The side chain concept is meritorious in that it generates the innovation of a sort of reversible Proof-of-Burn for new coin emission.
Counterparty used Proof of Burn in their launch, and it seemed the right thing to do at the time, and I still like it, and it worked out.
The notion of "pegging" I think is damaging to the Side Chain effort. Currency pegs always fail. (Argentina, Greece, China, etc) They are using a discredited term for something novel that just might not ever fail in some implementations. It is better than a peg and calling it a peg (or even a 2wp) is too faint of a descriptor. I'd rather they use a newer more distinguishable term (even "crypto-pegging" would be better).
There are all sorts of problems that this can cause, and all sorts of problems that it can solve. This thread has been one of the best places to sort through those. The occasional wacky assertions are also useful. It helps us realize that we are out here on the edge between what people know and what people don't yet know.
I am not at all certain of what the future of these will be, but this thread does provide some vistas of the possibilities.
Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 667. (Read 2032265 times)
Adrian may a great point the other day.
Why haven't all those all star investors in Blockstream invested in BTC, the currency unit, as opposed to a for profit company that stands to make $Billions turning Bitcoin as Money into a WoW trading platform game?
You might argue that they have but i seriously doubt it given the price action and the vocalized uneasiness with Bitcoin as Money that we've already heard from a number of CEO types over time. Plus, we know Bitcoin as Money would seriously disrupt alot of these guys empires if it gains a foothold in the currency wars.
Why haven't all those all star investors in Blockstream invested in BTC, the currency unit, as opposed to a for profit company that stands to make $Billions turning Bitcoin as Money into a WoW trading platform game?
You might argue that they have but i seriously doubt it given the price action and the vocalized uneasiness with Bitcoin as Money that we've already heard from a number of CEO types over time. Plus, we know Bitcoin as Money would seriously disrupt alot of these guys empires if it gains a foothold in the currency wars.
If you don't think they are doing both you are crazy but they are doing so in small increments 1-5% of their net wealth just in the coin is more than enough, the other investments is about making USD off the transactions and builds up the value of the nest egg bitcoins.
This was a great thread to follow everyday but honestly you have just went of the deep end on SC and everything in the last few weeks, this was one of the last threads I was following here and now have clicked unwatch.
I'm not worried.
I'm sure you'll be back just like all the others who say they're leaving.
Adrian may a great point the other day.
Why haven't all those all star investors in Blockstream invested in BTC, the currency unit, as opposed to a for profit company that stands to make $Billions turning Bitcoin as Money into a WoW trading platform game?
You might argue that they have but i seriously doubt it given the price action and the vocalized uneasiness with Bitcoin as Money that we've already heard from a number of CEO types over time. Plus, we know Bitcoin as Money would seriously disrupt alot of these guys empires if it gains a foothold in the currency wars.
Why haven't all those all star investors in Blockstream invested in BTC, the currency unit, as opposed to a for profit company that stands to make $Billions turning Bitcoin as Money into a WoW trading platform game?
You might argue that they have but i seriously doubt it given the price action and the vocalized uneasiness with Bitcoin as Money that we've already heard from a number of CEO types over time. Plus, we know Bitcoin as Money would seriously disrupt alot of these guys empires if it gains a foothold in the currency wars.
OR they could reorganize as a non profit.
Instead of Blockstream, imagine if it was Google. Would you feel the same? Remember, the miners aren't going to let anyone just run roughshod over the protocol and scare away their customers. Perhaps if this puny little 21M enterprise shows any initiative to actually innovate anything rather than pump and dump like every other shitcoin, maybe Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, Oracle, etc. will jump in and do something really useful. IOW, although I agree with you in principle, I think you are overreacting over this group. In fact, it's about time there was a whole lot more new blood researching, testing, and hacking Bitcoin's future.
Sidechains, One Coin To Rule Them All
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
Come on. You aren't really referencing greaseball bluemeanies blog as a meaningful source of information are you? I would expect better around here.
And when the blogger is the troll?
Sidechains, One Coin To Rule Them All
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
Come on. You aren't really referencing greaseball bluemeanies blog as a meaningful source of information are you? I would expect better around here.
Another possible compromise: make Side Chains an extension of Colored Coins. Instead of moving large blocks of bitcoins into the Side Chain, use the counterparty leverage of Colored Coins as the Side Chain peg. They won't be pegged to bitcoins, but they will add a layer to colored coins.
