If not a "store of value" or "medium of exchange" ... - page 4.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: figmentofmyass on September 28, 2019, 04:04:43 PM

Quote from: franky1 on September 28, 2019, 04:46:33 AM

technically it is possible, but politically devs just say no with some lame trumpesq excuses
'2015: hard drives will fill up fast if we had 2mb'
'2015: we want segwit and it will use 4mb bloat but not achieve 4x scaling, dont worry hard drives will be fine'

you're being disingenuous and you know it. you're ignoring the quadratic hashing problem. segwit specifically fixed this and expanded block space for transactions that don't worsen the problem. you also know this was done as a compromise so bitcoin could have bigger blocks but still allow for large-transaction use cases. the best of both worlds in other words, vs a crude sigops limit:

Quote

Removing the quadratic scaling of hashed data for verifying signatures makes increasing the block size safer. Doing that without also limiting transaction sizes allows Bitcoin to continue to support payments that go to or come from large groups, such as payments of mining rewards or crowdfunding services.
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/

1. not fixed. people can still use legacy transactions which still have the problem of bloating up a block
2. those wanting to bloat a block wont use segwit.
3. its like having a gun free neighbourhood but advertising it as removing all guns across the world and solving gun murders.. sorry advert doesnt meet reality
4. 'groups/crowds' dont deserve a whole block to themselves of only 5 tx's if people want to be paid it should be done as multiple batches. core dont want individuals to use bitcoin, they prefer large organisations to have access and let the other little people use other networks.
5. reducing the maxtxsigops limit is the most simplest solution. yet they wont.
6. even now they wont raise the baseblock because the quadratics is is not fixed.. wake up

figmentofmyass

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1483

Quote from: franky1 on September 28, 2019, 04:46:33 AM

technically it is possible, but politically devs just say no with some lame trumpesq excuses
'2015: hard drives will fill up fast if we had 2mb'
'2015: we want segwit and it will use 4mb bloat but not achieve 4x scaling, dont worry hard drives will be fine'

you're being disingenuous and you know it. you're ignoring the quadratic hashing problem. segwit specifically fixed this and expanded block space for transactions that don't worsen the problem. you also know this was done as a compromise so bitcoin could have bigger blocks but still allow for large-transaction use cases. the best of both worlds in other words, vs a crude sigops limit:

Quote

Removing the quadratic scaling of hashed data for verifying signatures makes increasing the block size safer. Doing that without also limiting transaction sizes allows Bitcoin to continue to support payments that go to or come from large groups, such as payments of mining rewards or crowdfunding services.
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/

NoBanThx

newbie

Activity: 10

Merit: 0

Title: Re: If not a "store of value" or "medium of exchange" ...
It says what it is in the first sentence of the white paper brother, a peer to peer electronic cash

Meaning it is a stand alone medium of exchange, kind of like usd,euro or yen (just not run by a country *centralized*, but by all willing participants *decentralized*)
So it is a decentralized, medium of exchange. (which people give a value)

Quote from: franky1 on September 25, 2019, 06:46:52 AM

bitcoin is a store of value. as it first needs to be a store of value to then be a medium of exchange.
by this i mean if having no value, people wont want to exchange it.

Yes but fiat has nothing to do with the equation.

I have apples and my neighbor has pizzarolls, We trade apples for pizzarolls every year without my apples or his pizzarolls fiat price in question, it is irrelevant.
Just like how the first bitcoin trade happened, I have traded him bitcoin for the pizzarolls before bitcoin even had a price.

The people create this value, so it will always have a value on what the trade agreement is between both parties.
The fiat price of bitcoin could go to 0, bitcoin will still be traded for goods and services. That is how the first trade happened to begin with Wink

Digitalbitcoin

hero member

Activity: 1568

Merit: 502

We can say it a digital asset, and due to limited supply price will be sure skyrocket in coming future.

And that's why it comes up with both concepts, as a store of value and at the same time medium of exchange.

Bitcoin is not a joke so take it seriously.

Viper1

sr. member

Activity: 686

Merit: 320

Quote from: franky1 on September 28, 2019, 05:17:54 AM

Quote from: Viper1 on September 28, 2019, 05:08:32 AM

Bitcoin is an experiment at creating decentralized digital cash.

oh we have another comedian. hmm but thats an old joke i heard that expriment joke before.

an experiment is a test, waiting for a result, whereby when the test is over something else can be tested and no harm done. whereby its not the solution but just game/playing around trying to look for something.

sorry but bitcoin is not a test. not an experiment. its an actual thing that exist and is bing used by common people.

the reason your joke is old is because the punchline is that the developers want to do what they want and if it fails they want to walk away as if they done nothing wrong.

seems the last two comedians are reading from the reddit jokebook circa 2014. i think its time they update their material

I knew you'd respond. I'm not going to get into a discussion with you about this as you're not worth the effort. Carry on with your opinion though, it's clear many people have bought into the same belief.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: Viper1 on September 28, 2019, 05:08:32 AM

Bitcoin is an experiment at creating decentralized digital cash.

oh we have another comedian. hmm but thats an old joke i heard that experiment joke before.

an experiment is a test, waiting for a result, whereby when the test is over something else can be tested and no harm done. whereby its not the solution but just a game/playing around trying to look for something.

sorry but bitcoin is not a test. not an experiment. its an actual thing that exist and is being used by common people every day.

the reason your joke is old is because the punchline is that the developers want to do what they want and if it fails they want to walk away as if they done nothing wrong.

seems the last two comedians are reading from the reddit jokebook circa 2014. i think its time they update their material

Viper1

sr. member

Activity: 686

Merit: 320

Bitcoin is an experiment at creating decentralized digital cash. That's it, but people have gotten so blinded by it's exchange rate etc they forget that. Given that however, has it been a success, a failure or is the jury still out on it? IMO, with the direction it's been going, after a few more halvings and the inevitable consolidation in mining starts to occur, the decentralized aspect will fail unless they make some sort of significant changes. Let's not even talk about how as time progresses, it becomes more and more like the mainstream financial sector with the governments taking more "control" of it through regulation. Not like it matters what it is or isn't or whether it will succeed or fail. Just enjoy making money from it for as long as you can and you can stop worrying about all that.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: Wind_FURY on September 28, 2019, 03:30:05 AM

You're trolling.

Newbies, in reality there are barriers to scaling. It can't scale on-chain without centralizing the network, and giving up some of its actual value proposition, which is censorship-resistance.

gotta love that comedy.
so developers say no to developing onchain scaling.. sniff sniff, smells like they are censoring community needs/desires
technically it is possible, but politically devs just say no with some lame trumpesq excuses
'2015: hard drives will fill up fast if we had 2mb'
'2015: we want segwit and it will use 4mb bloat but not achieve 4x scaling, dont worry hard drives will be fine'

so developer fan boys pretending it will centralise the network,.. sniff sniff, dang that smell is getting stronger
sorry but bitcoin runs on a raspbery pi which is a multitude x slower than a standard computer. thus standard computers can handle more. so dont even try to re-start the myth of 'servers'

windy, did you not forget the censorship of 2017 that threw people off the network for not complying to cores demands.

time for you to add 'censorship' to the list or things you need to independently research.
but i will say this, you are a comedian. your comments make me laugh often. but thats no excuse, as even comedians research the topics they want to joke about

hv_

legendary

Activity: 2534

Merit: 1055

Clean Code and Scale

Quote from: Wind_FURY on September 28, 2019, 03:30:05 AM

Quote from: hv_ on September 27, 2019, 04:13:02 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on September 27, 2019, 03:48:29 AM

Quote from: hv_ on September 27, 2019, 03:41:20 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on September 27, 2019, 02:46:12 AM

Quote from: hv_ on September 26, 2019, 09:24:41 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on September 26, 2019, 12:15:38 AM

Quote from: franky1 on September 25, 2019, 06:46:52 AM

bitcoin is a store of value. as it first needs to be a store of value to then be a medium of exchange.
by this i mean if having no value, people wont want to exchange it.

I'm not trolling, OK? But I believe we debated about this before, and you said that Bitcoin should be a medium of exchange first to be valuable, and that because of small blocks, Bitcoin cannot be a medium of exchange. Or am I confused?

It must be 'easy' exchangable to get value at all - if u cannot transfer, nobody wants it / can handle it -> useless Wink

Bitcoin should be P2P cash - per definition. so it should be free to transfer

But if no one wants to hold it, no one would accept it as a medium of exchange. "Medium of exchange" is not only for its sake. It also has to be a store of value, for later use as a medium of exchange. Cool

We know, it is chicken & egg.

But Bitcoin is fully digital / electronic

So it MUST be the cheapest and easy medium of exchange - it's purely intuitive and it is even TOP LEVEL ADVERTISED as the NEW e-cash

so what is the issue ? BTC is not Bitcoin and money any more - it cannot be a store of value for its only sake Wink

I would say yes to all of that, if the technical solution was as easy as increasing the block size to increase transaction throughput, BUT without preventing the network from scaling out.

Bitcoin was designed to be digital - it does not need artificial barriers - it can do, what computers can do - so let it do - it is honest by design

You're trolling.

Newbies, in reality there are barriers to scaling. It can't scale on-chain without centralizing the network, and giving up some of its actual value proposition, which is censorship-resistance.

If u are losing on arguments, u go name calling?

Nope, scaling means real scaling, and not little ( by little Joe, little RasPI,...)

Miners have done this step already, they have invested and installed high tech level network over the past years, in a still enough decentral way, and that is as industrial grade scaling has to be done for global networks,
Nothing new.

It stays decentral enough over time cause competition is maximum open and everyone can build high level efficient mining equipment and join every time, that will challenge any monopoly over long term. Perfect open rotation.

Little joe RasPI pies were never ever of relevance, they only run their wallet clients, when miners run the server farms, as Satoshi designed it.

Meh

NathanJB

sr. member

Activity: 756

Merit: 251