Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 772.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: Odalv on November 05, 2014, 12:01:53 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 11:02:02 AM

Quote from: Adrian-x on November 05, 2014, 10:46:11 AM

Actually most still think it's gold it's paper gold you transact with it because it's better than gold in that you can move it faster.
It is inflationary. It works with a theoretical 1:1 peg and is discouraged with hi transaction fees.

Not true at all. My gold can move as fast as your garbage.

The scBTC has the same feature as garbagecoin + risk-free put so I'm not gonna use garbage coin.

I want to add.

There are miners, they transport gold.
There are users who use miners transport service.

1. Miner A - transports shit together with gold.
2. Miner B - transport gold in clean transporter.

User can choose, transport service (does he want gold dirty from shit ... maybe service is cheaper).
Miner must decide how to make more money.

That's a cool analogy but I think it is backward because users actually determine what good the miners will choose to transport. And no one wants shit stained gold

Odalv

legendary

Activity: 1414

Merit: 1000

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 11:02:02 AM

Quote from: Adrian-x on November 05, 2014, 10:46:11 AM

Actually most still think it's gold it's paper gold you transact with it because it's better than gold in that you can move it faster.
It is inflationary. It works with a theoretical 1:1 peg and is discouraged with hi transaction fees.

Not true at all. My gold can move as fast as your garbage.

The scBTC has the same feature as garbagecoin + risk-free put so I'm not gonna use garbage coin.

I want to add.

There are miners, they transport gold.
There are users who use miners transport service.

1. Miner A - transports shit together with gold.
2. Miner B - transport gold in clean transporter.

User can choose, transport service (does he want gold dirty from shit ... maybe service is cheaper).
Miner must decide how to make more money.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: Adrian-x on November 05, 2014, 10:46:11 AM

Actually most still think it's gold it's paper gold you transact with it because it's better than gold in that you can move it faster.
It is inflationary. It works with a theoretical 1:1 peg and is discouraged with hi transaction fees.

Not true at all. My gold can move as fast as your garbage.

The scBTC has the same feature as garbagecoin + risk-free put so I'm not gonna use garbage coin.

Odalv

legendary

Activity: 1414

Merit: 1000

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:42:22 AM

Quote from: Odalv on November 05, 2014, 10:40:46 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:26:48 AM

b/c there will always be some idiots who WILL value it. just look at altcoin valuations. they're small but they're there and can be sold for fiat. it would also be possible for the sidecoin to actually take off in value which would really be a huge bonus.

ok,

SC must provide some utility (eg. fast tx) to be useful.
and then somebody creates SC with same utility without "sidecoin" and sc-block-chain will have only 1/2 size (b/c he removes garbage).

When miner have limited resources then what chain will he prefer.
He can mine 4 useful chains(he can take profit) or only 2 with garbage.

sideZerocoin, for a Bitcoin miner currently losing money, would be an excellent speculative bet for directly mining sideZerocoin.

not only that, speculators would buy sideZerocoin on exchanges for cash establishing value to draw miners in.

but this blockchains can be separed into 2 chains.
1. chain will be with zeroBTC(1:1 btc) and 2. chain zeroCoin(altCoin)

If they are on same blockchain then it is exchange betwen btc and zeroCoin.
We allready have btc <-> alt-coin exchanges.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:45:37 AM

define this: scZEROBTC

are you saying another SC would arise once removed from MC?

So we have two sidechains :

A sidechain using only 1:1 pegged unit. This unit offers whatever feature you want, faster tx or zerocoin type privacy.

A sidechain also using 1:1 pegged but issuing, for unknown reasons, a sidecoin. The sidecoin is not fungible with BTC or the scBTC. It has to create its own value. The problem with this chain is there is no interest for the user to use the sidecoin because : a. it offers no additional value than the scBTC on the same chain b. it offers no "risk-free put"

Which chain are people going to use?

Adrian-x

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Odalv on November 05, 2014, 10:23:12 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:14:11 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 10:08:33 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:03:39 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 09:58:55 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 09:54:27 AM

One could design a SC with a sidecoin plus a faster tx time for scBTC, I think.

Which goes back to the question i had for you yesterday, is this possible?

Possible I guess, but let me spin the question around. Is this desirable?

Remember that in that scenario the sidecoin does NOT have the same value as the scBTC residing on the same chain.

Ok, we're making progres. If it's possible then it's a given it will be done. And if it's done, miners WILL defect out of greed to the sc. So now you'd have 2 drivers of the sc; users and miners. That will kill Bitcoi.

Why are you so conveniently ignoring the essential argument?

NO ONE CARES FOR A SIDECHAIN WITH A SIDECOIN. Users will NOT use it because it does not offer the risk-free put and if users do NOT use it then miners have no incentive to mine it.

maybe we're having a definitional misunderstanding? as i understand it "sidecoin", as you've termed it, is an independent coin that can only be produced on the SC thru mining SC blocks for reward. it cannot be interchanged with scBTC which is derived from BTC as a result of the 1:1 peg. and sidecoin can't travel thru the peg into the MC. in this scenario, i envision both travelling securely within the SC, both being secured by MM or direct mining. they will both be mined for tx fees on the SC and both can take advantage of faster tx times.

is this technically accurate and possible? b/c if it is, then Bitcoin will die. if it's not, then your argument is strengthened altho i still see problems.

Why would you transfer "sidecoin" when they have $0 value ? You cannot transfer value using invaluable tokens. It is like a want buy gold and you give me gold + your garbage. How this garbage can add value to gold ?

Actually most still think it's gold it's paper gold you transact with it because it's better than gold in that you can move it faster.
It is inflationary. It works with a theoretical 1:1 peg and is discouraged with hi transaction fees.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: Odalv on November 05, 2014, 10:40:46 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:26:48 AM

b/c there will always be some idiots who WILL value it. just look at altcoin valuations. they're small but they're there and can be sold for fiat. it would also be possible for the sidecoin to actually take off in value which would really be a huge bonus.

ok,

SC must provide some utility (eg. fast tx) to be useful.
and then somebody creates SC with same utility without "sidecoin" and sc-block-chain will have only 1/2 size (b/c he removes garbage).

When miner have limited resources then what chain will he prefer.
He can mine 4 useful chains(he can take profit) or only 2 with garbage.

he just doesn't get it...

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 10:42:47 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:39:15 AM

and you are simply economically illiterate.

who says the price of the sidecoin has to be $0? what if the sidecoin was sideZerocoin as in rocks example? a speculator, like myself, would seriously buy up a bunch of sideZerocoin on an exchange for FIAT and that alone could drive the price sky high.

Maybe you're just playing stupid?

The price of the sidecoin is 0$ because no one uses it.

Answer that :

Who would you buy sideZerocoin when you have the option to use scZEROBTC on a 1:1 peg risk-free?

Do you realise there is NO reason for the sidecoin to exist if you can replicate the feature on a 1:1 scBTC

define this: scZEROBTC

are you saying another SC would arise once removed from MC?

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:39:15 AM

and you are simply economically illiterate.

who says the price of the sidecoin has to be $0? what if the sidecoin was sideZerocoin as in rocks example? a speculator, like myself, would seriously buy up a bunch of sideZerocoin on an exchange for FIAT and that alone could drive the price sky high.

Maybe you're just playing stupid?

The price of the sidecoin is 0$ because no one uses it.

Answer that :

Who would you buy sideZerocoin when you have the option to use scZEROBTC on a 1:1 peg risk-free?

Do you realise there is NO reason for the sidecoin to exist if you can replicate the feature on a 1:1 scBTC

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Odalv on November 05, 2014, 10:40:46 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:26:48 AM

b/c there will always be some idiots who WILL value it. just look at altcoin valuations. they're small but they're there and can be sold for fiat. it would also be possible for the sidecoin to actually take off in value which would really be a huge bonus.

ok,

SC must provide some utility (eg. fast tx) to be useful.
and then somebody creates SC with same utility without "sidecoin" and sc-block-chain will have only 1/2 size (b/c he removes garbage).

When miner have limited resources then what chain will he prefer.
He can mine 4 useful chains(he can take profit) or only 2 with garbage.

sideZerocoin, for a Bitcoin miner currently losing money, would be an excellent speculative bet for directly mining sideZerocoin.

not only that, speculators would buy sideZerocoin on exchanges for cash establishing value to draw miners in.

Odalv

legendary

Activity: 1414

Merit: 1000

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:26:48 AM

b/c there will always be some idiots who WILL value it. just look at altcoin valuations. they're small but they're there and can be sold for fiat. it would also be possible for the sidecoin to actually take off in value which would really be a huge bonus.

ok,

SC must provide some utility (eg. fast tx) to be useful.
and then somebody creates SC with same utility without "sidecoin" and sc-block-chain will have only 1/2 size (b/c he removes garbage).

When miner have limited resources then what chain will he prefer.
He can mine 4 useful chains(he can take profit) or only 2 with garbage.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 10:36:22 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:24:42 AM

as a user and a miner myself, who is losing money mining btw, i would use this SC for 2 reasons; faster tx times for my scBTC thru the peg and because it's protected by the risk free put AND i would mine the SC either thru MM or directly b/c of the added revenue of sidecoin block rewards and the associated tx fees.

this is called greed in action.

You really don't understand.

I'm at a loss for words

The sidecoin is worthless if people do not use it. As you have stated yourself, people will not use it because they have the option of using the risk free put of the scBTC for the same fast tx feature.

For this reason, if you are capable of any logic, there are no incentives for miners to mine a worthless sidecoin.

and you are simply economically illiterate.

who says the price of the sidecoin has to be $0? what if the sidecoin was sideZerocoin as in rocks example? a speculator, like myself, would seriously buy up a bunch of sideZerocoin on an exchange for FIAT and that alone could drive the price sky high.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:24:42 AM

as a user and a miner myself, who is losing money mining btw, i would use this SC for 2 reasons; faster tx times for my scBTC thru the peg and because it's protected by the risk free put AND i would mine the SC either thru MM or directly b/c of the added revenue of sidecoin block rewards and the associated tx fees.

this is called greed in action.

You really don't understand.

I'm at a loss for words

The sidecoin is worthless if people do not use it. As you have stated yourself, people will not use it because they have the option of using the risk free put of the scBTC for the same fast tx feature.

For this reason, if you are capable of any logic, there are no incentives for miners to mine the worthless sidecoin.

Adrian-x

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 06:49:21 AM

Quote from: Odalv on November 05, 2014, 04:51:50 AM

Quote from: notme on November 04, 2014, 11:34:32 AM

We can't have democracy without choice. I have one legit chain to point my hardware at. I would love to continue to mine Bitcoin, but also be given the choice to support other chains at the same time if they can work synergistically with Bitcoin. There is a higher bar for sidechains because it is so very obvious that it is a waste of time if it doesn't gain at least a solid niche use. As a miner, I would want to thoroughly vet a sidechain before I would give up known Bitcoin rewards for transaction-fee only sidechain blocks. If merge mining were used, we would be pushing the 1 MB limit before long as every chain would want their block hashes on the bitcoin blockchain, so I'm not terribly keen to support that route unless perhaps after a sidechain has proven itself by mining fee-only for some time.

What about this SC.
1. Server(or miners on SC) will collect transactions in SC.
2. When server collect enough fees then server will mine block and use this fees for timestamping hash of block on MC
3. I think my SC will have same security level as MC -> hidden MM

And if it works, you've just made my point about how you can suck value out of Bitcoin with games by severing the link between the currency and MC

The link can even be severed by MM SC and 51% hashing attack on Bitcoin. The insensitive to mine Bitcoin for profit is no longer preventing this as the profit comes from mining the SC.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: 21coin on November 05, 2014, 10:31:25 AM

gold is at lowest level since 2011
its trading at price of march 2010
and still no one know how much it can drop

i know (how much it can drop)

21coin

hero member

Activity: 493

Merit: 500

Sarthak's a dumb girl

gold is at lowest level since 2011
its trading at price of march 2010
and still no one know how much it can drop

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Odalv on November 05, 2014, 10:23:12 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:14:11 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 10:08:33 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:03:39 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 09:58:55 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 09:54:27 AM

One could design a SC with a sidecoin plus a faster tx time for scBTC, I think.

Which goes back to the question i had for you yesterday, is this possible?

Possible I guess, but let me spin the question around. Is this desirable?

Remember that in that scenario the sidecoin does NOT have the same value as the scBTC residing on the same chain.

Ok, we're making progres. If it's possible then it's a given it will be done. And if it's done, miners WILL defect out of greed to the sc. So now you'd have 2 drivers of the sc; users and miners. That will kill Bitcoi.

Why are you so conveniently ignoring the essential argument?

NO ONE CARES FOR A SIDECHAIN WITH A SIDECOIN. Users will NOT use it because it does not offer the risk-free put and if users do NOT use it then miners have no incentive to mine it.

maybe we're having a definitional misunderstanding? as i understand it "sidecoin", as you've termed it, is an independent coin that can only be produced on the SC thru mining SC blocks for reward. it cannot be interchanged with scBTC which is derived from BTC as a result of the 1:1 peg. and sidecoin can't travel thru the peg into the MC. in this scenario, i envision both travelling securely within the SC, both being secured by MM or direct mining. they will both be mined for tx fees on the SC and both can take advantage of faster tx times.

is this technically accurate and possible? b/c if it is, then Bitcoin will die. if it's not, then your argument is strengthened altho i still see problems.

Why would you transfer "sidecoin" when they have $0 value ? You cannot transfer value using invaluable tokens. It is like a want buy gold and you give me gold + your garbage. How this garbage can add value to gold ?

b/c there will always be some ~~idiots~~ speculating miners and investors who WILL value it. just look at altcoin valuations. they're small but they're there and can be sold for fiat. it would also be possible for the sidecoin to actually take off in value which would really be a huge bonus.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 10:18:26 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:14:11 AM

maybe we're having a definitional misunderstanding? as i understand it "sidecoin", as you've termed it, is an independent coin that can only be produced on the SC thru mining SC blocks for reward. it cannot be interchanged with scBTC which is derived from BTC as a result of the 1:1 peg. and sidecoin can't travel thru the peg into the MC. in this scenario, i envision both travelling securely within the SC, both being secured by MM or direct mining. they will both be mined for tx fees on the SC and both can take advantage of faster tx times.

is this technically accurate and possible? b/c if it is, then Bitcoin will die. if it's not, then your argument is strengthened altho i still see problems.

!!!

yes it is possible.

but address this question : is this desirable for the user? why would I use a sidechain that issues sidecoin if I can use a sidechain with the exact same feature that works only with the 1:1 peg. who would use the "sidecoin" when he has the option of the risk free put of the scBTC

as a user and a miner myself, who is losing money mining btw, i would use this SC for 2 reasons; faster tx times for my scBTC thru the peg and because it's protected by the risk free put AND i would mine the SC either thru MM or directly b/c of the added revenue of sidecoin block rewards and the associated tx fees.

this is called greed in action.

edit: AND as a speculative bet on the sidecoin appreciation.

Odalv

legendary

Activity: 1414

Merit: 1000

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:14:11 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 10:08:33 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:03:39 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 09:58:55 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 09:54:27 AM

One could design a SC with a sidecoin plus a faster tx time for scBTC, I think.

Which goes back to the question i had for you yesterday, is this possible?

Possible I guess, but let me spin the question around. Is this desirable?

Remember that in that scenario the sidecoin does NOT have the same value as the scBTC residing on the same chain.

Ok, we're making progres. If it's possible then it's a given it will be done. And if it's done, miners WILL defect out of greed to the sc. So now you'd have 2 drivers of the sc; users and miners. That will kill Bitcoi.

Why are you so conveniently ignoring the essential argument?

NO ONE CARES FOR A SIDECHAIN WITH A SIDECOIN. Users will NOT use it because it does not offer the risk-free put and if users do NOT use it then miners have no incentive to mine it.

maybe we're having a definitional misunderstanding? as i understand it "sidecoin", as you've termed it, is an independent coin that can only be produced on the SC thru mining SC blocks for reward. it cannot be interchanged with scBTC which is derived from BTC as a result of the 1:1 peg. and sidecoin can't travel thru the peg into the MC. in this scenario, i envision both travelling securely within the SC, both being secured by MM or direct mining. they will both be mined for tx fees on the SC and both can take advantage of faster tx times.

is this technically accurate and possible? b/c if it is, then Bitcoin will die. if it's not, then your argument is strengthened altho i still see problems.

Why would you transfer "sidecoin" when they have $0 value ? You cannot transfer value using invaluable tokens. It is like a want buy gold and you give me gold + your garbage. How this garbage can add value to gold ?

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 10:14:11 AM

maybe we're having a definitional misunderstanding? as i understand it "sidecoin", as you've termed it, is an independent coin that can only be produced on the SC thru mining SC blocks for reward. it cannot be interchanged with scBTC which is derived from BTC as a result of the 1:1 peg. and sidecoin can't travel thru the peg into the MC. in this scenario, i envision both travelling securely within the SC, both being secured by MM or direct mining. they will both be mined for tx fees on the SC and both can take advantage of faster tx times.

is this technically accurate and possible? b/c if it is, then Bitcoin will die. if it's not, then your argument is strengthened altho i still see problems.

!!!

yes it is possible.

but address this question : is this desirable for the user? why would I use a sidechain that issues sidecoin if I can use a sidechain with the exact same feature that works only with the 1:1 peg. who would use the "sidecoin" when he has the option of the risk free put of the scBTC

Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 772. (Read 2032266 times)