You don't know what a strawman is. Let's just end this. You win. I will ignore you also.
Bold statement again. It's sad that you'll never reply on https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9955204...
Topic: Proof of stake mining of bicoin - page 14. (Read 25670 times)
Bold statement again. It's sad that you'll never reply on https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9955204...
IMO, it would be better to just switch to a new POS coin. There would be too many problems with miners and early adopters interest in order to make that kind of change in bitcoin. They probably won't allow the change, until it would be late.
You overlook an obvious thing:
Transaction fee will increase to compensate subsidy decline. One way or another Bitcoin holders will be paying tithing for burned electricity. The only alternarive is to stop sending transactions but in this case the transaction fees will just go higher.
Indeed. And if fees don't go higher there won't be enough security in order to protect bitcoin.
The only thing I know for sure is bitcoin mining is doomed for the longterm. It's way too inefficient, old fashioned and tends to centralization. It was ok as a first step or an experiment, but not for a real economy or to go really far.
Bitcoin will have 6 % inflation in 2016, 5% inflation in 2017, 3% inflation in 2019, and 0.5% inflation in 2026
You overlook an obvious thing:
Transaction fee will increase to compensate subsidy decline. One way or another Bitcoin holders will be paying tithing for burned electricity. The only alternarive is to stop sending transactions but in this case the transaction fees will just go higher.
Indeed. And if fees don't go higher there won't be enough security in order to protect bitcoin.
The only thing I know for sure is bitcoin mining is doomed for the longterm. It's way too inefficient, old fashioned and tends to centralization. It was ok as a first step or an experiment, but not for a real economy or to go really far.
This is mostly true and why I am a big fan of PoS coins. I think every Central Bank should have one.
Good boy.
NB:
Don't give up, man. You haven't used all your tricks yet. Try strawman tactics, for example. 
Bitcoin will have 6 % inflation in 2016, 5% inflation in 2017, 3% inflation in 2019, and 0.5% inflation in 2026
You overlook an obvious thing:
Transaction fee will increase to compensate subsidy decline. One way or another Bitcoin holders will be paying tithing for burned electricity. The only alternarive is to stop sending transactions but in this case the transaction fees will just go higher.
Ohh goodness, they really should bring back the rule of sand boxing newbie accounts . You are ignored my friend.
You shouldn't have said this. Basically your phrase means "You won because I'm out of counterarguments."
This is mostly true and why I am a big fan of PoS coins. I think every Central Bank should have one.
Good boy.
NB:
Don't give up, man. You haven't used all your tricks yet. Try strawman tactics, for example.
No. The supply was fixed in 2009.
You misplaced plans and their realization.
I mean that you play with words. "Supply was fixed in 2009" doesn't make much sense. It's plans, the real supply of Bitcoin is very far from being fixed.
Quote
This is mostly true and why I am a big fan of PoS coins. I think every Central Bank should have one.
This may well be my favourite quote of the entire year.
No one will attack PoS coins, it cost nothing to make, it does not have any value, why attack it?
A successful attack on Nxt would give you 50'000 USD reward. Still too low for you to bother?
if the PoS system is indeed viable and superior
as some claim, we should see it start to gobble up market share...right?
as some claim, we should see it start to gobble up market share...right?
This is what we see now, share of PoS coins keeps growing.
I'm proposing to really fork bitcoin to create a bitcoinPOS.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/lets-fork-bitcoin-to-bitcoin-pos-906176
The reason? Annoyance.
I look forward to next week's thread on POS vs. POW in which most of the same people write most of the same things.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/lets-fork-bitcoin-to-bitcoin-pos-906176
The reason? Annoyance.
I look forward to next week's thread on POS vs. POW in which most of the same people write most of the same things.
You clearly didn't understand what i was trying to say.
POW is not stable with low or 0% inflation and the entire cost of network security pushed on those who make transactions,it simply cannot work properly.
POW is not stable with low or 0% inflation and the entire cost of network security pushed on those who make transactions,it simply cannot work properly.
I understand you, just think you are making up facts and speculating.
Where is your evidence that Bitcoin cannot pay for security with low inflation and high transaction volume?
This is wrong i think.
Imagine you have two coins only.
Coin A is POW, it is 10 years old, it has 100 billion market cap, it has 5% inflation, it costs 1 billion to attack it and every merchant on earth accepts it.
Coin B is POS, it is 5 years old, it has 1 billion market cap, it has 0% inflation, it costs 1 billion to attack it and no merchant accepts it.
You can switch from one coin to the other one for free or very very cheaply.
In this scenario every rational investor would chose to have most of his savings in coin B and he would switch to coin A only when he needs to spend.
As time goes by almost everyone moves from coin A to coin B, coin B market cap grows to 1 billion, coin A is abandoned and merchants forget about coin A and start to accept coin B only.
Network effect might not be enough to save bitcoin.
Bitcoin will have 6 % inflation in 2016, 5% inflation in 2017, 3% inflation in 2019, and 0.5% inflation in 2026Imagine you have two coins only.
Coin A is POW, it is 10 years old, it has 100 billion market cap, it has 5% inflation, it costs 1 billion to attack it and every merchant on earth accepts it.
Coin B is POS, it is 5 years old, it has 1 billion market cap, it has 0% inflation, it costs 1 billion to attack it and no merchant accepts it.
You can switch from one coin to the other one for free or very very cheaply.
In this scenario every rational investor would chose to have most of his savings in coin B and he would switch to coin A only when he needs to spend.
As time goes by almost everyone moves from coin A to coin B, coin B market cap grows to 1 billion, coin A is abandoned and merchants forget about coin A and start to accept coin B only.
Network effect might not be enough to save bitcoin.
Well there certainly is a race a foot and we will see if other alts can play catchup when Bitcoin is slowly switching from mining hashes to secure the network to mining transactions to secure the network.
You clearly didn't understand what i was trying to say.
POW is not stable with low or 0% inflation and the entire cost of network security pushed on those who make transactions, it simply cannot work properly.
For a POW coin to be stable and reliable cost to attack must be proportional to market cap and it must be paid by stakeholders via a constant inflation.
They already own Bitcoin. Why not PoS coins too?
Ohh goodness, they really should bring back the rule of sand boxing newbie accounts . You are ignored my friend.
This is wrong i think.
Imagine you have two coins only.
Coin A is POW, it is 10 years old, it has 100 billion market cap, it has 5% inflation, it costs 1 billion to attack it and every merchant on earth accepts it.
Coin B is POS, it is 5 years old, it has 1 billion market cap, it has 0% inflation, it costs 1 billion to attack it and no merchant accepts it.
You can switch from one coin to the other one for free or very very cheaply.
In this scenario every rational investor would chose to have most of his savings in coin B and he would switch to coin A only when he needs to spend.
As time goes by almost everyone moves from coin A to coin B, coin B market cap grows to 1 billion, coin A is abandoned and merchants forget about coin A and start to accept coin B only.
Network effect might not be enough to save bitcoin.
Imagine you have two coins only.
Coin A is POW, it is 10 years old, it has 100 billion market cap, it has 5% inflation, it costs 1 billion to attack it and every merchant on earth accepts it.
Coin B is POS, it is 5 years old, it has 1 billion market cap, it has 0% inflation, it costs 1 billion to attack it and no merchant accepts it.
You can switch from one coin to the other one for free or very very cheaply.
In this scenario every rational investor would chose to have most of his savings in coin B and he would switch to coin A only when he needs to spend.
As time goes by almost everyone moves from coin A to coin B, coin B market cap grows to 1 billion, coin A is abandoned and merchants forget about coin A and start to accept coin B only.
Network effect might not be enough to save bitcoin.
Bitcoin will have 6 % inflation in 2016, 5% inflation in 2017, 3% inflation in 2019, and 0.5% inflation in 2026
Well there certainly is a race a foot and we will see if other alts can play catchup when Bitcoin is slowly switching from mining hashes to secure the network to mining transactions to secure the network.
PoS coins have value because the marketplace dictates so based upon both utility and speculation.
This is mostly true and why I am a big fan of PoS coins. I think every Central Bank should have one.Fiat really is an archaic form of PoS. Centralization also has advantages over decentralization. Decentralization is very costly and inefficient.
How is PoS a form of fiat? The government tells me that I have to use NXT and assigns a value to it?
Decentralization is only "costly and inefficient" in the constructs of PoW.
They already own Bitcoin. Why not PoS coins too?
Ohh goodness, they really should bring back the rule of sand boxing newbie accounts . You are ignored my friend.
Uh Oh... I spoke the unspeakable truth.
PoS coins have value because the marketplace dictates so based upon both utility and speculation.
This is mostly true and why I am a big fan of PoS coins. I think every Central Bank should have one.Fiat really is an archaic form of PoS. Centralization also has advantages over decentralization. Decentralization is very costly and inefficient.
They already own Bitcoin. Why not PoS coins too?
Ohh goodness, they really should bring back the rule of sand boxing newbie accounts . You are ignored my friend.
No, I believe that PoW is equal to PoS if we measure all pros and cons. PoW or PoS is just a matter of trade-offs.
Unfortunately(from a perspective of curiosity), since Bitcoin has such a large lead and a much better network effect we are unlikely to see an fair battle between the two as history has shown that technologies must have a significant competitive
advantage to be able topple the established incumbent with such a sizable lead.
I am not suggesting PoS is slightly superior either but merely the fact that any alt has to be shown to be significantly superior to Bitcoin in order to catchup.
This is wrong i think.
Imagine you have two coins only.
Coin A is POW, it is 10 years old, it has 100 billion market cap, it has 5% inflation, it costs 1 billion to attack it and every merchant on earth accepts it.
Coin B is POS, it is 5 years old, it has 1 billion market cap, it has 0% inflation, it costs 1 billion to attack it and no merchant accepts it.
You can switch from one coin to the other one for free or very very cheaply.
In this scenario every rational investor would chose to have most of his savings in coin B and he would switch to coin A only when he needs to spend.
As time goes by almost everyone moves from coin A to coin B, coin B market cap grows to 100 billion, coin A is slowly abandoned, merchants forget about it and start to accept coin B only.
This is why i thin the coin that will win the crypto race is the coin which provides the strongest network at the lowest cost.
Network effect might not be enough to save bitcoin.
No. The supply was fixed in 2009.
You misplaced plans and their realization.
The price of BTC reflects the current float not the anticipated max 21 million Bitcoin limit.
PoS coins have value because the marketplace dictates so based upon both utility and speculation.
This is mostly true and why I am a big fan of PoS coins. I think every Central Bank should have one.They already own Bitcoin. Why not PoS coins too?
Jump to: