Topic: Open Letter to GMaxwell and Sincere Rational Core Devs - page 16. (Read 34841 times)

OK... just for the sake of argument... Litecoin.

For all essential aspects, Litecoin is a virtual clone of Bitcoin. The only thing differentiating Bitcoin from Litecoin, as viewed as the "other alternative" is the relative 100:1 ratio of market cap.

Granted, that is a significant difference from the aspect of the "other alternative". However, even Bitcoin is still a sideshow on the world stage. What if adoption in the coming years is driven to Litecoin rather than Bitcoin? Then Litecoin would end up the economic juggernaut, and Bitcoin would be relegated to junior status.

What might lead to mass adoption of Litecoin over Bitcoin? If Litecoin were to have increased utility to its user base, that is something that might lead to this eventuality. If something increases in value, it is a more compelling investment to the individual that some other thing which does not. And individuals are the decision-makers who allocate their resources to products and services.

What might lead Litecoin to have increased value with respect to Bitcoin to each individual stakeholder? I might posit that Litecoin adopting higher tps capability while Bitcoin does not might be such an eventuality.

So if such were to come about, and Bitcoin's market dominance be shunted to the side by Litecoin, why would Bitcoin's properties matter in terms of being the "other alternative"?

There is another Satoshi quote, already in this thread a while back, that demonstrates Satoshi made  bitcoin resistant to change by design.   That, combined with the facts that he snuck this 1M change into a release without telling anyone and that he left without providing any sort of warning about it or, upgrade advice, to me is counterevidence that he at least had a pretty good idea it would stick around, or should have.

edit: here is the satoshi quote. context is talking about the rationale for the script language.

Perhaps a fork is inevitable.

Any way you slice it, it would be extremely unlikely that a 3 TPS cryptocurrency could remain dominant in the long run.

I'd make a fool of satoshi.

Im paraphrasing his ideal money paper btw sorry you cant pick it up.
If anonymint was ever good for anything around here for this kind of stuff its probably this.. id trust his judgement on the subject

if anyone is wondering, this is blah non-sense.

Governments are probably going for some sdr backed fiat currency since us and eu are colloborating and backing it..the market may be forced to use less than ideal money but it may take a few decades for market to finally breakthrough as people are generally resistant to change.. esp those that have the most money.. if it threatens their business models they will go down foghting unless their peers switch over in which case we might see a seamless transition.. however i do expect some sdr backed currency first

Where is the example?

WHO HAS DONE THEIR HOMEWORK?

What are the other fucking possibilities that take the power from central banking like nash described?  That are international e-currencies with a stable supply with a halving inflation rate?

Give me ONE example.

No. What evidence has been provided that 'Bitcoin is the 'other alternative'?

FYP. grats for paying attention.  Nash hid his meaning.

get fucked.

I agree that this seems a pretty good summary of the thread. I question whether any evidence has been presented that supports assertion number two. And of course if (2) ends up being false, the parentheticals in (4) and (5) would need removal.

Your question is what are the RELEVANT difference between bitcoin and gold. and nash outlined them.

No arguments there, friend.  I'm not arguing against OP, just trying to understand it all.  This is the most interesting topic I think I have ever seen on BCT

no.  give this up.  we don't measure things in bananas.

franky1:  Your very interesting idea sounds very difficult to implement.

xyzzy099:  The interesting thing about the idea being presented here is that it is extremely easy to implement - simply leave the block size alone and see what happens.

You certainly don't need to sell me on the idea that Bitcoin is in many ways superior to gold

What you suggest is certainly possible, I'm just not sure there are any fingers in the trap just yet.  I hope (as you suggest above) that the bait  is sufficient this time

forget stalling/halting its tx/s ... that wont affect fiat.

how about something revolutionary...
we stop basing bitcoin on the Dollar value.

wait. dont through my post aside read on.

imagine we measure bitcoin against COST OF LIVING. (minimum wage hours for instance)

and make it so right now its ~160 hours (equivalent of ~$1200 now) so no real big disaster change.
then slowly let the fiat markets realise:

160 cuban hours or 160 nigerian hours come at different fiat value.
thus let the fiat markets arbitrage each other until cuba nigeria, ukrain, (180+ countries) duke it out arbitrarily until it forces fiat of all countries to even out to each other. where peoples living costs and value of labour and life all stabilise...

that alone would change fiat markets perception of bitcoin more than stalling a bitcoin code feature.

xyzzy099: I think the fact that Bitcoin is not physical, can be pretty easily owned, can be bought and sold with little friction, can be electronically transferred, has an abolute cap in quantity, etc. - all the things we know and love about it that make it so much better than physical gold - are the reasons it has a chance to persuade the fiat markets where physical gold has failed.