Pages:
Author

Topic: Some cryptocurrency questions for dinofelis. - page 2. (Read 447 times)

member
Activity: 210
Merit: 26
High fees = low BTC price
February 03, 2018, 02:13:02 PM
#2
Quote
Yes but it is a brilliant coin issuance and distribution system. Was that not the real purpose of the mining incentives aside from "keeping the miners honest"?

We don't need mining in the first place never mind CPU-Wars and I would say that PoS is better than PoW but it does come with problem too
and I would use that word "Trust" that gets established but I am sure someone would come along and beat me up for swearing.

I mean one broadcast results in 20,000 nodes trying to agree on whats said and then putting a finger in the air to try and guess quite what the next block
will look like as they all try to stay in sync with each other.

it is not a brilliant system by any means, it's slow, it's costly to run and is 1st generation with none of the new coins taking
much from it at all  and they can present a public ledger without budging it by going "off-block" and having a number of single points
of failure as is the case with Lightning banking hubs.

ETH with the concept of "Smart Contracts" brought more to Crypto-World than hashing data and linking it to the next
block in the chain in what is really just a read only supped up version of something called a linked list

What gets up my nose is they run out of resources and then up the transaction fees as if they didn't know from day one
that bitcoin would not scale so what we have today is nothing like the original vision of just being an experiment to play with
and coins not being worth a dime.

 
legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
February 03, 2018, 04:31:45 AM
#1
This was taken from another thread but I believe it is better to discuss them here to avoid being off topic in the original thread.

I am trying to find out what is your stance in the "scaling debate", though I am too lazy to read all your past posts. But are you for bigger blocks? If yes, then what is your opinion on Bitcoin Cash? Is it good enough or can it be better?

I could give you a simplistic answer, but it wouldn't be the right answer.  The simplistic answer is: yes, of course bigger blocks.  However, I think that a single question, like, "are you for bigger blocks" misses entirely the point, simply because everything influences everything.  That's like asking a doctor "are you for or against chemotherapy".

Thanks for your honesty. I also have some questions on the following.

Quote
I think bitcoin has fundamental design issues on the deepest conceptual level, that far overshadow the simple question of "bigger blocks".  I think bitcoin is fundamentally broken on the following points:

- the PoW consensus mechanism that is too wasteful and leads to centralization of power, even though it is a very good consensus (no dispute) mechanism, it doesn't provide the other desired factors, on the contrary.

But what would be a good PoW replacement for you? Proof of Stake? There is also Proof of Capacity, also called Proof of Space, which I heard from d5000. PoC does look more energy efficient but it is not without its "centralization problems".  

Quote
- the fact that the consensus mechanism is remunerated (which, in itself, is necessary for PoW), which gives rise to a lot of game-theoretical issues and is the motor of centralization, by "economies of scale".

Yes but it is a brilliant coin issuance and distribution system. Was that not the real purpose of the mining incentives aside from "keeping the miners honest"?

Quote
- bitcoin's coin emission curve, which links erroneous monetary theory, market speculation, crazy power consumption and security in one big clusterfuck

This would make one good topic with it own thread. There is to much to discuss.

Quote
- bitcoin's lack of anonymity and hence lack of fungibility

What is your opinion on Monero? Would that make a better "Bitcoin"?
Pages:
Jump to: