Looks like you guys have been having fun, what externality costs are you referring to precisely?
The cost of PoW, the security / decentralization / scalability trade-off, the construction of ASICs...?
Topic: On Bitcoin and externality costs - page 2. (Read 638 times)
Says who?
I say 
right, and you make up your own facts
("miners broke the SHA-2 algorithm" which is demonstrably nonsense)
@Wind_Fury started it by asking for ethos instead of logus and now you are accomplishing his job by directly questioning my right to say anything about bitcoin. Very interesting.
If you say so. You have that right. I believe you would feel at home with like-minded people in the Bitcoin Cash community.
What is hard, the real challenge of bitcoin is improving it in consensus level such that it can accomplish its original mission as a p2p electronic cash system in a scalable fashion without compromising security and decentralization measures. Bitcoin Core developers have escalated this hurdle to an upper level by discouraging (even fighting against) hard forks. Unlike them, I don't see any reason to be such dogmatic about chain splits and hard forks, actually I see a handful of good reasons to have an overhaul every one decade or so.
As a pro you might have noticed that I'm directly questioning Buterin's claim about the existence of a trilemma and suggesting that refuting this claim is the most important job of any serious bitcoin developer and the main agenda for any development project.
What do you think?
It's your right to question, and I agree that developers should try to solve that problem, but not in Bitcoin. It's too risky to be messing with the consensus layer just because there's a minority in the community that believe it's a good idea.
Plus wouldn't it be perfect for Bitcoin Cash to solve it? It will be a breakthrough, and it might even surpass Bitcoin in marketcap.
But currently, the reality is there are externality costs. The costs can be passed around, but there shall always be costs.
Jump to: