Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 956. (Read 2032274 times)

Interesting viewpoint, but I don't believe it to be true. Does silver as a store of wealth erode the value of gold being a store of wealth? What about platinum? There are hundreds of altcoins, some of which are worth tens of millions, some of which are worth nothing. The value of one doesn't affect the value of others to a huge degree. Bitcoin's value is based on the network effect, if another coin gained a huge market share they'd both have value based on their usage and their users. One doesn't degrade the other. Not every coin can have a huge network effect, therefore what you are talking about where there'll be thousands of equally valueless cryptocoins will never happen.

Funny logic. Do all million or so BTC users compile from the source before using it? I guess we should not even be using any online site, like coinbase, as we don't have source. All Windows users should never use BTC either as BTC is only for people who compile from the source.

What's your point anyway? Nxt is open source. Anyone can compile it. Given it's in Java, anyone can even decompile it. We have dozens of clones.

You have not made your point clear. Are you trying to claim Nxt security relies on obscurity? If that is the claim, that is provable false as you can decompile Java and steal Nxt. Given that isn't hapening, what are you trying to claim?

I have no interest in trying to dethrone Bitcoin. It's is crypto's store of value. That is it's job. It provides the backing everything else that comes after it. Bitcoin goes up, everything goes up. Bitcoin goes down, everything goes down - because they are directly tied to Bitcoin. Bitcoin is your entry into cryptoland. From there you are free to do as you wish with any system you wish, free of regulation and red tape and slow processes and filled with CHOICE! This is what crypto gives us: CHOICE and FREEDOM to do what we want with our money. Bitcoin is our direct gateway into that and does it exceptionally well.

Any coin that is a direct fork of bitcoin is not worth a second glance due to the reasons you mention above. However I believe that like Nxt, Maidsafe, Storj etc are NOT coins. They provide innovative value that is completely separate from it being a currency. They are token that exist on a system that provides other functions - and guess what, their value ARE MEASURED IN BITCOINS and is therefore in direct relation to the utility they provide crypto as a whole!  The use of these systems should bring more value to crypto and therefore Bitcoin itself. Of course because they have value they can be traded LIKE a currency and will speculated on but that is not their primary goal. That is Bitcoin's job and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Bitcoin's value is not and should not be threatened by this and if it is, then it would be because it is not doing it's job very well.

yes, which is to also say, "most investors in the cryptocurrency space will lose money" from a lack of understanding of the economics, technical innovations, and political circumstances surrounding Bitcoin.

and that, ladies and gentlemen, is why it is still early days for Bitcoin.

I think it's way more profound, Bitcoin is a once in 5,000 year paradigm shifting innovation, Alt's are an insignificant incremental improvement. cripto's from my viewpoint are the equivalent of painting a line in down the middle of the road, and saying this new innovation supersedes the road network. there will be metaphoric competition like rail roads and air ports, but the most valuable network will be Bitcoin.

Just like fiat must contend with distributed crypto-currencies, distributed (or not) crypto-currencies must contend with one another.  Fair is fair.  Each will rise and fall on it's strengths, the the strengths and weaknesses come from all different directions.  That is to say, technical and otherwise, and I'll go out on a limb and say that technical strengths and weaknesses will be minor compared to political ones.

it's not "no one understands that..." the increase in hashing power is a byproduct or a reflection or a value judgment, its quite elegant the way it increases so smoothly - more to the point is, where is it best for me to invest my excess resources, and it turns out lots of people see the system of Bitcoin a viable place to invest. The exponential halving forces competition and ultimately drives out any inefficient use of hashing power.

for all those non believers there is PoS and Fiat.  

Because if another coin even gets close (same order of mag) to bitcoin in terms of market cap, it seriously erodes the "scarcity" feature/argument of bitcoin, which is one of the most critical arguments for putting any wealth/mindshare/time/effort into bitcoin (and by extension, any crypto). Guys like Schiff and Rickards would be proven right, and no one would be comfortable putting any wealth into any crypto for a long long time. Thus, everyone would lose. Humanity would not see the benefits that decentralized money can bring for many years/decades longer than if bitcoin simply becomes the obvious-to-everyone non-dethronable crypto store of value.

To be clear, I think there's niche value in some alts, and some of the experimentation is valuable. But you guys who think that many coins can live side by side with similar monetizations are missing the key point that if that happened, we'd all be sitting side-by-side at *trivial* market-caps, not big ones.

No.  Those hashes prove nothing.

A deterministic build process enables multiple independent parties to generate the exact same output, given a git commit id.

If you cannot prove what's in users hands is exactly what came out from the java->bytecode compiler, then you should not use that binary.

lol.

Likewise, I don't consider myself a PoS guy.
Don't see the need to take those kinds of positions.
If a technology fills a need, that's good.

This wasn't was not me, notme!

Why does it have to be us vs them? Why must the crypto space be so divided? I am not a "pos guy". I simply see some value and utility in a well designed system and want to share that with others, just as I do with bitcoin.

Fiat is the enemy here.

I'm impressed with the number of pos guys following this thread. 

No idea how you could infer what my bitcoin portfolio is from that comment. And bitcoin is still 80% of my crypto portfolio thank you very much.

Sorry, but that is just a cop-out answer.

You asked a question that you could have quite easily have answered yourself.

The hashes are always posted on the nxt forum: https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-2-8/ ánd in the Nxt thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8672358

Instead, you throw the question on Twitter, knowing full well how much clout your name has.

An unbiased question could easily have been phrased differently, for instance by providing the source.

It wasn't the asking of questions that was commented on, but the manner in which this question was asked, combined with the person asking it. Every comment has context. To deny that is just silly.

perhaps checking it yourself before tweeting it to the world would have been a better practice to follow. it obviously took devphp 2 seconds to do the necessary due diligence that you failed to do before sending out a potentially harmful tweet, or spreading FUD as i might say in a less polite manner. as a public figure and respected bitcoiner you of all people should know better. the true intentions behind your tweet are very questionable regardless of your defense.

also..  you have publicly attacked NXT in the past which also cast a shadow of doubt over your "innocent question"..

asteroid comet gold mining, here we come!:

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/science-ticker/spot-comet-chosen-rosetta-mission-lander

Still looks like FUD in disguise, intentional or not.

Utterly useless exercise, without hash proof.


Guess what?  It was a question.

It is notable when asking questions leading to paranoia and accusations rather than specific answers.

The threat of p2p communications extends well beyond distributed crypto-currencies though I suspect that they are or will be a significant component of the threat list.

My view is that the best way to address the problem is to proactively engineer not only the technology but also the utilization to provide some defenses before it happens.  This means a 'reserve currency' which due to lowish utilization is somewhat more defensible.  A big component of defense in such a scenario would be the ability to remain hidden (to wit the intensive generation of personal porn vids and the like are swell!)

Often a good way to thwart an attack is to make it unlikely to succeed by developing defenses in advance.  In this case, though, the attack would be on more general free flow of information so hardening Bitcoin or developing and popularizing some similar currency is not likely to play a big role.  I don't really care much if Bitcoin serves the robust reserve role, though I would prefer it for my own benefit being a hodler.  Since the transaction rate is still modest I still hold some hope.  I hope sidechains comes to the rescue.  Not sure how that is coming along since I've been off on other projects for a while now and not following things closely.