Blockstream's motto: "Can't be evil" - cypher will have a field day with this 
even Google's Eric Schmidt is getting in on the action.
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/11/17/linked-in-sun-microsystems-founders-lead-big-bet-on-bitcoin-innovation/
Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 697. (Read 2032265 times)
even Google's Eric Schmidt is getting in on the action.
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/11/17/linked-in-sun-microsystems-founders-lead-big-bet-on-bitcoin-innovation/
TC is a pathetic example and an obvious scam that will attract so much suckers before it gets exposed.
TC in this statement is TruthCoin.
brg444 This guy has a much better take on what SC are than you.
He understand the mining incentives that make Bitcoin, the only scam he's pulling is capitalizing on the inflation effect offered by the idea of SC's, someone who gets mining like this and looks for a win win without addressing the effect the proposed protocol change will have on mining incentives is a businessman, he isn't the scanner you think he is. We'll see thousand of these
brg444 read the article you may learn something please address all criticism on the appropriate blog, feel free to invite my input over there if you like.
http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-and-mining/
Well, turns out this guy is a pretty smart fellow. It would be nice to have HIS input on sidechains. Every articles on his blog so far are very interesting and full of insights.
Prediction markets are the next big thing that the blockchain can offer, analogous to upending the financial system, prediction markets will upset the knowledge markets and services. Actually we are working with him to maybe collaborate to come up with a good implementation of prediction markets using Syscoin which is merged-mined... preliminary work is being done (https://github.com/syscoin/syscoin/commit/8dffafb59f4e0b67141c22a035500a3b714af3e5)
Its sad but true that I think OT never really took off because it couldn't be used as a get rich scheme or P&D 
The OT client for grandma offered what a 500btc bounty or something crazy? But noone ever did it and I don't think those bounty awarders are still around to offer that kinda money for the nice client... otherwise I'd prob take a stab at it.
The OT client for grandma offered what a 500btc bounty or something crazy? But noone ever did it and I don't think those bounty awarders are still around to offer that kinda money for the nice client... otherwise I'd prob take a stab at it. 
whenever we get proposals to "fix Bitcoin" as we are currently getting with SC's, it's often helpful to step back to before the proposal to help reassess where we actually. below is a talk by Daniel Krawiscz, whose views very much correspond to mine. listen carefully and realize everything is just fine and there is nothing to panic about by making rash changes to the protocol. other points that struck me in this talk are:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKRH_zxpdjM
1. OT appears to be a better federated system in that it doesn't require another currency and doesn't require an spvp change to the protocol which would "siphon off" BTC value from its blockchain.
2. he, and Balaji Srinivasan here, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOubCHLXT6A, both advocate "exiting the system" principles if you are dissatisfied with your current existing fiat system. exiting the current system implies that there is another new and secure system to which you can flee which will protect you. since this is high risk, this system would have to be a Self Contained Financial System that is secure, reliable, and firewalled off from outside intervention. ideally, it would be a public good, not subject to improprieties or vested interests that might be motivated to "profit" off said system. this system, as it currently and already stands, is Bitcoin. its transactional units are inextricably linked to its blockchain for maximum impenetrable security.
3. i think the reason you're hearing such common calls for the "blockchain" as distinct and removed from its "currency unit" is b/c the outside public intuitively realizes that if left as is, Bitcoin fundamentally disrupts the current fiat system. they can conceptually "understand" a blockchain as new "tech" while rejecting the currency unit. it also allows them to continue to "resist" buying a seat at the table by using cold hard cash or trading something of great value for BTC. if you can subvert the system by changing the rules, ie the protocol, to break the inextricable link, then you can "attract" value out of the Bitcoin system and convert or transform that value into all manner of inflationary, speculative assets. this is what the spvp or 2wp does. we don't want that.
i view the spvp as a breach in that system, like a leaky valve or offramp thru which real value can be siphoned off and transformed into all manner of speculative assets. this is a problem. guys like brg444 have already shown their cards that Bitcoin "is broken" and if you just insert this "funnel" or 2wp (spvp) into the walls of what now is an impenetrable system, it will make it "better". i think this is fundamentally wrong and is a major flaw in the Blockstream WP. the mere insertion of this funnel will break Bitcoin's Sound Money principles as it allows an offramp into all manner of insecure, alternative ledger systems (fake blockchains). if we can know ahead of time that it "might" be a problem, why insert it? it's not enough to say, "let's just let them put it in and see what happens". if they're wrong, and i am right, it will destroy the system as it erodes confidence that we indeed have a secure firewalled off Bitcoin not subject to for-profit opportunities and structural weakness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKRH_zxpdjM
1. OT appears to be a better federated system in that it doesn't require another currency and doesn't require an spvp change to the protocol which would "siphon off" BTC value from its blockchain.
2. he, and Balaji Srinivasan here, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOubCHLXT6A, both advocate "exiting the system" principles if you are dissatisfied with your current existing fiat system. exiting the current system implies that there is another new and secure system to which you can flee which will protect you. since this is high risk, this system would have to be a Self Contained Financial System that is secure, reliable, and firewalled off from outside intervention. ideally, it would be a public good, not subject to improprieties or vested interests that might be motivated to "profit" off said system. this system, as it currently and already stands, is Bitcoin. its transactional units are inextricably linked to its blockchain for maximum impenetrable security.
3. i think the reason you're hearing such common calls for the "blockchain" as distinct and removed from its "currency unit" is b/c the outside public intuitively realizes that if left as is, Bitcoin fundamentally disrupts the current fiat system. they can conceptually "understand" a blockchain as new "tech" while rejecting the currency unit. it also allows them to continue to "resist" buying a seat at the table by using cold hard cash or trading something of great value for BTC. if you can subvert the system by changing the rules, ie the protocol, to break the inextricable link, then you can "attract" value out of the Bitcoin system and convert or transform that value into all manner of inflationary, speculative assets. this is what the spvp or 2wp does. we don't want that.
i view the spvp as a breach in that system, like a leaky valve or offramp thru which real value can be siphoned off and transformed into all manner of speculative assets. this is a problem. guys like brg444 have already shown their cards that Bitcoin "is broken" and if you just insert this "funnel" or 2wp (spvp) into the walls of what now is an impenetrable system, it will make it "better". i think this is fundamentally wrong and is a major flaw in the Blockstream WP. the mere insertion of this funnel will break Bitcoin's Sound Money principles as it allows an offramp into all manner of insecure, alternative ledger systems (fake blockchains). if we can know ahead of time that it "might" be a problem, why insert it? it's not enough to say, "let's just let them put it in and see what happens". if they're wrong, and i am right, it will destroy the system as it erodes confidence that we indeed have a secure firewalled off Bitcoin not subject to for-profit opportunities and structural weakness.
Blockstream's motto: "Can't be evil" - cypher will have a field day with this
but sidechains are not competitors 
The same value can not be held simultaneously in the main chain and in a side chain.But the value of the sidechain is derived from the mainchain and so the scarcity and ledger is respected.
It's the network that is created by incentive structure that creates bitcoins value. SideChain change the incentive structure.
In your ignorance you agree but you don't prove that one can create economic energy from nothing you assume that to be true. The value that is Bitcoin isn't about to die (it's FUD to say SC "are the last hope"), it's dependent on it's existing incentive structure to grow, investment in infrastructure or wealth.
TC is a pathetic example and an obvious scam that will attract so much suckers before it gets exposed.
TC in this statement is TruthCoin.
brg444 This guy has a much better take on what SC are than you.
He understand the mining incentives that make Bitcoin, the only scam he's pulling is capitalizing on the inflation effect offered by the idea of SC's, someone who gets mining like this and looks for a win win without addressing the effect the proposed protocol change will have on mining incentives is a businessman, he isn't the scanner you think he is. We'll see thousand of these
brg444 read the article you may learn something please address all criticism on the appropriate blog, feel free to invite my input over there if you like.
http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-and-mining/
Thanks for the reference. The relevant part which applies to our SC's discussion:
Individuals bought coins, or mining equipment, with a certain expectation. As more and more individuals do this, it becomes harder and harder for cryptocoin-competitors to compete with the network-effect of money unless they can change the rules.
Bolded part mine.
but sidechains are not competitors
Because the SC's offer alternative assets, and there are only a fixed supply of BTC from which to attract, SC's will compete to attract those BTC. Just likeTC plans to do.
but sidechains are not competitors
The same value can not be held simultaneously in the main chain and in a side chain.But the value of the sidechain is derived from the mainchain and so the scarcity and ledger is respected.
The value of the sidechain is derived from the market price, which ought to include both its convertibility to main chain + the side chain's utility.
&
To the extent the main chain is locked in side chains, it can be expected to reduce the liquidity of the main chain, increasing its volatility, and also the incentive to 51% it.
Awareness of the positive and negative nuances will make for better investors.
but sidechains are not competitors
The same value can not be held simultaneously in the main chain and in a side chain.But the value of the sidechain is derived from the mainchain and so the scarcity and ledger is respected.
but sidechains are not competitors
The same value can not be held simultaneously in the main chain and in a side chain. TC is a pathetic example and an obvious scam that will attract so much suckers before it gets exposed.
TC in this statement is TruthCoin.
brg444 This guy has a much better take on what SC are than you.
He understand the mining incentives that make Bitcoin, the only scam he's pulling is capitalizing on the inflation effect offered by the idea of SC's, someone who gets mining like this and looks for a win win without addressing the effect the proposed protocol change will have on mining incentives is a businessman, he isn't the scanner you think he is. We'll see thousand of these
brg444 read the article you may learn something please address all criticism on the appropriate blog, feel free to invite my input over there if you like.
http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-and-mining/
Thanks for the reference. The relevant part which applies to our SC's discussion:
Individuals bought coins, or mining equipment, with a certain expectation. As more and more individuals do this, it becomes harder and harder for cryptocoin-competitors to compete with the network-effect of money unless they can change the rules.
Bolded part mine.
but sidechains are not competitors
TC is a pathetic example and an obvious scam that will attract so much suckers before it gets exposed.
TC in this statement is TruthCoin.
brg444 This guy has a much better take on what SC are than you.
He understand the mining incentives that make Bitcoin, the only scam he's pulling is capitalizing on the inflation effect offered by the idea of SC's, someone who gets mining like this and looks for a win win without addressing the effect the proposed protocol change will have on mining incentives is a businessman, he isn't the scanner you think he is. We'll see thousand of these
brg444 read the article you may learn something please address all criticism on the appropriate blog, feel free to invite my input over there if you like.
http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-and-mining/
Thanks for the reference. The relevant part which applies to our SC's discussion:
Individuals bought coins, or mining equipment, with a certain expectation. As more and more individuals do this, it becomes harder and harder for cryptocoin-competitors to compete with the network-effect of money unless they can change the rules.
Bolded part mine.
TC is a pathetic example and an obvious scam that will attract so much suckers before it gets exposed.
TC in this statement is TruthCoin.
brg444 This guy has a much better take on what SC are than you.
He understand the mining incentives that make Bitcoin, the only scam he's pulling is capitalizing on the inflation effect offered by the idea of SC's, someone who gets mining like this and looks for a win win without addressing the effect the proposed protocol change will have on mining incentives is a businessman, he isn't the scanner you think he is. We'll see thousand of these
brg444 read the article you may learn something please address all criticism on the appropriate blog, feel free to invite my input over there if you like.
http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-and-mining/
https://www.reddit.com/user/vbuterin
Jim Rickards in an interview re: China debt, global depression (lower % growth than could be achieved - the Keynesian def) and timing of the next crisis
Anyways, speaking about a system reset, the last question was:
Do you think such scenarios make people more optimistic about crypto currencies like Bitcoins?
I see the rise of crypto-currencies as a sign of waning confidence in traditional currencies, such as the dollar. I expect the trend towards alternative currencies, such as Bitcoin, to grow as central banks continue to fail in their efforts to manipulate asset values.
http://internationalfinancemagazine.com/article/The-debt-problem-in-China-is-not-hype.html#sthash.XPW1qNhD.dpuf
Anyways, speaking about a system reset, the last question was:
Do you think such scenarios make people more optimistic about crypto currencies like Bitcoins?
