Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 767. (Read 2032266 times)

that's sounds terrible.

congratulations, you've just succeeded in breaking the first, and probably the last chance we'll ever have at Sound Money, into 1,000,000 Berkshare Buck locations.

Once you understand that sidechains are just that "sub-coins to Bitcoins 21M controlled supply", then it is natural to see sidechains as part of the original Sound Money plan. They simply offer a mechanism to increase functionality without a hard fork. Period

I have a count of 3 Bitcoin proponents who see what you see, - sad reflection on comprehension skill. If Blockstreem gets to implement the protocol change to allow the extraction of value from the blockchain, we may get another chance at sound money in another 100 years, who knows, it could be longer as the sad truth is the majority cant see how this proposal destroys the one hope we have at sound money.   

The sad thing is those crazy evaluations people where projecting wont materialist, they'll be eaten by inflation in the SC that your tormenters are so eager to see happen.

There is still a chance they wake up. 
 

The BTC block reward will be more than enough to protect the network for another 20-30 years.

If after that time most transaction fees shift to MM'ed sidecoins to the extent that there are not enough fees on the main chain to support the main chain then one of 2 things will happen, either: 1) Adjustments will be made to shift MM fees from sidecoins to the main chain (after all sidecoins need this too since their protection is based on MM'ing with the main chain) or 2) some side chain will become the main chain since essentially the main chain was abandoned. Note: this wouldn't hurt BTC since at most 21M BTC would transfer over the 1:1 peg.


I only see bitcoin as Sound Money, it is the entire reason I support the project. If the concept is broken in the slightest I will abandon ship.

Sidechain's do nothing to effect the Sound Money aspect. Sidechains are sub-coins that only exist within the 21M supply limit and this is enforced with 1:1 pegging.

Altcoins (meaning new coins outside of the 21M limit) are the only real threat Bitcoin has, because they are the real threat that can inflate the money supply. 1 year ago I saw altcoin's as becoming a real problem and had second thoughts about the project because "anyone can create a coin".

However the past year has shown that network effects are working as intended, and I'm more comfortable with the altcoin threat not being a problem.

Once you understand that sidechains are just that "sub-coins to Bitcoins 21M controlled supply", then it is natural to see sidechains as part of the original Sound Money plan. They simply offer a mechanism to increase functionality without a hard fork. Period

I have a count of 3 Bitcoin proponents who see what you see, - sad reflection on comprehension skill. If Blockstreem gets to implement the protocol change to allow the extraction of value from the blockchain, we may get another chance at sound money in another 100 years, who knows, it could be longer as the sad truth is the majority cant see how this proposal destroys the one hope we have at sound money.   

The sad thing is those crazy evaluations people where projecting wont materialist, they'll be eaten by inflation in the SC that your tormenters are so eager to see happen.

There is still a chance they wake up. 
 

Sorry, it is my reaction to willful ignorance and intentional misinformation

...

your insolent behavior and insults have greatly exceeded mine.  everyone needs to factor this in.

that's sounds terrible.

congratulations, you've just succeeded in breaking the first, and probably the last chance we'll ever have at Sound Money, into 1,000,000 Berkshare Buck locations.

this is easily answered.

the scZC can "poach" its security from the MM and direct mining currently dedicated to Bitcoin.   this is enabled by the 2wp.  how does this happen?  b/c it has to happen to protect scBTC that seeks out the same anonymity features that  the ZC sidechain offers and that scZC already has.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

i actually think the underlying problem here is that some of us see Bitcoin as Sound Money who's sanctity is to be protected at all costs, like me, and others see it as an avenue to develop stocks, bonds, community currencies, assurance contracts, smart contracts, etc, etc.

if you don't buy into this view, then SC's seem like a natural thing.  who cares if somehow a little inflation, centralization, or trust requiring needs slip in the backdoor?

i actually think the underlying problem here is that some of us see Bitcoin as Sound Money who's sanctity is to be protected at all costs, like me, and others see it as an avenue to develop stocks, bonds, community currencies, assurance contracts, smart contracts, etc, etc.

as Bitcoin stands, it makes anything other than money very difficult to implement.  i've talked about this for years here.  how many times have i said "The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money"?

if you don't buy into this view, then SC's seem like a natural thing.  who cares if somehow a little inflation, centralization, or trust requiring needs slip in the backdoor?

Now divide 21M BTC into  1,000,000 SCs. And this SCs will timestamping thier blocks on MC.

To be clear I am pro secure trust free 1:1 Pegs that can be diploid within the existing feature set of the Bitcoin protocol, they are an essential innovation to the future of Bitcoin, It’s my view that this is in debate when in fact it isn’t.

Some considerations for MM SC:
Is it possible a MM SC with a 1:1 peg could provide a feature that attracts over 50% of transactions?
Possible, but doubtful. In any case, not a problem
Is it possible there will be over 2 (or 1000) other SC with a 1:1 peg competing for transaction fees?
Over 2? Maybe. 1000? Not a chance. Refer to my post about the properties and function of money. There are not 1000 ways you can improve money or its feature
Is it possible that the other 2 (or 1000) SC could represent approximately 30% of total transactions of all SC combined?
Possible, hardly a problem
Is it possible that if 80% of all transactions happened on SC’s then there would be approximately 20% of transactions happening on the Bitcoin Blockchain?
That looks like some sound calculations
Is it possible Miners will supplement their income by mining SC’s?  
It is not only possible but very likely. The problem with you logic is assuming they will stop mining Bitcoin complementary
Is it possible that the chain with the most fees would attract the most mining?  
It isn't black and white like that. Bitcoin has block subsidy. Sidechains don't so as long as miners can claim the BTC they mine 1:1 for scBTC they will continue mining
Is it possible that the chain that generated the most profit for miners would get the greatest hashing power?
Miners will MM EVERY chain that support any considerable value. It is trivial for them to do so
Is it possible that Bitcoin block rewards, supplement transaction fees? (Rhetorical question I hope)

Is it possible That the Bitcoin protocol reduces block rewards exponentially? (Rhetorical question I hope)

Is it possible that the chain with the heist profit margins for miners won’t be Bitcoin?  
Miners will MM EVERY chain that support any considerable value. It is trivial for them to do so. They will especially continue to support Bitcoin's chain until there is no more block subsidy
Is it possible that when Bitcoin’s block rewards reduce to less than the transaction fees generated by the Block reward, at least 51% of miners will still mine for profit? (not some ideological reason)  
It is actually logical to believe and quite likely that 100% of them continue to mine it for block subsidy since it is trivial to do so and naive to believe ALL transactions would disappear from this chain

this reminds me of another point i wanted to make, unrelated to your post.

i find it striking that you and brg444, SC's strongest proponents on this thread, are so far apart on your vision of the #SC's that will arise.  brg444 narrowmindedly tries to pidgeon hole the #SC's down to a mere two in his future vision; anonymity and faster tx times.  you, otoh, openly say there will be billions.  from your posts i can see you at least have imagination and an expansive mind, which is refreshing in and of itself, and i happen to agree with you when it comes to your estimate.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

this reminds me of another point i wanted to make, unrelated to your post.

i find it striking that you and brg444, SC's strongest proponents on this thread, are so far apart on your vision of the #SC's that will arise.  brg444 narrowmindedly tries to pidgeon hole the #SC's down to a mere two in his future vision; anonymity and faster tx times.  you, otoh, openly say there will be billions.  from your posts i can see you at least have imagination and an expansive mind, which is refreshing in and of itself unlike brg444, and i happen to agree with you when it comes to your estimate.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

 

Sidechains is possibly the best thing to have ever happened to Bitcoin as far as its sound money property.

It allows us to improve its money function without disrupting its ledger.

Without sidechain you can absolutely expect more inflation/fractional reserve, more centralization, and more trust in central entities.

Your analysis of sidechains has been a failure all around.

See where this is going?

Speculators can already buy the same feature of Bitcoin plus anonymity : Monero/Darkcoin

But now with sidechains Bitcoin users have access to anonymity through scBTC on a 1:1 peg.

So essentially there exist no more distinguishable feature for any altcoin/sidecoin. The utility is now available using Bitcoin and not having to expose yourself to additional volatility and security risks. Therefore, the altcoin/sidecoin have no more argument to attract users. Speculation? Speculation on what exactly? Future use? There is no future use because there is now a better, safer option offering the same features.

You have to understand, as everyone here does, that the sidecoin booted on top of the sidechain is useless, offers no additional value for the users. The experiment of innovative utility failed to catch any traction with altcoins, even considering the "discount ground floor price". Contrarily to what you think, this experiment has no better chance on a sidechain. In fact, it is stripped of all its appeal by scBTC on 1:1 peg that can offer the SAME features without any tradeoff.