Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 949. (Read 2032274 times)

Is this post for real? You want to reset the blockchain of a coin with 40million market cap that has been running on mainnet without problems for months? (That also has the most active asset exchange in the crypto world with additional tens of millions worth of assets https://coinmarketcap.com/assets/ floating on it)

What obvious attack vectors would you like to highlight that have been solved in other crypto-finance projects?

Bitshares can do anything NXT can do but better.

Why?  Because there are plenty of red flags.

• It is marketed like a scammy penny stock.
• Anon early super large stakeholders + Proof-Of-Stake == the big guys run the table, if they choose. https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf  The central bankers are in place from Day One unless they are super-virtuous and give tons away "fairly."
• Anon devs
• Closed dev process.  Source is periodically handed down from the ivory tower to the masses.
• Certain notable personages (& key stakeholders) that dodge, dodge, dodge, when an obvious attack vector -- mitigated in other crypto-finance projects by known techniques -- is highlighted.
• Active resistance to making it easier to independently reproduce the software
• Technical criticism is routinely met with bizarre behavior (notably from come-from-beyond)
• Attacking critics, rather than responding to criticism.
• Several security incidents that smell like inside jobs.

This is not something in the past 48 hours, but for the lifetime of the project.

Bitcoin has large stakeholders and large miners, sure, but the two sets are different.  This separation ensures an easier flow of stakeholders and miners in and out of the system, and serves as a bit of check-and-balance between the two groups.

Proof-of-Stake makes it easier to establish a system where early guys control the system, for life.  I'm not saying that is always the case with PoS; that's just how pure-PoS systems can shake out in the field.  Thus, it is easier for PoS to be "gamed" by insiders.  This is inherently, logically true because there are no externalities (electricity, heat) that serve as friction in the process.

In a perfect pure ideal honest world, NXT should reset the chain and develop fully in the open, with provable builds and a better early stake allocation that pays attention to the Central Banker Controls The Timeline Problem.  More honest projects these days run a test chain for months, and then launch once most problems are hammered out, and constructive criticism from the tech community has been incorporated.

I do think PoS has a place in this world... a mixed PoW & PoS system is very interesting.  PoS alone presents a completely enclosed system, where stakeholders are far too integral to the core process of choosing which transactions are to be accepted into the chain.

Remember (from your bitcoin mining classes if nothing else), those who choose what goes into the chain also choose what stays out (censor).  He who controls the timeline controls the universe, to paraphrase Dune.

the problem with today poor poeple is that they are so poor that they could double their money over night and still be poor!

Janet Yellen tells over leveraged  poor poeple to gamble on the markets?

what the.... 

Janet Yellen Trolls America's Poor: Tells Them It Is Important To Get Rich:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-16/janet-yellen-trolls-americas-poor-tells-them-it-important-get-rich

Hope dies last I suppose...

Diamonds are not fungible as the quality varies, its harder to ascertain the value in bulk exactly.  That causes more dramatic value shifts and they are high up the speculative value scale apparently, much like sub prime (or even normal commercial) debt altered as the general market shifted so they were never suitable as a core asset.

https://i.imgur.com/ZkqDr0B.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/d00teMO.jpg
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/redrawing-exter-pyramid-paul-mylchreests-latest-observations-flow-funds-and-more

I would rate bitcoin as speculative still unless it became invaluable to emerging market consumers like dollar is used now, not sure on that one but its not true yet imo

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/09/15/conversation-between-downs-armstrong-sept-15th-2014/

Interesting talk between Armstrong and Downs about the economical/political state of the world. At part 2 after about 10 mins it gets (even more) interesting. They're talking about gold being a hedge against souvereign trouble. They briefly talk about diamonds being easier to take with and being harder to detect.

All I'm thinking is, if that predicted scenario would indeed unfold, bitcoin would both be a hedge against the $ as well as a payment system (Bitcoin) to transfer/transact wealth to anywhere in the world.

 

+10000000000000000000000000099

Jeff, let me ask you something:

On twitter you were emotionally "rude" and "harsh" with NXT. Now, here I see a perfectly balanced post with argumented reasons. Why? Why these "SCAMCOIN", "I am done with your SCAM", "Nice scam you are running here" etc on public (twitter), and this "polite" post in "private" (BTT)? Are you going to blame the 140characters limitation? Or are you hiding an agenda against NXT?

OT works at the library/core level.

Fewer people are interested in building applications on top of OT right now because the VCs are funding P&D app coins instead of anything useful or sustainable.

This means is that OT development is slower and less flashy than the scamcoin startups.


(Monetas hired three more developers this week, FYI)

Well I for one am tired of hearing that x can be built on top of bitcoin using y, z etc etc etc yet constantly seeing nothing delivered. Counterparty was built on top and that is a pretty horrible experience. Open Transactions has been talked about as the answer for years yet still nothing working there either. And sidechains? That is so far from ever getting off the ground that it shouldn't even be mentioned. The reason I got interested in Nxt was because it has a lot of features already implemented and working now! By the time these other things come out it'll already be on to the next thing! Bitcoin doesn't want these things to be added on to it, it is allergic to change. Which is ok, because it does it's job as a layer 1 currency well and that's how it should be.

Compile it and your class files  should be identical to released version, at least if using the same version of the compiler. This is  independent reproducibility.

The appcoins are further along because that's their angle--that's the value proposition they use to monetize their proprietary tokens.  What I'm arguing is that if any of these apps prove useful, then if it is possible to create the same app but using bitcoin as fuel, then someone will create that app, and it will tend to outcompete the proprietary token.  The example you gave about the decentralized BITUSD assets is interesting and a potentially useful product.  But I don't see what's special about BitShares other than it was the first to do this.  This functionality could be built on top of bitcoin (no protocol changes), and, by learning from the BitShares experience, probably executed better. 

I don't think the bitcoin core devs should do anything in the way of "more features."  Bitcoin is just better money.  Any truly useful apps can be implemented on top using oracles, sidechains or open transactions like you said. 

I see this as a vastly more robust solution than some hodgepodge cryptocurrency with a feature set that changes from week to week.   

well, btc source has orders of magnitude more attack vectors than nxt with all those megatons of dependencies, just ask your friendly package manager.

and yes, we are talking about two different mechanism here but i am much more worried by post source/dependencies/package modifications on btc than nxt,
no matter if gitian is used or not, this is for sure.

why care?  The faster it fails the faster people realize bitcoin is the one.

I wish... the truth is the 20nm circuit size is not a reflection of efficient dissipation of thermal energy so the race will go on for years until someone has the best thermal efficiency and circuit density.

Then it all changes and decentralization takes hold and the internet of things earn money heating out hot water.

I hate that you're going about this as a public attack, but I 100% agree. I will continue pushing for this.

Calling the whole system a scam instead of just trying to help is incredibly childish.

What is necessary, for NXT or any other crypto-finance software, is to prove independent reproducibility.

The next step is to proactively have developers and community members cross-check each other, to make sure the build produced is the same for all.

This helps ensure that the release manager is not under duress, unknowingly infected with malware, or corrupt.  No security solution is perfect, but it raises the bar significantly when multiple parties verify the build.

You should never trust just one person to produce release binaries, in any crypto-finance project.  That's called a Single Point of Failure, and it is easy to attack such a narrow victim vector.

Today is the day of revelations