Author

Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 941. (Read 2032274 times)

sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 260
September 19, 2014, 08:40:26 AM
reposting here ...

Quote
... there was a network scale attack I pointed out to Gavin and the other devs after observing namecoin network getting "hung" for months by miners joining and leaving en-masse due to mining incentives and price fluctuations ...

if a well-resourced 'dishonest miner' attacker could build up a significant of quantity of mining power and ramp up hash-rate by bringing on-line an ever-increasing amount of compute, selling all btc the whole way and simultaneously drive price lower over the same period, squeezing out 'honest' miners ... then in a final act take all their mining power off-line during a final dump of price then it would leave the network hanging at very low block solving rate (long confirms) waiting forever for the next retargetting and a low price and take a toll on confidence ... the fix was to allow for a 'special' retargetting on the downside if it hasn't happened after a time-out, not just the set 2016 blocks.

Dogecoin applied this fix months ago Smiley
What's so special about 2016 blocks anyway, why was this number chosen by Satoshi?
legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
September 19, 2014, 08:36:55 AM
reposting here ...

Quote
... there was a network scale attack I pointed out to Gavin and the other devs after observing namecoin network getting "hung" for months by miners joining and leaving en-masse due to mining incentives and price fluctuations ...

if a well-resourced 'dishonest miner' attacker could build up a significant of quantity of mining power and ramp up hash-rate by bringing on-line an ever-increasing amount of compute, selling all btc the whole way and simultaneously drive price lower over the same period, squeezing out 'honest' miners ... then in a final act take all their mining power off-line during a final dump of price then it would leave the network hanging at very low block solving rate (long confirms) waiting forever for the next retargetting and a low price and take a toll on confidence ... the fix was to allow for a 'special' retargetting on the downside if it hasn't happened after a time-out, not just the set 2016 blocks.
legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1004
September 19, 2014, 08:28:02 AM

Steve,

you articulated the most succinct, logical, & pertinent rapid fire explanations of Bitcoin Freedom under time pressure i've ever seen to date.  congratulations. this is a big deal.
+1 to this. You were landing punches every shot you got in spite of them cutting you off every ten words or so. Did you perform any specific preparation for these appearances or are you just a natural at PR?

10,000 hours on BitcoinTalk.org and /r/bitcoin plus no sleep the night before, LOL! Seriously, we have some great minds on these forums and, while we don't always agree on everything, the discussions force us to check our premises and refine or revise our arguments. Thank you guys!



Nice job... Agree with Cypher and others that you nailed it. Most of the questions they asked you could easily generate hours of discussion; you nailed the near-impossible task of 30-second answers. You should do more speaking/interviews.
legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1004
September 19, 2014, 08:25:01 AM
...
Note that it's not talking about straight population growth, but about the level of economic activity/wealth created per unit time that can theoretically support a given amount of population growth. This is from Bostrom's new "Superintelligence" book: http://www.amazon.com/Superintelligence-Dangers-Strategies-Nick-Bostrom/dp/0199678111

It looks to reference some research? (that little superscript 1 at the end).  It would be nice to know where Nick Bostrom gets these numbers.

Here ya go:

hero member
Activity: 836
Merit: 1007
"How do you eat an elephant? One bit at a time..."
September 19, 2014, 07:30:11 AM

Steve,

you articulated the most succinct, logical, & pertinent rapid fire explanations of Bitcoin Freedom under time pressure i've ever seen to date.  congratulations. this is a big deal.
+1 to this. You were landing punches every shot you got in spite of them cutting you off every ten words or so. Did you perform any specific preparation for these appearances or are you just a natural at PR?

10,000 hours on BitcoinTalk.org and /r/bitcoin plus no sleep the night before, LOL! Seriously, we have some great minds on these forums and, while we don't always agree on everything, the discussions force us to check our premises and refine or revise our arguments. Thank you guys!
hero member
Activity: 836
Merit: 1007
"How do you eat an elephant? One bit at a time..."
September 19, 2014, 07:26:34 AM
Before the agricultural revolution, it took humanity about one million years on average to develop enough infrastructure/capability to support an additional one million humans living at subsistence levels. After the agricultural revolution, that changed to talking only a few hundred years. Now, after the industrial revolution, that takes 90 minutes on average.

There are huge side effects:
http://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/soil-erosion-and-degradation

That's important but the kicker is overall economic growth, we're moving from a meme of more to a meme of better. The problem is the centers of control are working from the ideology of Co opting / controlling the supply of more. Monopolies have no value when people find alternatives,  micro electronics, alternate energy and food security technologies like aquaponics (oh and money) are reshaping everything.

Forget it, Adrian.

In economics, the Jevons paradox (/ˈdʒɛvənz/; sometimes Jevons effect) is the proposition that as technology progresses, the increase in efficiency with which a resource is used tends to increase (rather than decrease) the rate of consumption of that resource.[1] In 1865, the English economist William Stanley Jevons observed that technological improvements that increased the efficiency of coal-use led to the increased consumption of coal in a wide range of industries. He argued that, contrary to common intuition, technological improvements could not be relied upon to reduce fuel consumption.[2]

The issue has been re-examined by modern economists studying consumption rebound effects from improved energy efficiency. In addition to reducing the amount needed for a given use, improved efficiency lowers the relative cost of using a resource, which tends to increase the quantity of the resource demanded, potentially counteracting any savings from increased efficiency. Additionally, increased efficiency accelerates economic growth, further increasing the demand for resources. The Jevons paradox occurs when the effect from increased demand predominates, causing resource use to increase


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

Ignore my post - (I started to reply to the wrong post).
legendary
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
Gresham's Lawyer
September 19, 2014, 06:08:58 AM
Quote
Before the agricultural revolution, it took humanity about one million years on average to develop enough infrastructure/capability to support an additional one million humans living at subsistence levels. After the agricultural revolution, that changed to talking only a few hundred years. Now, after the industrial revolution, that takes 90 minutes on average.

Think about that. Humanity and civilization are changing faster than they ever have before, by many orders of magnitude, and the digitization and electronic interconnectedness of the world is only accelerating that pace.


I think you mean ~90 hours per million?  (75 million per year)



No, it's minutes. Just double checked:



Note that it's not talking about straight population growth, but about the level of economic activity/wealth created per unit time that can theoretically support a given amount of population growth. This is from Bostrom's new "Superintelligence" book: http://www.amazon.com/Superintelligence-Dangers-Strategies-Nick-Bostrom/dp/0199678111

It looks to reference some research? (that little superscript 1 at the end).  It would be nice to know where Nick Bostrom gets these numbers.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1004
September 19, 2014, 03:52:07 AM
Before the agricultural revolution, it took humanity about one million years on average to develop enough infrastructure/capability to support an additional one million humans living at subsistence levels. After the agricultural revolution, that changed to talking only a few hundred years. Now, after the industrial revolution, that takes 90 minutes on average.

There are huge side effects:
http://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/soil-erosion-and-degradation

That's important but the kicker is overall economic growth, we're moving from a meme of more to a meme of better. The problem is the centers of control are working from the ideology of Co opting / controlling the supply of more. Monopolies have no value when people find alternatives,  micro electronics, alternate energy and food security technologies like aquaponics (oh and money) are reshaping everything.

Forget it, Adrian.

In economics, the Jevons paradox (/ˈdʒɛvənz/; sometimes Jevons effect) is the proposition that as technology progresses, the increase in efficiency with which a resource is used tends to increase (rather than decrease) the rate of consumption of that resource.[1] In 1865, the English economist William Stanley Jevons observed that technological improvements that increased the efficiency of coal-use led to the increased consumption of coal in a wide range of industries. He argued that, contrary to common intuition, technological improvements could not be relied upon to reduce fuel consumption.[2]

The issue has been re-examined by modern economists studying consumption rebound effects from improved energy efficiency. In addition to reducing the amount needed for a given use, improved efficiency lowers the relative cost of using a resource, which tends to increase the quantity of the resource demanded, potentially counteracting any savings from increased efficiency. Additionally, increased efficiency accelerates economic growth, further increasing the demand for resources. The Jevons paradox occurs when the effect from increased demand predominates, causing resource use to increase


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
sr. member
Activity: 354
Merit: 250
September 19, 2014, 03:36:38 AM

Steve,

you articulated the most succinct, logical, & pertinent rapid fire explanations of Bitcoin Freedom under time pressure i've ever seen to date.  congratulations. this is a big deal.
+1 to this. You were landing punches every shot you got in spite of them cutting you off every ten words or so. Did you perform any specific preparation for these appearances or are you just a natural at PR?
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
September 19, 2014, 12:28:01 AM
All it takes is a Electromagnetic pulse and you'd find out why just one store of wealth is not happening.   Or a really bad solar flare, feasible events.  
c'mon man, when's the last time that happened?  have you heard of backups?

Exactly. Bitcoin is highly redundant. The source code is duplicated all over the place. There are copies of the blockchain scattered throughout the world, on hard drives, on flash drives, on optical discs, etc.

and soon we'll have copies in space via jgarzik's cubesat.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
September 19, 2014, 12:18:59 AM

Steve,

you articulated the most succinct, logical, & pertinent rapid fire explanations of Bitcoin Freedom under time pressure i've ever seen to date.  congratulations. this is a big deal.
hero member
Activity: 836
Merit: 1007
"How do you eat an elephant? One bit at a time..."
legendary
Activity: 3878
Merit: 1193
September 18, 2014, 11:54:48 PM
All it takes is a Electromagnetic pulse and you'd find out why just one store of wealth is not happening.   Or a really bad solar flare, feasible events.  
c'mon man, when's the last time that happened?  have you heard of backups?

Exactly. Bitcoin is highly redundant. The source code is duplicated all over the place. There are copies of the blockchain scattered throughout the world, on hard drives, on flash drives, on optical discs, etc.
legendary
Activity: 1281
Merit: 1000
☑ ♟ ☐ ♚
September 18, 2014, 11:19:09 PM
Interesting article about Alibaba's IPO and the price of bitcoin. Also, correlation between gold and bitcoin mentioned.  Cheesy

http://bitcoinmagazine.com/16481/bitcoin-price-dropped-today/
legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1004
September 18, 2014, 08:43:51 PM
Quote
Before the agricultural revolution, it took humanity about one million years on average to develop enough infrastructure/capability to support an additional one million humans living at subsistence levels. After the agricultural revolution, that changed to talking only a few hundred years. Now, after the industrial revolution, that takes 90 minutes on average.

Think about that. Humanity and civilization are changing faster than they ever have before, by many orders of magnitude, and the digitization and electronic interconnectedness of the world is only accelerating that pace.


I think you mean ~90 hours per million?  (75 million per year)



No, it's minutes. Just double checked:



Note that it's not talking about straight population growth, but about the level of economic activity/wealth created per unit time that can theoretically support a given amount of population growth. This is from Bostrom's new "Superintelligence" book: http://www.amazon.com/Superintelligence-Dangers-Strategies-Nick-Bostrom/dp/0199678111


legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
September 18, 2014, 08:40:24 PM


All it takes is a Electromagnetic pulse and you'd find out why just one store of wealth is not happening.   Or a really bad solar flare, feasible events.  


c'mon man, when's the last time that happened?  have you heard of backups?
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
September 18, 2014, 08:37:57 PM
Gold tanking collapsing again:

legendary
Activity: 896
Merit: 1006
First 100% Liquid Stablecoin Backed by Gold
September 18, 2014, 08:30:19 PM
Quote
The world is going digital, something that never existed before. Gold can't compete in a digital world

All it takes is a Electromagnetic pulse and you'd find out why just one store of wealth is not happening.   Or a really bad solar flare, feasible events.  

Its very easy for gold to be digital, what is less likely is the distributed network that btc has.    Dollars can be backed by gold and so value can be transmitted without chopping up bits of gold


Quote
Gold will still be gold a 1000 years from now but it will never be money again for the majority of the worlds population just like pigeon mail will never be a future mode of communication

Dont you think we could replace gold a long time before 1972.   If it needed to be replaced it would have, its been there thousands of years because the one constant is human nature; such as every generation believing they have surpassed the mistakes of the last and then right after repeating those same mistakes
Who's "we"? 
You can not digitize gold unless you've invented a Star Trek transporter.  You can digitize gold obligations which are only as good as whoever is digitizing them.  And an Emp / solar flair will screw that up just like bitcoin.
legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
September 18, 2014, 08:24:49 PM
Quote
Before the agricultural revolution, it took humanity about one million years on average to develop enough infrastructure/capability to support an additional one million humans living at subsistence levels. After the agricultural revolution, that changed to talking only a few hundred years. Now, after the industrial revolution, that takes 90 minutes on average.

Think about that. Humanity and civilization are changing faster than they ever have before, by many orders of magnitude, and the digitization and electronic interconnectedness of the world is only accelerating that pace.


I think you mean ~90 hours per million?  (75 million per year)

... and this raises a further very important consideration. Actual population growth rates in the world are about to decline (~40 million per annum by 2050) due to increase in wealth of the developing world above subsistence level and widespread contraception etc as the West has already undergone.

What does this mean? At the same time technology and productiveness is increasing exponentially, population will be lowering to stagnating ... i.e. massively deflationary forces. The globe needs a deflationary currency to prevent over-supply, gluts, malinvestments and huge wealth inequality, capital stagnating in pools.

Human wealth valuation is non-linear, capital generally functions linearly in it's effectiveness. This is a major mathematical problem for money as a technology to solve.
Jump to: