows that there are no blocks.  blocks were fundamental to Satoshi's design and have provided a level of open security of data never seen before in human history.  i think you're full of shit.
In my novel new design, transactions don't have to be put in blocks in order to be confirmed. That is a very strong head scratching hint for you!

Your theory is all gvts are in bed together with all the banks and big retailers

And people like you said the NSA isn't recording everything until Edward Snowden leaked.

please provide quote where i said that

obfuscating again.  you said i "said" that.  details i guess don't matter to you, thus you are not to be taken seriously.

Quote
If you had compiled all the corroborating data I have, you would realize how foolish you appear to me.

any "proof" you've provided here is just plain old news articles most of us are already aware of.  your interpretation of those articles is what i disagree with.

Specifics else you are just obfuscating the debate.

As a programmer you should appreciate that specifics of implementation often changes the entire design. People think they know something to be true based on some generalized haze in their mind and when we drill down they say, "Oh my Gurd, you were correct".

i am not a programmer
but it's hard to feel sorry for someone who claims he understands Bitcoin when you totally missed the runup from the early days and enter in March 2013 and missed the biggest runup of them all.

I told you I don't want to introduce more of my personal circumstances into this discussion, but this is the second time you've hit me over the head with the same character assassination.

FYI, rpietila pinged me when BTC was $10 and I agreed with him to proceed to sell silver and go in big. I told him I couldn't do it, because my illness has so messed up my brain that I didn't trust myself (had uncharacteristically lost $100,000 in 2012 betting on options following some idiot promoter after having built my stash with sound thinking to 18,000 oz of silver by 2008) and was in capital preservation mode so I could survive my malaise to fight again on better days.

Also there were other factors going in my personal family life in addition to the M.S. which were causing my actions and thinking to be volatile and rash, which is another reason I decided to exclude myself from speculative investing from that point forward. I decided that my best performances in life had been coding and entrepreneurial and that I didn't have the right circumstances and psychology for managing speculative investing.

And I precisely achieved my objective to stay afloat without making any more catastrophic errors so that now I am ready to fight again as my Multiple Sclerosis appears to be under abatement with the high dose vitamin D3 treatment and I just finished coding 5000+ LOC social network over a span of 2 months. Thus proving to myself I am back to coding productivity and poised to move on to bigger and more productive actions.

Also I was handicapped to a large extent on investing (especially in physical silver) by my choice to live in Mindanao. But this does not harm my ability to code and in fact appears to give me more solitude and focus.

now you claim you called it just b/c it fell from 1200.  i'm not even finding your technical discussion to be that interesting b/c it involves many assumptions i don't agree with.  and worse, those assumptions are based on doom and gloom political factors.

I was correct on silver. I was correct on gold. I was correct on BTC on the way up and down.

you couldn't have been more correct than me.  check the beginning quote of mine in this thread and follow my posts thru 2011.  most ppl know and can verify my claims around gold, silver, & Bitcoin.  that's why they're here.  you on the other hand are full of shit.

btw, you seem to think gvts are going to continue to grow and take over the world.  here's a great chart from Calculated Risk that shows shrinkage of the public sector jobs under Obama and since the crisis.  it verifies what i've been claiming for quite a while now, deflation is really the dynamic in force right now to the point it is actually shrinking big gvt.  that's great news despite the fact that we still have a long, long ways to go towards that goal. And Bitcoin will help facilitate that:



i also think this graph is fascinating.  it shows the US national murder rate heading steadily down since the 1990's.  i'd like to think that might be because of the internet and a spreading social consciousness worldwide as ppl link up.  that means there's hope for a better world perhaps.



also, incremental progress on curtailing the NSA.  and you diss the significance of Snowden?:

https://www.vox.com/2015/5/13/8603193/house-vote-nsa-spying?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=chorus&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

your doom and gloom is tiresome.  here's the greatest conspiracy of all:  is Anonymint a paid NSA shill?
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 13, 2015, 06:50:41 PM
i've stopped listening.

Meanwhile he predicted the collapse of gold, predicted the exact to the dollar closing price of oil for 2014 (back when it was $100), etc, etc..

http://armstrongeconomics.com/archives/30339

Quote from: Martin Armstrong
Why do Most Computer Models Fail?

Computer Models typically fail for the same reason why human forecasting from a gut personal perspective becomes a joke. In both cases, if there is no experience with the past, neither can possibly forecast the future. Such models have failed because they lack the historical database on a global scale. How is it possible to create a model that only goes back to 1971 where free data is available? What will happen is catastrophic. It will work for the period that everything is normal, but it cannot predict the major events like the Great Depression and Sovereign Debt Defaults for it has never seen such events in the data.



To put together this chart would cost over $100 million today. It was a major research project that was necessary to predict the future. The burning question was HOW DO EMPIRES FALL? Was it like a 747 plane coming down gradually for a landing, or was it a collapse out of the blue? If you do not spend this money, you cannot possibly predict how society will perform.

sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 13, 2015, 06:33:15 PM
then you need to explain this:

I already did. Again I already alluded to the word "orthogonal" which was in one of my posts in this thread which preceded the one you quoted. You can't seem to correlate all my posts on an issue, thus apparently the low reading comprehension.

Your theory is all gvts are in bed together with all the banks and big retailers

And people like you said the NSA isn't recording everything until Edward Snowden leaked.

please provide quote where i said that

I don't need to. Your general cognitive dissonance and denial is indicative of the effect.