I see the rise of crypto-currencies as a sign of waning confidence in traditional currencies, such as the dollar. I expect the trend towards alternative currencies, such as Bitcoin, to grow as central banks continue to fail in their efforts to manipulate asset values.
http://internationalfinancemagazine.com/article/The-debt-problem-in-China-is-not-hype.html#sthash.XPW1qNhD.dpuf
Nice find.
The back pedaling is almost complete.
Jim Rickards in an interview re: China debt, global depression (lower % growth than could be achieved - the Keynesian def) and timing of the next crisis
Anyways, speaking about a system reset, the last question was:
Do you think such scenarios make people more optimistic about crypto currencies like Bitcoins?
I see the rise of crypto-currencies as a sign of waning confidence in traditional currencies, such as the dollar. I expect the trend towards alternative currencies, such as Bitcoin, to grow as central banks continue to fail in their efforts to manipulate asset values.
http://internationalfinancemagazine.com/article/The-debt-problem-in-China-is-not-hype.html#sthash.XPW1qNhD.dpuf
Anyways, speaking about a system reset, the last question was:
Do you think such scenarios make people more optimistic about crypto currencies like Bitcoins?
I see the rise of crypto-currencies as a sign of waning confidence in traditional currencies, such as the dollar. I expect the trend towards alternative currencies, such as Bitcoin, to grow as central banks continue to fail in their efforts to manipulate asset values.
http://internationalfinancemagazine.com/article/The-debt-problem-in-China-is-not-hype.html#sthash.XPW1qNhD.dpuf
TC is a pathetic example and an obvious scam that will attract so much suckers before it gets exposed.
TC in this statement is TruthCoin.
brg444 This guy has a much better take on what SC are than you.
He understand the mining incentives that make Bitcoin, the only scam he's pulling is capitalizing on the inflation effect offered by the idea of SC's, someone who gets mining like this and looks for a win win without addressing the effect the proposed protocol change will have on mining incentives is a businessman, he isn't the scanner you think he is. We'll see thousand of these
brg444 read the article you may learn something please address all criticism on the appropriate blog, feel free to invite my input over there if you like.
http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-and-mining/
Well, turns out this guy is a pretty smart fellow. It would be nice to have HIS input on sidechains. Every articles on his blog so far are very interesting and full of insights.
Generally speaking, there are two different ways in which a miner can behave: they can operate in good faith or they can grief.
Griefer miners have to pay a real cost for their bad behaviour - they expend significant quantities of electricity and capex depreciation which they will never recover.
What if a Bitcoin miner decides to grief the Namecoin blockchain? Mine empty blocks, intentionally orphan valid parts of the chain, run difficulty up and then pull out, attempt double spends of Namecoins, etc.
Their electricity and capex is paid for by the Bitcoins they mine. Sure, they have to spend a little bit in bandwidth to run a Namecoin node, but that cost is insignificant compared to the cost of mining Bitcoin.
This is why merged mining doesn't provide the kind of security that people think it provides. The only security comes from the goodwill of the mining pool operators, without strong economic incentives that make good behaviour much more profitable than bad behaviour.
Just like proof of stake, and also just like central banks.
Griefer miners have to pay a real cost for their bad behaviour - they expend significant quantities of electricity and capex depreciation which they will never recover.
What if a Bitcoin miner decides to grief the Namecoin blockchain? Mine empty blocks, intentionally orphan valid parts of the chain, run difficulty up and then pull out, attempt double spends of Namecoins, etc.
Their electricity and capex is paid for by the Bitcoins they mine. Sure, they have to spend a little bit in bandwidth to run a Namecoin node, but that cost is insignificant compared to the cost of mining Bitcoin.
This is why merged mining doesn't provide the kind of security that people think it provides. The only security comes from the goodwill of the mining pool operators, without strong economic incentives that make good behaviour much more profitable than bad behaviour.
Just like proof of stake, and also just like central banks.
What about converting Namecoin to NameSC ? Same functionality as now -> you will only pay for service with BTC. Do you need NMC ?
Bitcoin collapsing, SC up.
Jump to: