Topic: Ixcoin TODO - page 184. (Read 631747 times)

Yes, I represent mmpool.org. See the contact page on the pool for confirmation. The last ixcoin block mined by the pool using the new client was block 200094.

Here we go with features again.

Do you think Bitcoin is awesome?

Do you think Bitcoin has some great features or advantages which make it worth $500 per coin?

Cause if you do then I've got GREAT news:  iXcoin has the same exact features and the exact same Payment System as Bitcoin and is also ultra secure at 40 Peta Hash but it's better than Bitcoin cause it has a clean image with no bad history and criminal execs and it's more liquid than Bitcoin as well.

So imagine, you're getting Bitcoin plus these advantages for 8 cents USD compared to $500 for Bitcoin.

But if you need power windows to make you feel better just say the word and I'll copy and paste them for you.

What is the special feature of Ixcoin?

iXcoin now at 40 Peta-Hash network [Security].

The distance [in network security] between iXcoin and 99% of the alts is getting ridiculous.

Yet [still] nobody sees this massive advantage yet.  People really are sheep eating up anything the Bitcoin "experts" throw at them.

You speak of these cost problems as if those with money stand still to allow the poor to catch up.  The hardware cost problems you mention are not a problem for Bitcoin nor are they a cost problem per sé:  This cost problem is nothing more than an inherent Design Strategy [built into the Bitcoin Protocol] where eventually only those with a very high budget will be able to mine Bitcoin [and collect massive fees].

But of course:  Banks, Hedge Funds, Governments, etc., won't secure Bitcoin for themselves, no they'll do it for you and me, cause they made it clear they do to want Bitcoin and Andreas Antonopoulos [the utmost Expert] regurgitated many times over that Banks and Governents are terrified of Bitcoin and they can NEVER control Bitcoin.

[FYI:  Andreas the Expert also said last year that Mt Gox and Neo and Bee would go to the moon this year. Haha]

So these rich Elite will simply help us out by employing their massive resources [and Data Centers] to mine and secure the Bitcoin Network.  To be nice to us.  lol....not to have a monopoly on a new global monetary system where they can easily price gouge 7 billion people instead of 4 Billion.



And this is precisely why I said last year:   Bitcoin was designed from the ground up for the rich elite.

FYI:  Banks have been getting bids from ASICS manufacturers.

Bitcoin is fiat 2.0.  You'll need a data center to mine (secure) Bitcoin and therefore who will dictate the fees?

That's right:  The big banks will once again have a monopoly on fees.

Enter GATT.

Speaking as a Techie.  I will give you something to think about in regards to the Hardware limitations of taking over all transactions in the world.


The first thing you have to remember.  BTC, and any other Crypto-currency is NOT centralized.  This means there is not 1 central storage location where you just need to worry about having enough HDD's of storage space to contain the blockchain.  Pretty much every computer connected has to have the space to contain the entire blockchain.   Yes I know BTC has wallets like Multi Bit, which helps with this problem, but the need is still there to have the blockchain on MANY computers worldwide.

Currently the BTC Blockchain is taking up almost 17 Gb of space.  With the limited number of transactions that currently happen, the Blockchain grows approx. 1 Gb/month.  If the blockchain grew to take over Visa, I have read that would have to scale by a factor of 1000.  Or 1 Tb/month.   

Not only would every single personal computer choke on the size of that blockchain  (Everyone is not going to buy a 3 Tb HDD every couple of months to contain the Blockchain).  Also the amount of data flowing to every single computer holding the blockchain would saturate the average monthly ISP bandwidth cap.

So as you can see there are still in this day and age very massive hardware caps for doing what you are speaking of.  What they are banking on is Moore's law continuing to grow the hardware side so that in a few years when the Blockchain is sitting at 1 Tb, that HDD's most people will be popping into their computers will be in the 100 Tb range, and that the bandwidth ISP's provide monthly grows in leaps and bounds as well.

You know, I'm confused as well about the two.

Can anyone confirm if they're the same company or not?

TIA.

GHash.IO is the more important organization....  I don't know of CEX.IO and GHash.IO is the same organization.

Friction,

Isn't CEX.io getting ready to do some big things with iXcoin?

Wouldn't they be enough to get the ball rolling?

Thanks!  Can you dig up which IXC block was mined by mmpool using the new client?

BTW, do you represent mmpool.org? 

mmpool.org is using the latest IXcoin client and has mined a few blocks successfully using it. This can be a useful data point to mention to other pools if they are hesitating due to perceived lack of testing.

You are correct in the assessment that Mastercoin can be rebuilt on top of IXcoin. 

The main stumbling block right now is to have GHash.IO and the other pools accept the latest version of IXcoin.  The latest version enables Multi-Sig and OP_RETURN and we just need cooperation from the pool to get this deployed.   People need to ping GHash.IO to get their cooperation.  This is the main obstacle right now for progress.

Please try to reach out to GHash.IO so we can get some technical collaboration going!

I would be curious to know what type of "strain" Satoshi Dice put on the Bitcoin network.  

My theory is that the Bitcoin protocol was developed [from the ground up] to engulf the whole world, every transaction imaginable so then, how can any one thing strain it?

Unless, of course, I'm totally wrong.

Not being a techie I can only guess.  And my guess is that the strain issue came from the transaction block size limit which is coded in the Bitcoin source code.

This, to me, sounds crazy to even discuss, let alone debate.

2 weeks ago I got into a similar debate on twitter, with Bitcoin "experts".  After witnessing a year of utter lies and misinformation by Andreas and a lots other Bitcoin experts, I'm having a difficult time reserving any intellectual respect for any of them.

The argument started when I said the Bitcoin protocol could engulf [with ease] visa and master card so Bitcoin, having now surpassed Western Union [in daily transactions] could be valued as a real asset based on these potential future cash flows.

This was a good thing, and I put a $20 Billion valuation on Bitcoin [which should double in under 12 months].

This was my analysis and then the experts quickly chimed in, to call me crazy, and criticizing me and telling me that Bitcoin can NEVER be bigger than Visa [let alone engulf the world] because Bitcoin was not designed for that and it could never be that big and powerful.

They used words like NEVER and technologically IMPOSSIBLE.


After literally 5 minutes of research I found out these experts were talking about the transaction block size limit in the Bitcoin code.

I was speechless at the level of Stupidity - the same kind of stupidity which spews out of Andreas and all other Bitcoin experts.

Keeping in mind I wasn't a techie, I simply replied something like:  "The Transaction size limit is a simple line of code, the only limitation facing Bitcoin then is hardware which is now a non-event, what would stop us from simply raising that transaction size limit to literally grow [with the Blockchain] and fit every transaction on earth, including all of Visa and MasterCard?"

Of course I got no response cause the answer is: There is no road block from raising the size limit to anything one chooses; because Bitcoin was designed to be infinitely scalable, limited only by hardware requirements, which [Today] can easily and absolutely enable Bitcoin to take on the whole world.

So again, when I hear anything about Bitcoin straining, given I'm not a techie, I have to wonder if this strain is nothing more than a simple line of code.  An issue which a newbie can fix.

Because it's clear to me, the network is growing logarithmically [with no slowing down in sight] and storage space limitations are quickly approaching ZERO [given the right budget].

So I say that any refusal by Bitcoin to cooperate with Master-Party or any other future COMPETITOR is simply strategic, the bankers now running Bitcoin want to create a competitive advantage moat around bitcoin, given the lack of such advantages in this open source Eco-System (ie. Little crappy iXcoin [right now] has the necessary tech and security to easily copy and replace any service or payment system provided by Bitcoin).

So I agree, as Bitcoin becomes slow and political, just like any monopoly, an exact technological twin of Bitcoin, iXcoin, can quickly move to become literally better and more advanced and then prove it is not just Bitcoin's equal, but literally, a better more advanced alternative payment system.

What do the real techies have to say about that?  Somebody show me where and how Bitcoin has a real technical advantage over iXcoin.  Please, show me and I will dump all my iXcoins.

Regards...

On the one hand, ixcoin could make itself friendly to the counterparty/mastercoin methods. This has the advantages of advanced features that people love and could possibly make the protocol more attractive as advanced features are trending. Also advanced feature users pay miners an extra fee making all the more reason to secure the network after the coin maturation event. (The big event)

On the other hand however, mastercoin/counterparty have come under heavy criticism. Something along the lines of, you are a parasite and will break the bitcoin network. My understanding is that satashi dice put a very heavy load on the network, and when the master-party is finally rocking out in all its glory, it will make the dice load look like a walk in the park.  So in this scenario maybe Vlad is right, if bitcoin is looking like a testnet for these advanced ideas that might adversely affect it, then maybe a coin that is identical to bitcoin with out the extra features is more attractive to the big money. However bitcoin is not going to be able to shake mastercoin off very easily if at all. The same mastercoin system could be built on top of ixcoin without approval, so maybe it is just better to work with these ideas instead of against them.

Peter Todd was hired by mastercoin to research issues such as these and to help mitigate the impact of the project on bitcoin. I haven't followed his research but he would be a good person to look at for these topics.

Seriously?

Since you get it [and I don't] please explain to me the technical advantages the Bitcoin payment system has over iXcoin.

And then I will list iXcoin's advantages over Bitcoin, and why iXcoin can actually take over anything Bitcoin can do, in an instant - TODAY.

I'll be patiently waiting for your response.

haha, you really need to ease up on the Kool-Aid my friend

Disclaimer: I own some IXC but there is no way iXcoin is going to replace Bitcoin any time soon (ever).

Haha.

Clever move.

I wonder if it's reasons like this that got Gavin to "step down".

Think about it; Bitcoin will be majority owned by banks, hedge funds, corporations and governments in the next 12 months - something I've been saying since last year.

And right now, banks and hedge funds already own over 10% of Bitcoin so they can exert massive pressure on any policies affecting Bitcoin.

Someone like Gavin was all about open source and helping people.  But banks, hedge funds, etc., they want to retain as many competitive advantages as possible over upcoming cryptos.

Cause let's face it, if Bitcoin plays ball, it won't be long before Bitcoin will be matched and maybe even surpassed.

But what these players don't realize is that they're forcing all the players [and consumers] to search for a Bitcoin replacement.

Because think about it; iXcoin can offer counter party anything Bitcoin can offer, even the ultra secure network.

The only problem is that even today, NOBODY seems to see this painfully obvious fact.  But I have no doubt someone of importance will see it eventually.  Maybe even the likes of someone like Gavin himself.

Did not realize that Counterparty is now screwed because Bitcoin developers don't want to play ball with them:

http://www.coindesk.com/developers-battle-bitcoin-block-chain/

iXcoin was a testbed for the raw Bitcoin protocol:  What would happen if you left it untouched for nearly the entire duration of its mining life.

iXcoin proved that it did not need any maintenance or updates to survive and that it's bullet proof, it can take any amount of hash-power thrown at it.  If you look at how easily other coins break or die, this is a rare and difficult feat.  

For that reason IXC doesn't have much in terms of features and services.  I think features and services can be easily added over time whereas no other coin can say they have the tested technology like iXcoin.

iXcoin is Bitcoin - tested and true, but with more liquidity and no image problems.  

iXcoin is now ready to be implemented as the world's premiere payment system:  Anything Bitcoin can do, iXcoin can do as well [or better].

I think mastercoin and nxt are attempting to tackle problems such as the multi-wallet.

Vlad has made mention a few times that features aren't the main thing to focus on. So following that train of thought, maybe ixcoin just makes itself friendly to these types of systems and third parties can then build the functionality. I believe that counterparty and mastercoin wanted to make use of an 80 byte op_return feature but bitcoin devs only gave around 40? bytes. Maybe if we take a few suggestions from these folks then they can build the advanced features. Give them their 80 bytes...

It could be called MasterParty....   



Anyone know if there is a paper wallet for ixcoin? or a list of current services?