Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 501.

Melbustus

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1004

Quote from: justusranvier on February 09, 2015, 07:08:23 PM

Quote from: smooth on February 09, 2015, 07:07:28 PM

That's an interesting line of reasoning.

It suggests that Bitcoin can only succeed if no such attackers exist.

Bitcoin can only succeed by growing larger than all attackers.

Maybe you and Peter Todd need to get in a room:

"Nifty paper proving what we knew already: w/o a blocksize limit there's no PoW security -> death of Bitcoin." http://t.co/VPsgVkdzj9
(https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/564934207487897601?s=03)

Since his tweet misrepresents what the paper says, it seems to me that he's irrationally entrenched in his opinion.

Melbustus

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1004

Quote from: smooth on February 09, 2015, 07:16:16 PM

Quote from: justusranvier on February 09, 2015, 07:08:23 PM

Quote from: smooth on February 09, 2015, 07:07:28 PM

That's an interesting line of reasoning.

It suggests that Bitcoin can only succeed if no such attackers exist.

Bitcoin can only succeed by growing larger than all attackers.

"Growing" implies a stage of being smaller, at which point such attackers can and will destroy it. How can anything grow if it is already destroyed?

Kinda the unlikely miracle of Bitcoin's current size, perhaps. This is partly why Wences Casares, for example, likes to assert that it's much less likely for Bitcoin to have gotten from 0 to where it is today, than for it to get to 1B users from where we are now.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: justusranvier on February 09, 2015, 07:08:23 PM

Quote from: smooth on February 09, 2015, 07:07:28 PM

That's an interesting line of reasoning.

It suggests that Bitcoin can only succeed if no such attackers exist.

Bitcoin can only succeed by growing larger than all attackers.

"Growing" implies a stage of being smaller, at which point such attackers can and will destroy it. How can anything grow if it is already destroyed?

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: smooth on February 09, 2015, 07:07:28 PM

That's an interesting line of reasoning.

It suggests that Bitcoin can only succeed if no such attackers exist.

Bitcoin can only succeed by growing larger than all attackers.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: justusranvier on February 09, 2015, 04:08:04 PM

Quote from: NewLiberty on February 09, 2015, 02:42:31 PM

If there exist entities that both care about Bitcoin and want to end it (and have sufficient motivation and resources)

...then they will succeed, and there's no technological solution we can implement that will stop them.

There is no substitute for growth as a defence against such attackers.

That's an interesting line of reasoning.

It suggests that Bitcoin can only succeed if no such attackers exist.

Melbustus

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1004

Quote from: justusranvier on February 09, 2015, 04:08:04 PM

Quote from: NewLiberty on February 09, 2015, 02:42:31 PM

If there exist entities that both care about Bitcoin and want to end it (and have sufficient motivation and resources)

...then they will succeed, and there's no technological solution we can implement that will stop them.

There is no substitute for growth as a defence against such attackers.

+1

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: HeliKopterBen on February 09, 2015, 10:38:30 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on February 08, 2015, 11:32:28 PM

Quote from: ssmc2 on February 08, 2015, 10:54:40 PM

http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/

Im gonna give that to a coworker who is a conspiracy theorist yet pessimistic about bitcoin.. He always asks who controls bitcoin and never satsified as a fork can cause a large loss to his investment.. Thus labels it a ponzi scheme aimed at luring in small fish

He will panic-buy at much higher prices.

His pessismistic attitude is worrying as im sure he thinks hes right just like most of the other engineers i know. I told him last year and i remind him again.. The day you buy is the day i sellout

Pruden

hero member

Activity: 496

Merit: 500

Spanish Bitcoin trader

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 09, 2015, 02:50:21 PM

Dow rolling again. -100.

desperately trying to stay up.

Volume was very low, what is your idea of desperation?
The trend is UP!

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: NewLiberty on February 09, 2015, 02:42:31 PM

If there exist entities that both care about Bitcoin and want to end it (and have sufficient motivation and resources)

...then they will succeed, and there's no technological solution we can implement that will stop them.

There is no substitute for growth as a defence against such attackers.

rocks

legendary

Activity: 1153

Merit: 1000

Quote from: NewLiberty on February 09, 2015, 02:42:31 PM

...
so it is probably in the 'good enough' category. It is not in the 'safe' category (though Andreas A. disagrees with me on this).

That is a great way to put it. It also highlights that people's views on bitcoin largely depend upon their risk aversion preferences and/or what they view as risky. Someone who views maintaining a fixed dollar amount as low risk and their primary goal, will likely see negatives to bitcoin since it's not "safe" (i.e. 100% guaranteed), while someone who views the value of a fixed dollar amount as itself being risky, will likely see value to the project since it is "good enough".

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Bitcoin volatility? pfffft:

Melbustus

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1004

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 09, 2015, 03:42:55 PM

Looks like a chart of 99% of alt-coins.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

i love this chart. can't get enough of it. it's a record after all. down 99.83% from its 2007 high. how low can it go? dead, dead, and deader:

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

this must be bullish, right?

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

how much deader can Greece get?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-09/greek-bank-bonds-stocks-crumble-record-lows

coric

member

Activity: 169

Merit: 10

ExToke - Fee Free Trading

Quote from: NewLiberty on February 09, 2015, 02:51:21 PM

This math assumes the fork starts just after adjustment.

You're right, I forgot about that. So would it be best to schedule the fork for the middle of a period to minimize this impact, if that can be done? I think the Doge merged mining hardfork was scheduled for a specific block count, not time.

NewLiberty

legendary

Activity: 1204

Merit: 1002

Gresham's Lawyer

Quote from: coric on February 09, 2015, 02:46:13 PM

Quote from: justusranvier on February 09, 2015, 11:54:47 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 09, 2015, 11:48:32 AM

well, a hard fork new chain gets started with x hashing rate. blocks are 10 min apart, just like they were with Bitcoin back in 2009. any increases in hashing rate from miner adoption that decreases the frequency below 10 min is automatically adjusted every 2 wks with difficulty. we've never had a problem with block intervals going to days or weeks in Bitcoin so why should it happen with a new chain, given it is a hard fork with minimal protocol changes?

At the point of the fork, the difficulty has already been set based on the entire network's hash rate.

Miners have to choose one fork to mine.

If half of them go one way, and the other half goes to the other fork, then both forks are mining at with difficulty at double the value it should be, so both forks will experience 20 minute block times until the next difficulty adjustment.

If the split is 70/25, then the smaller chain will experience 40 minute block times and the larger chain will get 13 minute block times.

And the 20 minutes are for both forkd for a time of 4 weeks, the 40 minutes for a time of 8 weeks for slowfork.
Add the value crashing, there's enough time to do some real damage, in the worst case to both Gavincoin and Mirceacoin.

This math assumes the fork starts just after adjustment.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Dow rolling again. -100.

desperately trying to stay up.

coric

member

Activity: 169

Merit: 10

ExToke - Fee Free Trading

Quote from: justusranvier on February 09, 2015, 11:54:47 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 09, 2015, 11:48:32 AM

well, a hard fork new chain gets started with x hashing rate. blocks are 10 min apart, just like they were with Bitcoin back in 2009. any increases in hashing rate from miner adoption that decreases the frequency below 10 min is automatically adjusted every 2 wks with difficulty. we've never had a problem with block intervals going to days or weeks in Bitcoin so why should it happen with a new chain, given it is a hard fork with minimal protocol changes?

At the point of the fork, the difficulty has already been set based on the entire network's hash rate.

Miners have to choose one fork to mine.

If half of them go one way, and the other half goes to the other fork, then both forks are mining at with difficulty at double the value it should be, so both forks will experience 20 minute block times until the next difficulty adjustment.

If the split is 70/25, then the smaller chain will experience 40 minute block times and the larger chain will get 13 minute block times.

And the 20 minutes are for both forkd for a time of 4 weeks, the 40 minutes for a time of 8 weeks for slowfork.
Add the value crashing, there's enough time to do some real damage, in the worst case to both Gavincoin and Mirceacoin.

Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 501. (Read 2032286 times)