Quote
If you had compiled all the corroborating data I have, you would realize how foolish you appear to me.

any "proof" you've provided here is just plain old news articles most of us are already aware of.  your interpretation of those articles is what i disagree with.

Specifics else you are just obfuscating the debate.

As a programmer you should appreciate that specifics of implementation often changes the entire design. People think they know something to be true based on some generalized haze in their mind and when we drill down they say, "Oh my Gurd, you were correct".

but it's hard to feel sorry for someone who claims he understands Bitcoin when you totally missed the runup from the early days and enter in March 2013 and missed the biggest runup of them all.

I told you I don't want to introduce more of my personal circumstances into this discussion, but this is the second time you've hit me over the head with the same character assassination.

FYI, rpietila pinged me when BTC was $10 and I agreed with him to proceed to sell silver and go in big. I told him I couldn't do it, because my illness has so messed up my brain that I didn't trust myself (had uncharacteristically lost $100,000 in 2012 betting on options following some idiot promoter after having built my stash with sound thinking to 18,000 oz of silver by 2008) and was in capital preservation mode so I could survive my malaise to fight again on better days.

Also there were other factors going in my personal family life in addition to the M.S. which were causing my actions and thinking to be volatile and rash, which is another reason I decided to exclude myself from speculative investing from that point forward. I decided that my best performances in life had been coding and entrepreneurial and that I didn't have the right circumstances and psychology for managing speculative investing.

And I precisely achieved my objective to stay afloat without making any more catastrophic errors so that now I am ready to fight again as my Multiple Sclerosis appears to be under abatement with the high dose vitamin D3 treatment and I just finished coding 5000+ LOC social network over a span of 2 months. Thus proving to myself I am back to coding productivity and poised to move on to bigger and more productive actions.

Also I was handicapped to a large extent on investing (especially in physical silver) by my choice to live in Mindanao. But this does not harm my ability to code and in fact appears to give me more solitude and focus.

In short, I decided I needed to be very conservative for a while and focus on rebuilding from my core vocation which is programming and marketing. Speculative investing I should do only where the synergies are well fit, so that I don't get myself investing in things I can't keep up with.

now you claim you called it just b/c it fell from 1200.  i'm not even finding your technical discussion to be that interesting b/c it involves many assumptions i don't agree with.  and worse, those assumptions are based on doom and gloom political factors.

I was correct on silver. I was correct on gold. I was correct on BTC on the way up and down.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 13, 2015, 06:09:42 PM
They exchange function for confidence, the real for the prettier illusion.

I suppose it is a risk...  If you are running such a really long con, even your successors might fall for it.
100 years is such a long time that anyone working at a CB has to believe that they are following tried and tested principles.
What saved the long con for so long was the 20th century population boom and technological revolutions.

Those two factors created wealth at a faster rate than the central banks could destroy it. So much so, that it wasn't apparent to anyone that the central banks were destroying wealth at all.

That no longer appears to still be the case.

Now they want to leverage our nerd productivity and use that to sustain the NWO. This is why they planted Bitcoin for us to drool over. And we are falling right into the trap.

I don't want to work for them as a defacto slave! But all my angst won't matter if we don't make a super minority for a money that isn't what they created.

sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 13, 2015, 05:48:42 PM
I'll switch to dash if theres no cash

You seem to forget that money has no value if at least a super minority doesn't also use it as money.

Also differentiate assets from money, primary by the liquidity (and slowing declining marginal utility[1]). Money is highly liquid while assets have variable (over class and time domains) liquidity.

The cognitive dissonance in this thread appears to be motivated by delusional hope because the reality is too depressing:

Yeah those who are thinking that defaults will weed out the corruption from the system and set us free are naive and myopic. This is the typical goldbug simpleton thought process.

Add to that the cognitive bias (foolish pride) psychology of being an early investor in Bitcoin.


[1] You could only store so many barrels of oil in your backyard before the utility would decline into a liability.
legendary
Activity: 2101
Merit: 1061
May 13, 2015, 05:25:21 PM
the bond managers are getting desperate.  anything to make their bond portfolio prices go up.  

note that this guy doesn't ever truly think that gvt manipulation of interest rates will ever be to the upside; he knows they're a one trick pony.  it would just be a matter of how negative they want to take them to screw the savers to his benefit:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/comment/11602399/Ban-cash-end-boom-and-bust.html

 Shocked  Shocked  Shocked  Shocked

Make cash illegal. They'll never get away with it no matter how 'futuristic' they make it sound. I'll switch to dash if theres no cash
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1006
100 satoshis -> ISO code
May 13, 2015, 05:15:41 PM
why don't they just tell us what to buy how much of it and when.

like if my friend saved up to  much money he should be forced by law to take an expensive trip.

Ah, I can see it now. Being a Canadian your friend applies to the govt there to take a vacation to the beaches and bars of Thailand. However, the govt has different ideas, and certainly doesn't want to add to the invisibles trade deficit, and wants to goose domestic GDP. So Thailand is denied and your friend spends some weeks putting much needed tourist dollars into the impoverished communities along the remote shore of Hudson Bay.  This idea could work!
Of course senior politicians can still visit Thailand on "fact-finding" missions.
Pages:
Jump to: