Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 586. (Read 2032291 times)

Ok, then tell them to STFU about me and  all the other SC opponents  "preventing" them from doing a damn thing. Code it up, stop the marketing and complaining, and we'll evaluate away.

Perhaps a  promise from BS core devs  to treat similar ops from altcoins would be appropriate as well although I suspect that would break their  backs.

You can't lump me into this generalization. Anyone who had followed this thread for the mere 3.5 years of its existence knows I'm an altcoin and Bitcoin 2.0 hater as I believe they're sucking badly needed capital away from Bitcoin temporally. Doesn't mean  I don't think they have a right to compete fairly by not bring able to change Bitcoins source code. 

Wow, great article on Internet freedom.  If you can't see where Bitcoin stands in this battle,  you're an idiot.  Bitcoin SC's as stocks, bonds, or insurance contacts won't help in this regard:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/01/02/business/international/web-freedom-is-seen-to-be-growing-as-a-global-issue-in-2015.html?ref=technology&_r=0&referrer=

Homeopathic remedies are still acceptable forms of snake oil. Magical thinking is everywhere. Bitcoin has properties that can't be duplicated. There can't be generic forms of Bitcoin, but there are placebo trials called altcoins.

I would agree that it isn't just the alt coin camp talking down SCs.

SCs have the potential of giving people a false hope of it being equivalent to Bitcoin but in fact not having all of the elements of MC Bitcoin.

Quite the opposite most are heavily invested in Bitcoin and more over the idea of hard money.
SC are a threat to fundamental hard money function in Bitcoin.

+ 1 here, I for one want to see the Bitcoin experiment prove the underlying assumption that it's more than a frugally designed protocol but a solution for digital cash before BlockSteam fuck it up.

Adam the reason Bitcoin is considered successful thus far is real people have invested in giving it value, running SVP proof on the Bitcoin blockchain just put it all at risk.

I'll guess the falling price is an opportunity to invest in the status quo, or it'll fall more with every public victory Blocksteam win in the PR war.

I suspect most people who have been trolling Adam and the sidechain developers have ulterior motives. They probably either hold large Alt coin hoards, are part of alt coin development teams or have other vested interests that the sidechain project would directly compete with/make redundant.

This is exactly what I see. Huge spoiler with really no purpose. HAHAHA 

thanks for that!

Not this bitcoiner.  I always considered it absurd due to the design of the system.

Gold is the counter-point inevitably comes up in these discussions.  Gold isn't used as a 'currency of commerce' in the least.  It sits in a vault doing nothing for decades at a time yet it has significant value and is in high demand.  Usually the vault that of a nation state.  The safest, most 'distributable', most supportable, etc blockchain would be one which mimics this use.

It is still possible (in most countries) for any Joe Sixpack to obtain and dispose of gold if they want, and very occasional he may do so in some sort of unusual transaction.  Very rare though.  I bought a house a few years back and had to prove that I had certain assets.  I went to my safe deposit box and got some of my stash, then to the real estate office down the street, showed the agent, and made photocopies.  No shit!  Obviously I didn't want to take the conversion hit of changing them to USD then back again, and didn't wish to use them to pay for the house and was expecting a batch of cash to show up in a few weeks due to some work related stuff.  The real estate agent had never heard of nor seen such a thing.  But it worked.  Crypto-currency would have been so much better.

Doing some 'commerce' I do need a 'currency of commerce' regularly and for this I use USD (me being an American.)  I 'demand' only what I need for relatively immediate use and don't have demand for much more since I don't use it as a vehicle for store of value.

It is true (albeit very pie-in-the-sky) that if BTC were even modestly used as a 'currency of commerce' the valuations would rise just to achieve the needed liquidity, but the risks are huge and I don't believe that Bitcoin could exists in a desirable form under this pattern of utilization due to design deficiencies.  It is more true that if Bitcoin can achieve and maintain trust in a 'reserve' or 'store of value' role where most non hand-to-mouth people store most of their wealth, that would elevate the valuations at least as much as this need for 'currency of commerce' liquidity demand.  'Trust' in my book means defensible against corp/gov attack which diminishes or disappears with significant use as an 'exchange' currency.

Indeed.  A year ago, that was THE argument that bitcoiners used, all the time, to 'prove' that 1 BTC would be worth a fortune (1 million dollars, often) in the future.

The counterargument would be that the value achieved is a discounting of future value expected by (future) use as a currency of commerce. But if you take away the latter, the former disappears as well.

Pffft.  Bitcoin never was 'used as a currency of commerce' (whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean) and it achieved a pretty significant value...though barely a tiny fraction of it's potential.  I've heard the same nonsense assertions spouted by Joe Random Nobody as though they have some position of authority for years now as have a lot of us.  Normally it's not worth the bother to respond.


Sounds to me like a couple of butt-hurt losers who got in late and are crying in your beers about it.  Commiserate away.  Sniffle.

Doesn't sound like a troll to me. +1 brother

No, by "the bitcoin blockchain with all those appendages" in sentence (1) I meant the bitcoin plus sidechains plus wahetever additions to the protocol are being considered to make sidechains work and to try to co-opt any promising altcoins.

That project is trying to patch extraneous functionality into the already-abused bitcoin protocol in order to turn it into a global production service for a multitude of fuzzy tasks that it was not intended to do.

The bitcoin protocol was frugally designed and implemented by "Satoshi" for a single specifc purpose: namely, to test whether his solution to an old technical problem (motivating a bunch of uncoordinated volunteers to maintain and protect a distributed, decentralized payment ledger) actually worked.  Just like the Wright Brothers' Flyer One was designed and built specifically for one purpose: namely, test whether their solution for heavier-than-air flight actually flew and could be steered - nothing more.  

The bitcoin protocol is already ill-suited for all the things that people want to use it for today -- hedge against inflation, get-rich-quick scheme, internet roulette/dice, global competitior to paypal, visa and western union, ....  And now it is to become the central timestamping and trust management and whatnot for thousands of sidechains.  Such extreme repurposing of an inadequate design is bound to produce a monstrosity that will not stand on its feet.

The second part (2) above refers to the more extreme view that bitcoin would cease to be used as a currency and would become to all cryptos what the gold used to be to all national currencies.  But gold used to fill that role only because of historical and cultural inertia, and it lost it once people got used to unbacked paper money.  Bitcoin does not have such history; on the contrary, the altcoins started out as fiercely independent of it.  Thus, trying to turn it into the 'gold of crypto' and convincing the altcoins to adhere to the 'gold standard' is going against the natural evolution of money.  Worse, if bitcoin stops being used as a currency of commerce, it will lose its value, and then will become useless also as crypto-gold.

Native Bitcoin:




Sidechains backed by Native Bitcoin:

To have sidechains as jet engine technology to bitcoin you'd need to see a great deal of benefit and efficiency increase from including them.  Not many think that is the case, I think its more like adding more seats or more luggage space.  It'd be nice if sidechains somehow improved everything about bitcoin not just tagged onto it

Do nothing, you can eat and drink bitcoins. Bitcoins are very tasty and very well nutrition.

Sorry but more like this:









 

Asking "[w]ho really rules?" researchers Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page argue that over the past few decades America's political system has slowly transformed from a democracy into an oligarchy, where wealthy elites wield most power.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/princeton-experts-say-us-no-longer-democracy

you guys have to ask yourselves why they have so much power.  the answer, if you're reading this, is that you already know:  control of Money.

with Bitcoin, as it is, we are slowly taking back those reins of power.  and now, we are being asked to change Bitcoin into a SC-enabled asset trading platform? speculative asset trading is NOT needed and distracts us from Bitcoins main function:  Sound Money.