Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 603.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 07:33:14 AM

Quote from: BldSwtTrs on December 30, 2014, 07:16:50 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 01:42:03 AM

for those who miss their daily SC's hit, go here for an excellent discussion btwn this guy Coinlock and nullc over on Reddit. Coinlock gives some very clear and cogent arguments against the peg and shuts nullc down real quick:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qpdnc/gregory_maxwell_how_i_went_from_bitcoin_skeptic/cn8dne9

nullc :
About the only thing negative you can say about a system which is truly backed by Bitcoin is that it doesn't create huge incomes for traders. Many people wouldn't consider that much of a negative.

Does he heard about Soros?
When two things are pegged while they don't have the same economic features, then the pegged is temporary, and that creates profit opportunities and people prompted to accelerate the failure of the peg system.

It looks like sidechains people think because two things are pegged they magically become the same thing. From 1984 to 1997 the thai bath was pegged with the US dollar, that doesn't mean that the bath was the same thing than the dollar. Sooner or later the market forces end up destroying the top down price fixation.

Yep, that contorted remark by nullc is painfully naive. He totally neglects the fact that these SC assets will have a separate exchange price in fiat that certainly can and will be pumped and manipulated to all sorts of illogical levels. SC's don't solve any of those issues

Please, we have been going over this times and times again. The exchange rate of a properly implemented 1:1 SC asset will, in time, closely track BTC prices for many logical reasons.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:13:08 AM

Sidechain coins are Bitcoins.

No. There's time (cost) and risk between the two.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: BldSwtTrs on December 30, 2014, 07:16:50 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 01:42:03 AM

for those who miss their daily SC's hit, go here for an excellent discussion btwn this guy Coinlock and nullc over on Reddit. Coinlock gives some very clear and cogent arguments against the peg and shuts nullc down real quick:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qpdnc/gregory_maxwell_how_i_went_from_bitcoin_skeptic/cn8dne9

nullc :
About the only thing negative you can say about a system which is truly backed by Bitcoin is that it doesn't create huge incomes for traders. Many people wouldn't consider that much of a negative.

Does he heard about Soros?
When two things are pegged while they don't have the same economic features, then the pegged is temporary, and that creates profit opportunities and people prompted to accelerate the failure of the peg system.

It looks like sidechains people think because two things are pegged they magically become the same thing. From 1984 to 1997 the thai bath was pegged with the US dollar, that doesn't mean that the bath was the same thing than the dollar. Sooner or later the market forces end up destroying the top down price fixation.

Yep, that contorted remark by nullc is painfully naive. He totally neglects the fact that these SC assets will have a separate exchange price in fiat that certainly can and will be pumped and manipulated to all sorts of illogical levels. SC's don't solve any of those issues

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 01:42:03 AM

for those who miss their daily SC's hit, go here for an excellent discussion btwn this guy Coinlock and nullc over on Reddit. Coinlock gives some very clear and cogent arguments against the peg and shuts nullc down real quick:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qpdnc/gregory_maxwell_how_i_went_from_bitcoin_skeptic/cn8dne9

I don't see it that way.

I see you were happy about coinlock saying this...

Quote

Now super-risky-coin collapses, I lose my Bitcoin because the information about the relative risks was hidden in the deterministic rate.

To this I would say: you already lost your Bitcoins when you swapped them for super-risky-coins. That information isn't hidden at all. When you 'move' (it's debatable wether that's a good expression to use) BTC -> scBTC you're well aware you're swapping your bitcoins for sidechain coins, aren't you?

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: BldSwtTrs on December 30, 2014, 07:16:50 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 01:42:03 AM

for those who miss their daily SC's hit, go here for an excellent discussion btwn this guy Coinlock and nullc over on Reddit. Coinlock gives some very clear and cogent arguments against the peg and shuts nullc down real quick:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qpdnc/gregory_maxwell_how_i_went_from_bitcoin_skeptic/cn8dne9

nullc :
About the only thing negative you can say about a system which is truly backed by Bitcoin is that it doesn't create huge incomes for traders. Many people wouldn't consider that much of a negative.

Has he heard about Soros?
When two things are pegged while they don't have the same economic features, then the pegged is temporary, and that creates profit opportunities and people prompted to accelerate the failure of the peg system.

It looks like sidechains people think because two things are pegged they magically become the same thing. From 1984 to 1997 the thai bath was pegged with the US dollar, that doesn't mean that the bath was the same thing than the dollar. Sooner or later the market forces end up destroying the top down price fixation.

I don't think traditional currency peg apply. The mechanics behind these pegs are not solid and open to the failures you've illustrated.

The situation here is one where a sidechain unit has its equivalent in BTC collateral. A mathematically enforced 1:1 convertibility between both units. Each units' exchange rate value might differ but the protocol dictates that they are exchangeable 1:1 no matter their economic value. That is because for every unit on a sidechain there exist an equivalent amount of BTC locked in an "escrow" type transaction.

Theoretically (I may be wrong) but even if the perceived market value of the unit on a sidechain would come to 0 one could still return is sidecoin for its equivalent in BTC.

BldSwtTrs

legendary

Activity: 861

Merit: 1010

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 01:42:03 AM

for those who miss their daily SC's hit, go here for an excellent discussion btwn this guy Coinlock and nullc over on Reddit. Coinlock gives some very clear and cogent arguments against the peg and shuts nullc down real quick:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qpdnc/gregory_maxwell_how_i_went_from_bitcoin_skeptic/cn8dne9

nullc :
About the only thing negative you can say about a system which is truly backed by Bitcoin is that it doesn't create huge incomes for traders. Many people wouldn't consider that much of a negative.

Does he heard about Soros?
When two things are pegged while they don't have the same economic features, then the pegged is temporary, and that creates profit opportunities and people prompted to accelerate the failure of the peg system.

It looks like sidechains people think because two things are pegged they magically become the same thing. From 1984 to 1997 the thai bath was pegged with the US dollar, that doesn't mean that the bath was the same thing than the dollar. Sooner or later the market forces end up destroying the top down price fixation.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: adam3us on December 30, 2014, 06:21:14 AM

Thought cypherdoc might like this article by Daniel Krawisz

http://bitcoinist.net/the-two-ideologies-in-bitcoin/

I am sort of imagining it as what underlies his arguments that he doesnt like sidechains.

I think thats likely still mistaken (and Krawisz as ever makes interesting informed economic arguments).

If nothing else for those who view bitcoin as gold2.0 (and I do myself) then its in our interest actually that there not be code churn on bitcoin-core to add micro-payments, fancy contracts etc etc it's better to fix all the bugs, refactor and freeze the code. Put the code churn onto other chains. But having the other chains be non-bitcoin denominated detracts from bitcoin. Hence... sidechains.

Further if extra features can go into sidechains, perhaps along the way bitcoin could do things to reduce centralisation reduce blocksize, and get rid of extraneous existing code complexity by refactoring some things off into a more featureful sidechain.

btw I read Krawisz as more saying investment utility is the predominant driver of bitcoin adoption, transactional uses secondary.

Anyway just some thoughts, not trying to reanimate the sub-thread.

Adam

If you make a commitment to stick around and address all my concerns instead of lobbing in a comment every hundred pages or so then maybe I'll take the effort to repeat everything I've already said.

adam3us

sr. member

Activity: 404

Merit: 362

in bitcoin we trust

Quote from: Odalv on December 30, 2014, 04:12:26 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:51:17 AM

The peg is an illusion.

Quote

I think you're just suffering some confusion. But I'm not sure exactly what.

^ this

Uh I see I spoke too soon. Seemingly the cypherdoc vs world sub-thread is still raging

(Wasnt reading thread for some weeks).

I think cypherdoc's skill is to be the right balance of adhominem, unexplained dismissive & occasional logic to cultivate a continuous flame war. Otherwise called trolling I guess, easily recognisable form of entertainment for anyone who enjoyed USENET news flame wars of yore! Flame wars are fun and all but I prefer constructive discussion. Cypherdocs a clever fellow, I'm sure he has the smarts to hold a pure logic conversation if he chose. Just the inner-troll is having too much fun trolling.

Anyway thats my view of whats going on.

Adam

ps and for the love of Mike trim quotes!

adam3us

sr. member

Activity: 404

Merit: 362

in bitcoin we trust

Thought cypherdoc might like this article by Daniel Krawisz

http://bitcoinist.net/the-two-ideologies-in-bitcoin/

I am sort of imagining it as what underlies his arguments that he doesnt like sidechains.

I think cypherdoc likely still mistaken (and Krawisz as ever makes interesting informed economic arguments).

If nothing else for those who view bitcoin as gold2.0 (and I do myself) then its in our interest actually that there not be code churn on bitcoin-core to add micro-payments, fancy contracts etc etc it's better to fix all the bugs, refactor and freeze the code. Put the code churn onto other chains. But having the other chains be non-bitcoin denominated detracts from bitcoin. Hence... sidechains.

Further if extra features can go into sidechains, perhaps along the way bitcoin could do things to reduce centralisation reduce blocksize, and get rid of extraneous existing code complexity by refactoring some things off into a more featureful sidechain.

btw I read Krawisz as more saying investment utility is the predominant driver of bitcoin adoption, transactional uses secondary.

Anyway just some thoughts, not trying to reanimate the sub-thread.

Adam

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Odalv on December 30, 2014, 04:12:26 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:51:17 AM

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:44:19 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:26:08 AM

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:13:08 AM

Sidechain coins are Bitcoins. All the muddled thinking about 'fixed price', 'supply/demand', etc, etc and the consequent confusion goes out the window when one conceptualizes that. Alas, not everyone is capable of doing so and clearly not that Coinlock dude. Of course most people are not really capable of conceptualizing Bitcoin itself for the same basic lack of mental flexibility. Or any form of 'money' really.

no. Bitcoins are units that only exist on the MC.

Bingo! We have a winner! Repeat after me as many times as necessary: 'two...way...peg. two...way...peg." This 'exists on MC' is precisely what separates Sidchain coins from Bitcoin alts and work-a-likes.

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:26:08 AM

anything else that rides on less secure SC's are who the hell knows what.

Granted in the earlier phases there will be a discount for this which will diminish as confidence increases. There will also be a discount for the mechanical aspects of utilizing the peg. But these things are minor and largely inconsequential to the conceptual basis of the solution.

The peg is an illusion.

Quote

I think you're just suffering some confusion. But I'm not sure exactly what.

^ this

No. I thought coinlock phrased it very well. Which is why nullc disappeared.

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1014

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: sickpig on December 30, 2014, 05:41:14 AM

Quote from: cbeast on December 30, 2014, 05:18:50 AM

Side chains are probably unicorns . I say probably because I haven't seen the proof of concept demonstrated nor have a real world analogy. It seems like vaporware.

Time will tell I suppose.

Fwiw 2wpeg sidechains could be implemented now, without any changes to the btc protocol...

Let's see a two way peg with test bitcoins and test litecoins at an arbitrary peg. Has anyone created an atomic swap between chains without human intervention?

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: cbeast on December 30, 2014, 05:18:50 AM

Side chains are probably unicorns . I say probably because I haven't seen the proof of concept demonstrated nor have a real world analogy. It seems like vaporware.

They are not terribly hard to understand. Yes the math has to be vetted, the crypto validated and implemented but they are very much a reality and certainly not "vaporware".

The proof of concept is in the whitepaper.

sickpig

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1008

Quote from: cbeast on December 30, 2014, 05:18:50 AM

Side chains are probably unicorns . I say probably because I haven't seen the proof of concept demonstrated nor have a real world analogy. It seems like vaporware.

Time will tell I suppose.

Fwiw 2wpeg sidechains could be implemented now, without any changes to the btc protocol...

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1014

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Side chains are probably unicorns . I say probably because I haven't seen the proof of concept demonstrated nor have a real world analogy. It seems like vaporware.

Odalv

legendary

Activity: 1414

Merit: 1000

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:51:17 AM

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:44:19 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:26:08 AM

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:13:08 AM

Sidechain coins are Bitcoins. All the muddled thinking about 'fixed price', 'supply/demand', etc, etc and the consequent confusion goes out the window when one conceptualizes that. Alas, not everyone is capable of doing so and clearly not that Coinlock dude. Of course most people are not really capable of conceptualizing Bitcoin itself for the same basic lack of mental flexibility. Or any form of 'money' really.

no. Bitcoins are units that only exist on the MC.

Bingo! We have a winner! Repeat after me as many times as necessary: 'two...way...peg. two...way...peg." This 'exists on MC' is precisely what separates Sidchain coins from Bitcoin alts and work-a-likes.

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:26:08 AM

anything else that rides on less secure SC's are who the hell knows what.

Granted in the earlier phases there will be a discount for this which will diminish as confidence increases. There will also be a discount for the mechanical aspects of utilizing the peg. But these things are minor and largely inconsequential to the conceptual basis of the solution.

The peg is an illusion.

Quote

I think you're just suffering some confusion. But I'm not sure exactly what.

^ this

Melbustus

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1004

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:51:17 AM

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:44:19 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:26:08 AM

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:13:08 AM

Sidechain coins are Bitcoins. All the muddled thinking about 'fixed price', 'supply/demand', etc, etc and the consequent confusion goes out the window when one conceptualizes that. Alas, not everyone is capable of doing so and clearly not that Coinlock dude. Of course most people are not really capable of conceptualizing Bitcoin itself for the same basic lack of mental flexibility. Or any form of 'money' really.

no. Bitcoins are units that only exist on the MC.

Bingo! We have a winner! Repeat after me as many times as necessary: 'two...way...peg. two...way...peg." This 'exists on MC' is precisely what separates Sidchain coins from Bitcoin alts and work-a-likes.

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:26:08 AM

anything else that rides on less secure SC's are who the hell knows what.

Granted in the earlier phases there will be a discount for this which will diminish as confidence increases. There will also be a discount for the mechanical aspects of utilizing the peg. But these things are minor and largely inconsequential to the conceptual basis of the solution.

The peg is an illusion.

I think what might happen is that pegs will have to be really "cheap" in order to compensate for the risk of the sidechain. Then, if the sidechain works and its utility rises, it'll pull up demand for bitcoin quickly as the underpricing becomes apparent.

Of course, that's in the simple 1:fixedX peg scenario.

What scares me with sidechains is still the "any deterministic function" blockchain-introspection aspect of it. Back to the example of a peg func that says: "peg is 1:1000 until sidechain block N, then 1:0". Then you just have an alt-coin that was boostrapped off bitcoin, and any future increase in demand for the alt cannot flow back to bitcoin.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:44:19 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:26:08 AM

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:13:08 AM

Sidechain coins are Bitcoins. All the muddled thinking about 'fixed price', 'supply/demand', etc, etc and the consequent confusion goes out the window when one conceptualizes that. Alas, not everyone is capable of doing so and clearly not that Coinlock dude. Of course most people are not really capable of conceptualizing Bitcoin itself for the same basic lack of mental flexibility. Or any form of 'money' really.

no. Bitcoins are units that only exist on the MC.

Bingo! We have a winner! Repeat after me as many times as necessary: 'two...way...peg. two...way...peg." This 'exists on MC' is precisely what separates Sidchain coins from Bitcoin alts and work-a-likes.

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:26:08 AM

anything else that rides on less secure SC's are who the hell knows what.

Granted in the earlier phases there will be a discount for this which will diminish as confidence increases. There will also be a discount for the mechanical aspects of utilizing the peg. But these things are minor and largely inconsequential to the conceptual basis of the solution.

The peg is an illusion.

tvbcof

legendary

Activity: 4760

Merit: 1283

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:26:08 AM

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:13:08 AM

Sidechain coins are Bitcoins. All the muddled thinking about 'fixed price', 'supply/demand', etc, etc and the consequent confusion goes out the window when one conceptualizes that. Alas, not everyone is capable of doing so and clearly not that Coinlock dude. Of course most people are not really capable of conceptualizing Bitcoin itself for the same basic lack of mental flexibility. Or any form of 'money' really.

no. Bitcoins are units that only exist on the MC.

Bingo! We have a winner! Repeat after me as many times as necessary: 'two...way...peg. two...way...peg." This 'exists on MC' is precisely what separates Sidchain coins from Bitcoin alts and work-a-likes.

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 02:26:08 AM

anything else that rides on less secure SC's are who the hell knows what.

Granted in the earlier phases there will be a discount for this which will diminish as confidence increases. There will also be a discount for the mechanical aspects of utilizing the peg. But these things are minor and largely inconsequential to the conceptual basis of the solution.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: tvbcof on December 30, 2014, 02:13:08 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 01:42:03 AM

for those who miss their daily SC's hit, go here for an excellent discussion btwn this guy Coinlock and nullc over on Reddit. Coinlock gives some very clear and cogent arguments against the peg and shuts nullc down real quick:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qpdnc/gregory_maxwell_how_i_went_from_bitcoin_skeptic/cn8dne9

Sidechain coins are Bitcoins. All the muddled thinking about 'fixed price', 'supply/demand', etc, etc and the consequent confusion goes out the window when one conceptualizes that. Alas, not everyone is capable of doing so and clearly not that Coinlock dude. Of course most people are not really capable of conceptualizing Bitcoin itself for the same basic lack of mental flexibility. Or any form of 'money' really.

no. Bitcoins are units that only exist on the MC. anything else that rides on less secure SC's are who the hell knows what.

tvbcof

legendary

Activity: 4760

Merit: 1283

Quote from: cypherdoc on December 30, 2014, 01:42:03 AM

for those who miss their daily SC's hit, go here for an excellent discussion btwn this guy Coinlock and nullc over on Reddit. Coinlock gives some very clear and cogent arguments against the peg and shuts nullc down real quick:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qpdnc/gregory_maxwell_how_i_went_from_bitcoin_skeptic/cn8dne9

Sidechain coins are Bitcoins. All the muddled thinking about 'fixed price', 'supply/demand', etc, etc and the consequent confusion goes out the window when one conceptualizes that. Alas, not everyone is capable of doing so and clearly not that Coinlock dude. Of course most people are not really capable of conceptualizing Bitcoin itself for the same basic lack of mental flexibility. Or any form of 'money' really.

Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 603. (Read 2032266 times)