Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 729. (Read 2032266 times)

Don't you understand?  Its still gold even though it looks like paper... see you can trade it in for gold and its easier to carry! You can trade it in only if you are in the right place during working hours and can prove its you and that you haven't stolen the paper and aren't a criminal or said anything bad about people who you aren't allowed to say bad things about, and that none of your relatives are either, and we decide to let you

Almost...  Well, they require sequential broadcasting of transactions (and sufficient confirmations).  At least two, possibly more if there is a problem needing a refund.
So not instantaneous if you want to do it trustlessly, but a lot quicker than 100 blocks.


For delivery of contracted goods, these provide refunds, "consumer protection" built into the protocol.
It really only works for on-chain assets though.

You can do atomic swaps today.
You can do them between bitcoin and litecoin, it doesn't take a sidechain to do it.
But very few people use this feature.  

There is a good description of the process in the blockstream side chain pdf in Appendix C.
http://www.blockstream.com/sidechains.pdf

The current payment systems also have to store all transactions for many years, and those systems require far more bytes per transaction. They also have to store multiple copies, although not as many copies as our current number of full nodes. Based on this, I think that the storage space required is not crucial, and it is right to not focus too much on that.

looks like he was on CNBC Fast Money a couple of an hour or so ago. wondered if he repeated his prediction, would be bullish

 

ask him for a shoutout on twitter, he'll probably get you even more views than me  

Yeah, that is a kick ass interview.

he even uses the words "gold collapses"!  is he here?

I've been pretty vocally against Gavin's proposal.
In this thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/increasing-the-block-size-is-a-good-idea-50year-is-probably-too-aggressive-815712
and in Gavin's thread.

And in more public forums
http://www.bizforum.org/Journal/www_journalJVP018.htm

And on LetsTalkBitcoin
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/the-bitcoin-game-3-joseph-vaughn-perling

And in private emails with Gavin.
And other places that I have probably forgotten about.

For many very good reasons. (I think)

I've been fiddling with computers since the early 80's.  The magnetic capacities reasonably available to me as a relatively interested enthusiast are falling off a cliff.  I posted about it in this thread earlier.  So when it comes to Moore's Law, 'show me the beef', but don't lead me to NASA's supercomputer cluster to do so.  Anyway, Bitcoin is in it's tiny head-of-the-pin phase and already it has already gone through significant phases of struggle.

I will also say that people who not have actually tried transferring big wads of data around the global internet should keep their mouth's shut.  That includes transferring said data chunks from outfits like Amazon through very high-end connectivity to outfits like {very large tech company here.}  Even very experienced engineers who had not tried it were shocked when theory and practice didn't come anywhere close to meeting.  It comes down to basic physics and how TCP/IP works.  Yes, there are tricks to make the problems somewhat diminish but there are no silver bullets here...or at least ones which are very applicable to lower end users.  Maybe there will be, or they will develop, but absent a market demand it is not likely.  Opening 10.000 sockets is not going to be very welcome by one's ISP (even if they do have an OS and router and modem which handles it with grace.)

I once asked Gavin if he thought about trying to get the testnet up to maximum capacity.  Blank stare followed.  I shit you not!  That was back in 2011.  To bad nobody ever did try it or the emergency hard fork for the BDB mis-config (NOT 'bug') might not have been such a shocker.  At the very least one should try to run the 10-year out capacities (adjusted for a realistic effect of Moore's Law') as a test and make sure they can get it working before inserting the exponential system growth that Gavin promotes.  Not holding my breath for that one.  I expect that TBF's party line will be 'Don't worry, code will improve.'

edits: minor

What's your source, because my source (Computer Architecture: A Quantiative Approach 5th edidion, 2012), says that magnetic storage has been growing at about 40% per year since 2004:


Even flash is doubling every 2 years, not the 18 month timeline for moore's law.

Edit: not sure why my image is choking the proxy, http://yrral.net/storage_growth.png

I suggest you watch the video at the end of the article if you haven't already. Much more interesting than the article.

Only at the end does he drifts into nonsense suggesting gold will be improved to allow for currency use. It seems he hasn't accepted yet that Bitcoin is effectively gold's replacement but he definitely understand its value proposition

Moon?  i lol'ed:

"So I said OK well let's assume it's something like gold—There's a finite amount of it," Pal said in an interview with Grant Williams on Real Vision Television. "There's a finite amount that's been mined. The rest is underground. We kind of know how long it's going to take before all the gold is mined or before all the bitcoins. Put them in the same kind of equation we get a value of bitcoin and that value is a million dollars. Now, you'll never hear an analyst say this—but I don't mind this—I could be wrong by 90%, and it's still worth $100,000."

http://uk.businessinsider.com/raoul-pal-on-bitcoin-2014-11?r=US

i see about 10 guys commenting on about 5 different ways to do this.  what happens when you don't get a consensus?  do nothing?

also refreshing to see someone dismiss the Bitcoin with the B and concentrate on the bitcoin currency

I'm playing with SD card as a storage ... capacity is god but it is getting slower and slower every day.

in brg444's mind as well.  and i agree with his preference, if i were to call it that, b/c MM'ing SC's forever is inherently wasteful as well in terms of data

me?  why, thank you.  i had no idea.

i am in favor of it.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/raoul-pal-on-bitcoin-2014-11?r=US

this guy can see it coming. interesting insight on the oncoming loss of confidence in fiat money

Don't be so sure that you won't be able to store 20 years of UTXO dust 15 years from now.  You'll probably be able to do it in a $5 chip the size of a postage stamp.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/6815/sandisk-ulltradimm-ddr3-400gb-ssd-enterprise-review/index.html

Storage density is EXCEEDING Moore's law for the last 10+ years...