Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 856. (Read 2032266 times)

No need to search it, just look at all the pixels and the nice round sixes stick out like a sore thumb

Not sure why you 'shopped that.

I just google-image searched for "gold certificate" to find the image. Here's the source: http://barrygoldberg.net/photos/coins/Series_1928_Twenty_Dollar_Gold_Certificate_Obverse1.jpg

So if I want to buy 2,000,000 bitBTC who creates this 2M bitBTC ? (What if I want to buy 30M bitBTC)

Also they may make btsx the snapshot chain so any new dacs will get you allocations of new assets as they have respected with ags pts before. This meant that as a social consensus you raise awareness by allocating shares of new assets (a percentage of) to holders of pts and ags which were used to fund growth of bitshares. Now the thought is to merge in btsx so btsx will be useful for snapshots of new dacs.. the goose that keeps on giving.. while also providing utility through the gateway for assets and the physical world.

Doc I will answer your questions later im out right now.

For 1 and 2 people could have said the same thing about Bitcoin in the early days. Rome wasn't build in a day.

3. The transaction fees on Bitshares doesn't depend on the Bitcoin one. The DPOS system scale very well, cost of transaction will not be an issue.

4. These are all problems which are not solved by Bitcoin :
- hedge and speculate without counterparty risk
- earn an (rather high) interest rate without counterparty risk
- diversify one wealth (you will be able to keep X% of you wealth in wheat with BitWheat, Y% in JPY with bitJPY, Z% in GOOG with bitGOOG, etc.) while being government-proof since the purchasing power remain in the custody of a blockchain.

And if BitAssets are useful then BTSX will have value because you need BTSX to create BitAssets.

is this real?

the other thing about Bitshares is that you have to assume btsx will gain and keep any value at all.  why would it?

1.  it isn't money
2.  it has no network effect
3.  do ppl really want to trade all these overlay assets on top of the blockchain?  it could become quite costly depending on how high a price BTC attains and how high a tx fee might go.
4.  if Bitcoin's destiny is to become a world reserve currency that supports and disciplines (maximum 10x leverage) the existing fiat system, there would never be a need for Bitshares.

First things first.

Ethereum house needed to make sure they were fully stocked with herbs.

what do you mean by this?  is this a 1x fee or something?

still amazing to me Buterin raised all that BTC yet doesn't even have this fundamental strategy resolved yet
you hope they come along
i'll disagree with this.  just b/c there might be larger #'s of delegates doesn't mean they're more decentralized.  many could be owned by same individual.  i don't believe voting necessarily solves this either b/c it sounds like that could be gamed.
of course there is incentive.  no work needs to be done.  just get the votes from either your buddies or already vested interests in the POS system then get paid to simply sign blocks.  sounds like centralization to me even worse than Bitcoin mining. btw, i think there's a chance we've seen the last time a miner gets to 50% of the network hashrate as we're getting commoditization of hardware with 10x lower prices to the small miner.  this is good and could reverse the swing of the pendulum back towards increasing decentralization as a result.  the other evidence this is happening is the hashrate is leveling off and we could be stuck at 14nm ASICS for a few years.  that's a good thing.

so how can this be successful in the long run? there is a tremendous incentive to own several delegate nodes. insider club=ponzi scheme.

can u explain how the btcx interface with the BTC blockchain?  is it using the 40 byte op_return and for what purpose?
since eventually the original BTC needs to be paid back along with BTC interest, how does the system continue long term as BTC doesn't inflate?
holding bitBTC privkeys is not the same as holding BTC privkeys. be careful.

at the very best then it sounds like someone would just want to hold btsx as its supply will be decreasing.  the whole thing sounds dicey to me.  none of these overlays will take off until Bitcoin itself is solidified and accepted as a bonafide currency/money.

The world won't change overnight... so you have backed assets with price feeds... until you don't. It's called the network effect. Both sides must adapt not just one.

ya I remember that.. and oracles are used now to feed price which filters shorts by not allowing shorting below 10% medium or buying about 10%.. so it keeps a band. The black swan type event is what it tries to avoid.. but its probably the best solution I've seen so far.

BitsharesX is perhaps the most interesting distributed asset ledger I've seen so far.  Unlike everything else, it does actually require backing in the form of BTSX.  However, this is also its weakness.  If there is ever a run on BTSX and the price drops, the system will not allow people to sell their undercollateralized as less than the price peg specified by the oracles.  Of course, it should be possible for people to put up this cheap BTSX as collateral to short more of the bit asset into existence, which should help stabilize the falling BTSX price plus recolateralize the asset.  However, the risk is that nobody steps up in a crises.  There should be a profit motive though, so it may work out.  We'll just have to see how it goes when the eventual price drop of BTSX happens.  If the system makes it through that, I think it will quickly rebound with a new found level of trust, and could potentially provide a means of trading almost any asset digitally with the same speed and low cost of bitcoin.

Cypherdoc you think Bitcoin will replace gold, right? Me too.

What gold was use for? Backing stuff...

So you should think in the future BTC will be used to back stuff too. So this is not an anathema to think a blockchain token is useful to back various things.

The only anathema from you point of view is to use another digital scarce token than BTC to back something, but it appears that BTC cannot be collaterized in its own blockchain so there was a need to make another blockchain to allow the features that Bitshares makes available.

Blockchain doesn't make backing unecessary. Are you really thinking that blockchain technology end the need to make credit?
If I put some BTC to collaterize an IOU that I issue in exchange of funding, then that IOU become a lot more valuable on the free market.

Blockchains allow digital scarcity. Digital scarcity gives value. In order to back something you need someone valuable.
So the only logical conclusion you can make is that blockchain tokens are great to back promises. And the usefulness of making promises won't go away with Bitcoin.

yep, he's got it upside down.

the concept is a total anathema to what this whole thread has been arguing in the first place.

Doesn't matter. The point is that there necessarily has to be some centralized management of the physical to virtual connection somewhere, be it the guy at the gold vault, or an Oracle (or set of Oracles) providing a price feed.

This is not really a problem with Bitshares so much as "backing" is simply a stupid idea to begin with.

I perhaps shouldn't say "stupid"; it was a somewhat reasonable stopgap for a century or so, but now we can do credible digital scarcity natively, so the backing hack (and monetary use of PMs) is no longer necessary at all.

Why the hell are we trying to replicate the folly of backing in the very blockchain idea that fundamentally makes backing unnecessary?

Great point. But it's been going on much longer than the past century.

yup Charles de Gaulle went to NY with warships to claim our gold back, in the mid 60s.
As opposed to germany, which still failed at doing so lately: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-23/german-gold-stays-in-new-york-in-rebuff-to-euro-doubters.html

FED is a gigantic gold blackhole. They hate gold as it is the only thing that value is not fully compressible. It is somehow the last rempart before their fiat paper domination system.
They hate it, but they control it.. so that's that.

But then bitcoin came along..

It remains to be seen how the system will react to volatility.  A 50% move in price in 1 hr or less could result in more assets available to be sold than there is a counterparty to cover.

Wee!  there you go Pruden!