Simple Solution to S.Dice spam - page 2.

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: mccorvic on March 08, 2013, 11:48:09 AM

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:45:30 AM

Quote from: misterbigg on March 08, 2013, 11:40:02 AM

The worst part about Litecoin is not it's pointless technical differences but that it is essentially a ponzi scheme: Doomed to collapse, and rewards early adopters (who know it will fail). This explains why Litecoin fetishists are absolutely the most vocal segment of the board in promoting their alternate "cryptocurrency."

You realize what you said is actually more accurate describe Bitcoin? There's nearly no early Adopters in Litecoin, mining power was significant from day one, coin value has been quite stable from the start.

While you're right that this is what people said about BTC, I do think it applies to LTC much more. The LTC folk got emo-sad they couldn't print their own money anymore so made a new coin to scam...er...encourage people to adopt. Do you think they have any sort of true belief in their idea? Of course not. If LTC picked up at all they'd dump, create a new coin and say "No, we're using this one now. It's so much FASTER!"

No they foresaw a problem and created a possible solution, which is what I just proposed, LTC can easily solve the transaction spam problem that S.Dice is creating for the Bitcoin chain.

misterbigg

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1001

Quote from: mccorvic on March 08, 2013, 11:48:09 AM

...I do think it applies to LTC much more....

It is absolutely amazing to see the level of effort and determination that Litecoin zealots put into pumping their turd.

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: mccorvic on March 08, 2013, 11:41:49 AM

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:38:39 AM

Quote from: mccorvic on March 08, 2013, 11:34:35 AM

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:23:31 AM

Explain?

Sigh. One of (if not the) biggest draw of bitcoin is that the 21million hardcap prevents inflation. Whenever some script kiddie makes their own alt-coin it is a basic attempt to create inflation and devalue other coins. It's not like LTC has any physically unique properties that truly differentiates itself from bitcoin. There's more of them and the confirm "faster", but it's use is exactly the same.

People are smart enough to realize that if any alt-coins actually become worth anything, they'll be playing a losing a game. Why buy bitcoin or anything else if some emo-kid can just make a new fork-coin and devalue what I have over and over?

If you're worried about bitcoin, dump your LTC, buy some real coin and the world will be better for it.

I don't understand the logic, crytocoins is not a zero sum game. What you are saying is there's Apple, Microsoft, IBM on nasdaq, and if we have a new company called Google, we are de-valuing all the other companies. That's a ridiculous logic.

I'm saying it IS a zero sum game. When Microsoft competes against apple, they are producing new products that are better and better that people demand and will continue to consume. Even gold and silver have different physical properties that can be used which differentiate themselves from one another.

LTC does the exact same thing as bitcoin.

First LTC isn't the exact same thing as BTC, there are several significant differences, confirmation time, mining hardware requirement, block size and divisibility.

Second, even things that are exact the same, can become non-zero sum game. Consider USD and EUR, they function exactly the same, fiat money to be used as legal tender, are they a zero sum game? more USD means less EURO? Your logic is still ridiculous.

mccorvic

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:45:30 AM

Quote from: misterbigg on March 08, 2013, 11:40:02 AM

The worst part about Litecoin is not it's pointless technical differences but that it is essentially a ponzi scheme: Doomed to collapse, and rewards early adopters (who know it will fail). This explains why Litecoin fetishists are absolutely the most vocal segment of the board in promoting their alternate "cryptocurrency."

You realize what you said is actually more accurate describe Bitcoin? There's nearly no early Adopters in Litecoin, mining power was significant from day one, coin value has been quite stable from the start.

While you're right that this is what people said about BTC, I do think it applies to LTC much more. The LTC folk got emo-sad they couldn't print their own money anymore so made a new coin to scam...er...encourage people to adopt. Do you think they have any sort of true belief in their idea? Of course not. If LTC picked up at all they'd dump, create a new coin and say "No, we're using this one now. It's so much FASTER!"

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: misterbigg on March 08, 2013, 11:40:02 AM

The worst part about Litecoin is not it's pointless technical differences but that it is essentially a ponzi scheme: Doomed to collapse, and rewards early adopters (who know it will fail). This explains why Litecoin fetishists are absolutely the most vocal segment of the board in promoting their alternate "cryptocurrency."

You realize what you said is actually more accurate describe Bitcoin? There's nearly no early Adopters in Litecoin, mining power was significant from day one, coin value has been quite stable from the start.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: johnyj on March 08, 2013, 11:35:38 AM

But in bitcoin's case, they are connected together, a higher transaction capacity cause centralization and decrease the value of bitcoin

The exact opposite is the case.

Higher transaction capacity means higher transaction fee revenue. If you don't believe this, just look at the data: http://blockchain.info/charts. Anyone who wants to argue that higher limits results in declining fees needs to explain exactly what will cause the observed relationship to reverse.

Higher total transaction fee revenue means more bitcoins for miners to compete for, which means more miners will compete for them. Shortly after Bitcoin reaches the transaction rate of PayPal transaction fees will equal the block reward. It will be like going back to 50 BTC/block as far as miner revenue is concerned. More people are willing to invest the necessary capital to compete for 50 BTC/block than are willing to invest for 25 BTC/block.

mccorvic

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:38:39 AM

Quote from: mccorvic on March 08, 2013, 11:34:35 AM

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:23:31 AM

Explain?

Sigh. One of (if not the) biggest draw of bitcoin is that the 21million hardcap prevents inflation. Whenever some script kiddie makes their own alt-coin it is a basic attempt to create inflation and devalue other coins. It's not like LTC has any physically unique properties that truly differentiates itself from bitcoin. There's more of them and the confirm "faster", but it's use is exactly the same.

People are smart enough to realize that if any alt-coins actually become worth anything, they'll be playing a losing a game. Why buy bitcoin or anything else if some emo-kid can just make a new fork-coin and devalue what I have over and over?

If you're worried about bitcoin, dump your LTC, buy some real coin and the world will be better for it.

I don't understand the logic, crytocoins is not a zero sum game. What you are saying is there's Apple, Microsoft, IBM on nasdaq, and if we have a new company called Google, we are de-valuing all the other companies. That's a ridiculous logic.

I'm saying it IS a zero sum game. When Microsoft competes against apple, they are producing new products that are better and better that people demand and will continue to consume. Even gold and silver have different physical properties that can be used which differentiate themselves from one another.

LTC does the exact same thing as bitcoin.

misterbigg

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1001

Quote from: johnyj on March 08, 2013, 11:40:53 AM

Do you understand that when you increase the hard block size limit, you create another 21M of bitcoin?

/facepalm

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

Quote from: conv3rsion on March 08, 2013, 11:33:13 AM

Increasing the block size increases the maximum number of transactions that Bitcoin can support, which increases the amount of economic activity that can be conducted in bitcoins, which increases the value of a bitcoin. Increasing the 21M limit decreases the value of a bitcoin. One decision helps Bitcoin, the other undermines it. All "forks" are not equal.

Do you understand that when you increase the hard block size limit, you create another 21M of bitcoin?

misterbigg

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1001

The worst part about Litecoin is not it's pointless technical differences but that it is essentially a ponzi scheme: Doomed to collapse, and rewards early adopters (who know it will fail). This explains why Litecoin fetishists are absolutely the most vocal segment of the board in promoting their alternate "cryptocurrency."

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: mccorvic on March 08, 2013, 11:34:35 AM

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:23:31 AM

Explain?

Sigh. One of (if not the) biggest draw of bitcoin is that the 21million hardcap prevents inflation. Whenever some script kiddie makes their own alt-coin it is a basic attempt to create inflation and devalue other coins. It's not like LTC has any physically unique properties that truly differentiates itself from bitcoin. There's more of them and the confirm "faster", but it's use is exactly the same.

People are smart enough to realize that if any alt-coins actually become worth anything, they'll be playing a losing a game. Why buy bitcoin or anything else if some emo-kid can just make a new fork-coin and devalue what I have over and over?

If you're worried about bitcoin, dump your LTC, buy some real coin and the world will be better for it.

I don't understand the logic, crytocoins is not a zero sum game. What you are saying is there's Apple, Microsoft, IBM etc.. on nasdaq, and if we have a new company called Google, we are de-valuing all the other companies. That's a ridiculous logic.

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

Quote from: justusranvier on March 08, 2013, 11:24:42 AM

Quote from: johnyj on March 08, 2013, 11:20:05 AM

You should also abolish the 21 million coin limit, so that you can get more coin Wink

Transaction processing is a service whose value is proportional to it's speed, low cost, and Metcalfe's law.

Bitcoins are virtual objects whose value is depends on the inability of any entity to create more of them arbitrarily.

From transaction service sector point of view, what you said is true, because they do not need to worry about the value of currency it transfer

But in bitcoin's case, they are connected together, a higher transaction capacity cause centralization and decrease the value of bitcoin

mccorvic

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:23:31 AM

Explain?

Sigh. One of (if not the) biggest draw of bitcoin is that the 21million hardcap prevents inflation. Whenever some script kiddie makes their own alt-coin it is a basic attempt to create inflation and devalue other coins. It's not like LTC has any physically unique properties that truly differentiates itself from bitcoin. There's more of them and the confirm "faster", but it's use is exactly the same.

People are smart enough to realize that if any alt-coins actually become worth anything, they'll be playing a losing a game. Why buy bitcoin or anything else if some emo-kid can just make a new fork-coin and devalue what I have over and over?

If you're worried about bitcoin, dump your LTC, buy some real coin and the world will be better for it.

conv3rsion

sr. member

Activity: 310

Merit: 250

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:25:30 AM

Quote from: justusranvier on March 08, 2013, 11:24:42 AM

Quote from: johnyj on March 08, 2013, 11:20:05 AM

You should also abolish the 21 million coin limit, so that you can get more coin Wink

Transaction processing is a service whose value is proportional to it's speed, low cost, and Metcalfe's law.

Bitcoins are virtual objects whose value is depends on the inability of any entity to create more of them arbitrarily.

You can create more Bitcoin with a hard fork, just like you can increase the block size limit with a hard fork. Once a hard fork happens in Bitcoin, I'm out, there's no guarantee Bitcoin's 21M limit won't be lifted with another hard fork.

So why wouldn't you wait until the 21M limit fork was proposed to leave?

Let me make it really simple for you. Increasing the block size increases the maximum number of transactions that Bitcoin can support, which increases the amount of economic activity that can be conducted in bitcoins, which increases the value of a bitcoin. Increasing the 21M limit decreases the value of a bitcoin. One decision helps Bitcoin, the other undermines it. All "forks" are not equal.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:25:30 AM

You can create more Bitcoin with a hard fork, just like you can increase the block size limit with a hard fork. Once a hard fork happens in Bitcoin, I'm out, there's no guarantee Bitcoin's 21M limit won't be lifted with another hard fork.

You can call it a hard fork, or you can call it a mandatory upgrade version 3 blocks.

Either way I'm not worried about it because:

1) It's an upgrade that was discussed as eventually being necessary literally from the beginning so I don't consider it to be a change to the nature of Bitcoin.

2) Far more people will go along with a change that increases the value of the network than a change that destroys it. A majority of users who are willing to change the 21M limit is indistinguishable from a 51% attack, so in that case Bitcoin is doomed regardless of whether we change the transaction limit or not.

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: justusranvier on March 08, 2013, 11:24:42 AM

Quote from: johnyj on March 08, 2013, 11:20:05 AM

You should also abolish the 21 million coin limit, so that you can get more coin Wink

Transaction processing is a service whose value is proportional to it's speed, low cost, and Metcalfe's law.

Bitcoins are virtual objects whose value is depends on the inability of any entity to create more of them arbitrarily.

You can create more Bitcoin with a hard fork, just like you can increase the block size limit with a hard fork. Once a hard fork happens in Bitcoin, I'm out, there's no guarantee Bitcoin's 21M limit won't be lifted with another hard fork.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: johnyj on March 08, 2013, 11:20:05 AM

You should also abolish the 21 million coin limit, so that you can get more coin Wink

Transaction processing is a service whose value is proportional to it's speed, low cost, and Metcalfe's law.

Bitcoins are virtual objects whose value is depends on the inability of any entity to create more of them arbitrarily.

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: mccorvic on March 08, 2013, 11:22:55 AM

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:21:44 AM

Quote from: WiW on March 08, 2013, 11:15:54 AM

Enough with these threads. There is no spam. The network is super healthy. SDice is using something cheap and they're paying for it. Delete these threads!

You don't get to pick who uses bitcoin for what. If you don't like it, go print your own fiat and regulate it however you want. If you don't trust the design of bitcoin to sort this stuff out then don't use bitcoin.

I don't like how YOU use bitcoins but nobody gives a shit.

Also, abolish the dumb max block size limit and the "problem" is solved.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/max-block-size-limit-why-im-not-worried-about-miner-centralization-or-attacks-149745

That's a bad idea, creating a hard fork is bad for the confidence of Bitcoin. So we hard fork the coin now to increase the block size, what's next? hard fork the coin to increase the 21M coin limit?

LTC undermines cryto-currency in its entirety, so obviously you don't care to much about that.

Explain?

mccorvic

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: kokojie on March 08, 2013, 11:21:44 AM

Quote from: WiW on March 08, 2013, 11:15:54 AM

Enough with these threads. There is no spam. The network is super healthy. SDice is using something cheap and they're paying for it. Delete these threads!

You don't get to pick who uses bitcoin for what. If you don't like it, go print your own fiat and regulate it however you want. If you don't trust the design of bitcoin to sort this stuff out then don't use bitcoin.

I don't like how YOU use bitcoins but nobody gives a shit.

Also, abolish the dumb max block size limit and the "problem" is solved.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/max-block-size-limit-why-im-not-worried-about-miner-centralization-or-attacks-149745

That's a bad idea, creating a hard fork is bad for the confidence of Bitcoin. So we hard fork the coin now to increase the block size, what's next? hard fork the coin to increase the 21M coin limit?

LTC undermines cryto-currency in its entirety, so obviously you don't care to much about that.

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: WiW on March 08, 2013, 11:15:54 AM

Enough with these threads. There is no spam. The network is super healthy. SDice is using something cheap and they're paying for it. Delete these threads!

You don't get to pick who uses bitcoin for what. If you don't like it, go print your own fiat and regulate it however you want. If you don't trust the design of bitcoin to sort this stuff out then don't use bitcoin.

I don't like how YOU use bitcoins but nobody gives a shit.

Also, abolish the dumb max block size limit and the "problem" is solved.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/max-block-size-limit-why-im-not-worried-about-miner-centralization-or-attacks-149745

That's a bad idea, creating a hard fork is bad for the confidence of Bitcoin. So we hard fork the coin now to increase the block size, what's next? hard fork the coin to increase the 21M coin limit?

There is actually also a simple solution for the block size limit. Use LTC for daily transactions, like I proposed, a "LTC mode" on S.Dice, and everywhere else. LTC can handle 4X more transactions than BTC. BTC can be used as a reserve currency, while LTC used as a transactional currency.

Topic: Simple Solution to S.Dice spam - page 2. (Read 2388 times)