Sidechains, One Coin To Rule Them All
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
A very good case against the viability of Side Chains and unveiling ideological ulterior motives that undermine the fundamental incentives of Bitcoin.http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
Sidechains bad?
Many people are skeptical. They remind us of altcoins I guess. But if it is a decentralized way to achieve micropayments, for example, seems legit enough
I haven't read the whitepaper yet
Sidechains, One Coin To Rule Them All
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
A very good case against the viability of Side Chains and unveiling ideological ulterior motives that undermine the fundamental incentives of Bitcoin.http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
Sidechains bad?
Many people are skeptical. They remind us of altcoins I guess. But if it is a decentralized way to achieve micropayments, for example, seems legit enough
read more carefully.
his pt is that a SC for micropmts would increase data demands on full nodes thus increasing centralization and thus exposure to gvt intervention and surveillance. pretty devastating article against SC's:
Secondly we have the problem of block chain scaling. If everything is going to be on ONE block chain, how will we store all this information in every p2p node? So this contributes to the problem of an ongoing theme in the Bitcion world, that of Centralization. This theme has many sub-motifs such as mass surveillance, monetary dominance, market rigging, and other factors to which average users are averse. It seems this theme is rather virulent and some forces have a lot invested in maintaining programs to progress this goal and hide their agenda from the public. The problem of moving value between different chain types was already solved by Cryptocoin exchanges, however Sidechains privileges a new group- the group that traces and tracks coin usage ie. surveillance interests. In an cryptocoin exchange scenario, ownership qualities are destroyed the moment coins enter into an exchange.
Sidechains, One Coin To Rule Them All
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
A very good case against the viability of Side Chains and unveiling ideological ulterior motives that undermine the fundamental incentives of Bitcoin.http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
Sidechains bad?
Many people are skeptical. They remind us of altcoins I guess. But if it is a decentralized way to achieve micropayments, for example, seems legit enough
spin-offs is inflationary (you have N x amount) but SC is not inflationary b/c you CAN use BTC only in 1 chain at the same time.
Hmmm....Unless a side chain reorganizes after the contest period. If there are enough different SC that are MM, this is very possible.
Does a chain re-org cause SPV linked chains to re-org too?
I'd assume not in most any case, though it should invalidate the SPV for the re-org'd TXs, yes?
I could see a possible workaround on this if somehow the contest period were relative to the difficulty of each chain, but not sure how that would work in practice as that would be a flexible metric within the relevant period. There could still be a way to game it.
Sidechains, One Coin To Rule Them All
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
A very good case against the viability of Side Chains and unveiling ideological ulterior motives that undermine the fundamental incentives of Bitcoin.http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
Sidechains bad?
Many people are skeptical. They remind us of altcoins I guess. But if it is a decentralized way to achieve micropayments, for example, seems legit enough
Sidechains, One Coin To Rule Them All
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
A very good case against the viability of Side Chains and unveiling ideological ulterior motives that undermine the fundamental incentives of Bitcoin.http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
Sidechains bad?
Looks like Juan Llanos of BitReserve is losing sight of things: https://bitreserve.org/en/blog/posts/about-bitreserve/with-your-right-hand-on-your-heart-a-recap-of-money20-20-2014 Shame...
... he's been a raving statist apologist for the worst of their crimes since he showed up in bitcoinosphere. He's wondering why bitcoin is starting to feel like paypal2.0 after advocating for his gravvy train govt. intervention paid him handsome dividends ...
Sidechains, One Coin To Rule Them All
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
A very good case against the viability of Side Chains and unveiling ideological ulterior motives that undermine the fundamental incentives of Bitcoin.http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
Sidechains bad?
Sidechains, One Coin To Rule Them All
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
A very good case against the viability of Side Chains and unveiling ideological ulterior motives that undermine the fundamental incentives of Bitcoin. http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
back up a step. miners get paid to insert those CP records into satoshi tx's in the first place which incentivizes mining growth and thus more security and thus less chance for subsequent attack on those same satoshi tx's. now move all these CP tx fees off to a SC that can't be MM'd. this deprecates the MC. and there will be thousands of these insecure SC's as i think only a few SC's will be MM'd due to mining capacity constraints.
Merge mining may tend to make a SC less secure rather than more unless it is super popular already.
Any MM SC with a shortish SPV confirmation time is going to be DOA if there is any value to be taken from a double spend. There are a heck of a lot of ASICs out there.
Sidechains, One Coin To Rule Them All
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
http://blog.bluemeanie.net/2014/11/sidechains-one-coin-to-rule-them-all.html
Jump to: