Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 952.

klee

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: manfred on September 16, 2014, 04:48:12 AM

Pile of Shit coins can not go anywhere because you can not stop progress. Daily superior technology hits the market endlessly diluting the market. Software is cheap and easy to replace starting a new chain is no effort. It is akin to a parallel system, start again and again.
With Bitcoin progress is made too with new better miners hitting the market the technology is hardware based the chain stays the same, akin to a serial system keep building atop of the foundation.

In software we tend to 'lock in' (excellent analysis here: http://www.amazon.com/You-Are-Not-Gadget-Manifesto/dp/0307389979) but on the other hand first mover advantage is highly overestimated too (netscape, myspace, etc).

It is difficult to know the result because Bitcoin is both asset/currency/commodity/store of value etc AND software.

I guess we will learn sooner or later!

manfred

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1001

Energy is Wealth

Pile of Shit coins can not go anywhere because you can not stop progress. Daily superior technology hits the market endlessly diluting the market. Software is cheap and easy to replace starting a new chain is no effort. It is akin to a parallel system, start again and again.
With Bitcoin progress is made too with new better miners hitting the market the technology is hardware based the chain stays the same, akin to a serial system keep building atop of the foundation.

jaberwock

legendary

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1127

Bitcoin is going down.

Gold is not fallling.

Upside down world.

valarmg

full member

Activity: 237

Merit: 100

Quote from: justusranvier on September 16, 2014, 12:19:37 AM

Quote from: devphp on September 16, 2014, 12:07:03 AM

Well, both PoW and PoS models have that under control.

PoS is in no way comparable to PoW and it's misleading and deceptive to market as such.

https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf

The problems he mentions are being solved:
http://www.nxtcommunity.org/nxt-whitepaper

PoW has its own problems, like mining centralization. Both PoW and PoS have their advantages and disadvantages.

klee

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Mining tends to centralisation.

PoS tends to centralisation.

Everything that can be CENTRALISED, will be centralised - the opposite holds true too.

It is a never ending battle - technology is bringing us closer to freedom and enslavement at the same time.

Stop arguing which is more decentralised, fair, anti gvt etc.

The point is our personal stance.

I don't see a problem if 1000 people decide to make exchanges between them based on shit (Proof of Shit), debt, gold or PoW.

Important thing is to decide what kind of power distribution they want.

Technology is a weapon but it can be used by all sides... (just wait to see a gvt based PoW and what ASICS will mine in that case...I would mine them instead of BTC for sure!)

valarmg

full member

Activity: 237

Merit: 100

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 12:52:17 AM

While doing all that work and paying for electricity for BTC at a price of $0.05 and a chance for it to go to 0.

Coins mined today could still be worth lots tomorrow. At least we have a short at mining fresh coins. Not with POS.

For PoW coins, there are two ways to get them.

1) You buy mining equipment, spend time and money mining them.
2) You buy the coins on the market.

For PoS stakes there is one way to get them.
1) You buy coins on the market.

In both cases you spend money to gain coins, and in both cases you can make or lose money if the coin goes up or down. Removing the first part of the equation, being able to mine the coins doesn't have much effect unless you happen to have a factory of mining equipment in your backyard.

nexern

hero member

Activity: 597

Merit: 500

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 12:52:17 AM

Quote from: devphp on September 16, 2014, 12:46:32 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 12:42:10 AM

It was open to anyone who actually did the work of mining not to mention the ongoing opportunity to mine.

It's still not fair. And the ongoing opportunity is not fair, you can only get a few millibits and lose money, while early adopters were each getting fat blocks every day.

While doing all that work and paying for electricity for BTC at a price of $0.05 and a chance for it to go to 0.

Coins mined today could still be worth lots tomorrow. At least we have a short at mining fresh coins. Not with POS.

even if we are talking about a biger timeframe here it seems some of you forgot that as soon the last btc is mined it turns into a kind of a pos system also,
where miners are rewarded just by transaction fees. nxt just jumps directly into this stage.

moreover, you can't be very sure that the btc distribution looks much better than nxt as soon it turns into this level.
just compare the real distribution numbers of both and don't argue that a mass of miners, who getting some pico-btc, are really changing this picture,
it's looking more than an ongoing wealth and mining concentration within btc than a real mass distribution.

it seems dynamic systems always tend to reach pareto, no matter what kind of initial parameters you choose.

added: using this analogy the interesting question is this.
assuming btc reaches this pos like level and also assuming the distribution follows pareto for btc and nxt at this stage.
which one of both will have the better, further mass distribution. btc, with a very high value, concentrated to 100 entities
or nxt with the same entities but much lower value?

as mentioned before, don't be toooo sure...

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 02:37:55 AM

You are so full of FUD.

I am leaving this thread then. Please stay in your blissful ignorance.

User705

legendary

Activity: 896

Merit: 1006

First 100% Liquid Stablecoin Backed by Gold

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: devphp on September 16, 2014, 01:36:03 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 01:23:09 AM

Not if it replaces significant parts of the banking system.

Dreams are nice, reality is harsh.

All Bitcoin needs to be is a superior alternative. Personally, I think it is. Time will tell.

Currently the banking sector together with central banks control money almost completely. How would ceding that control to bitcoin be a superior alternative for them? It may be a superior alternative for everyone else but it certainly isn't for the banking system.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: devphp on September 16, 2014, 01:47:54 AM

Quote from: kehtolo on September 16, 2014, 01:40:53 AM

I would say you would have a pretty good legal leg to stand on if they raised prices only for one particular industry.

In most countries there is a privatised energy industry -meaning it wouldn't be the governments decision to raise or lower prices.

Also - it would be easier to just ban bitcoin mining in a country, declare it illegal. This would be a better route if you wanted to stop or discourage it, as opposed to charging miners higher electricity costs.

Legislation is not set in stone, it can be changed in the name of national security, welfare of people, optimized usage of natural resources, etc. you get the idea. Electricity fees are a good attack vector, they are not using it yet, because Bitcoin is still insignificant and doesn't pose a threat yet. When/If it does, all bets are off.

You are so full of FUD.

so which gvt are you talking about? The US? China? Russia? Or all of them together since they all seem to get along so well?

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: kehtolo on September 16, 2014, 01:40:53 AM

I would say you would have a pretty good legal leg to stand on if they raised prices only for one particular industry.

In most countries there is a privatised energy industry -meaning it wouldn't be the governments decision to raise or lower prices.

Also - it would be easier to just ban bitcoin mining in a country, declare it illegal. This would be a better route if you wanted to stop or discourage it, as opposed to charging miners higher electricity costs.

Legislation is not set in stone, it can be changed in the name of national security, welfare of people, optimized usage of natural resources, etc. you get the idea. Electricity fees are a good attack vector, they are not using it yet, because Bitcoin is still insignificant and doesn't pose a threat yet. When/If it does, all bets are off.

kehtolo

hero member

Activity: 707

Merit: 500

I would say you would have a pretty good legal leg to stand on if they raised prices only for one particular industry.

In most countries there is a privatised energy industry -meaning it wouldn't be the governments decision to raise or lower prices.

Also - it would be easier to just ban bitcoin mining in a country, declare it illegal. This would be a better route if you wanted to stop or discourage it, as opposed to charging miners higher electricity costs.

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: cbeast on September 16, 2014, 01:21:51 AM

Raising energy prices would hurt everyone. It's all relative.

Only Bitcoin miners, it would be targeted at them. Governments don't like competition.

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 01:23:09 AM

Not if it replaces significant parts of the banking system.

Dreams are nice, reality is harsh.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: devphp on September 16, 2014, 01:15:02 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 01:10:42 AM

The real world work part and electricity costs are quite important to discourage gvt attacks.

It's not a sustainable path, it can go on for some time, but not forever. They are not gonna produce ASICs to outrun miners, don't worry. What will happen most likely is the electricity fees will be raised dramatically for Bitcoin mining by governments to drive them out of business. In the interests of security of other electricity users. And that is one of major flaws of Bitcoin, it depends on scarce natural resources, that others are in competition for.

Not if it replaces significant parts of the banking system.

http://www.coindesk.com/microscope-economic-environmental-costs-bitcoin-mining/

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1014

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: devphp on September 16, 2014, 01:15:02 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 01:10:42 AM

The real world work part and electricity costs are quite important to discourage gvt attacks.

It's not a sustainable path, it can go on for some time, but not forever. They are not gonna produce ASICs to outrun miners, don't worry. What will happen most likely is the electricity fees will be raised dramatically for Bitcoin mining by governments to drive them out of business. In the interests of security of other electricity users. And that is one of major flaws of Bitcoin, it depends on scarce natural resources, that others are in competition for.

Raising energy prices would hurt everyone. It's all relative.

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 01:10:42 AM

The real world work part and electricity costs are quite important to discourage gvt attacks.

It's not a sustainable path, it can go on for some time, but not forever. They are not gonna produce ASICs to outrun miners, don't worry. What will happen most likely is the electricity fees will be raised dramatically for Bitcoin mining by governments to drive them out of business. In the interests of security of other electricity users. And that is one of major flaws of Bitcoin, it depends on scarce natural resources, that others are in competition for.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: devphp on September 16, 2014, 01:03:11 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 12:59:46 AM

You're inflating the cryptocurrency space with a coin created with code only, no work.

First of all, I am not inflating anything, I am a user.

Second, if you can skip the work part and achieve the same and even much more, why do you need the work part? Just for the sake of work? Why don't people still do all the manual work at this age but instead use devices to make their life easier? Not to mention, this 'work' you're referring to is not sustainable long term, if it keeps growing at the rate it is growing, soon half the world will be working to produce ASICs and generate electricity for mining Bitcoin. Which is of course crazy and not gonna happen, something's gotta give sooner or later.

The real world work part and electricity costs are quite important to discourage gvt attacks. They'd just rather print money to try and attack Bitcoin I'd imagine. Sorta sounds like POS. Attacks have to be expensive.

Stakeholder collusion would be very bad.

LiQio

legendary

Activity: 1181

Merit: 1002

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 12:59:46 AM

You're inflating the cryptocurrency space with a coin created with code only, no work.

I believe burning electricity and hard work were not Satoshis ideas.
PoW was suggested mainly as a solution to double spending. Now other ("improved") ideas are available.
Work itself doesn't give any value to objects.
Frankly I don't care if a gold nugget was found in my garden or if it had to be dug up from 1000 feet - same value.

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 12:59:46 AM

You're inflating the cryptocurrency space with a coin created with code only, no work.

First of all, I am not inflating anything, I am a user.

Second, if you can skip the work part and achieve the same and even much more, why do you need the work part? Just for the sake of work? Why don't people still do all the manual work at this age but instead use devices to make their life easier? Not to mention, this 'work' you're referring to is not sustainable long term, if it keeps growing at the rate it is growing, soon half the world will be working to produce ASICs and generate electricity for mining Bitcoin. Which is of course crazy and not gonna happen, something's gotta give sooner or later.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: devphp on September 16, 2014, 12:55:32 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on September 16, 2014, 12:52:17 AM

While doing all that work and paying for electricity for BTC at a price of $0.05 and a chance for it to go to 0.

Coins mined today could still be worth lots tomorrow. At least we have a short at mining fresh coins. Not with POS.

That's risk taking. Risk taking should be rewarded, nobody argues with that. However, you argue that other people taking risk, outside of Bitcoin system, somehow don't deserve to be rewarded. How is that not hypocritical?

You're inflating the cryptocurrency space with a coin created with code only, no work.

Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 952. (Read 2032274 times)