the 1MB limit will centralize bitcoin

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: PolarPoint on September 11, 2015, 08:43:26 PM

I don't have a crystal ball. I can't tell you how successful bitcoin sidechains/payment channels will be, but I can imagine some future users will forego transactions on the mainchain for a cheap and fast sidechain solution. They would have to trust a 3rd party, and they would be willing to do that for a chargeback option. These channels can co-exist with the mainchain.

to really scale bitcoin to be usable by billions and keep it decentralized we are going to need to pull on EVERYTHING we can do. we need every solution implemented simultaneously.

bigger blocks
optimized block propagation
sidechains
payment channels
interconnected 3rd party wallets ( with proof of solvency )
Everything!

PolarPoint

hero member

Activity: 672

Merit: 500

I don't have a crystal ball. I can't tell you how successful bitcoin sidechains/payment channels will be, but I can imagine some future users will forego transactions on the mainchain for a cheap and fast sidechain solution. They would have to trust a 3rd party, and they would be willing to do that for a chargeback option. These channels can co-exist with the mainchain.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: ?? on ??

it wont stop there
forking for big blocks this is just a test
they want me convincing all you diehard fans to let them double supply in the midst of the next bubble around this time next year.

You're laughing but that's what's awaiting anyone stupid enough to get on the XT train. That and "assurance contracts", "black/redlists", rich tax, etc, etc.

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 05:06:33 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 05:06:02 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 05:01:21 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:46:21 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 04:21:00 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:19:01 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:47:29 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

That's a lot of if Cheesy

Let's say Bitcoin fee go up

And people start using payment channels and other services for small payments. It already leverages Bitcoin's security and trustlessness. I gets more support hence more liquidity.

See I can also pull a completely fabricated scenario out of my ass but it really isn't productive

payment channels might work, but it has to be as easy and secure as bitcoin.

i'm very bearish as to payment channels being able to deliver.

i have a feeling its this massive complex story, i hear them talk about it, and they bring up possible scenarios about BOB losing all his money and then talk about mitigating that risk and i can't help but think this is no a good solution

For what reasons? (other than of course it would make all your attempts at bloating the blockchain look a bit stupid)

I can't help but think you insist on sharing opinions about things you obviously don't understand. This is not productive and you should stop.

i told you why i'm bearish, using payment channels sounds complex as fuck and there is talk of mitigating risk is some cases.

this is nuts... https://youtu.be/fBS_ieDwQ9k?t=26m49s

multi sig
refund TX
bla bla bla sign here here here and here ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNND its gone!
bob and alis need a masters degree in crypto to use the payment channel properly
and at the end of the day it still makes a fucking TX on the blockchain.
this is insane.

Yes it does sound insane because you are an impressionable noob who is seemingly oblivious to the way technology progress.

Don't worry, much more intelligent people will make it trivial to use and abstract all that complexity for you. You just have to be patient

*Satoshi introduces Bitcoin*
*Adam: that's insane, bob and alis need a masters degree in crypto to use Bitcoin properly*
*Satoshi: you're right, let's scrap the whole thing*

I hope so but i'm not optimistic

That's unlike you. Sounds to me like you're pushing an agenda. Who paid you ? Angry

the NSA, your fuck man bitcoin WILL have bigger blocks the illuminati will make sure of that.
i'm just one small part of there master plan to fork the shit out of bitcoin

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 05:06:02 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 05:01:21 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:46:21 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 04:21:00 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:19:01 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:47:29 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

That's a lot of if Cheesy

Let's say Bitcoin fee go up

And people start using payment channels and other services for small payments. It already leverages Bitcoin's security and trustlessness. I gets more support hence more liquidity.

See I can also pull a completely fabricated scenario out of my ass but it really isn't productive

payment channels might work, but it has to be as easy and secure as bitcoin.

i'm very bearish as to payment channels being able to deliver.

i have a feeling its this massive complex story, i hear them talk about it, and they bring up possible scenarios about BOB losing all his money and then talk about mitigating that risk and i can't help but think this is no a good solution

For what reasons? (other than of course it would make all your attempts at bloating the blockchain look a bit stupid)

I can't help but think you insist on sharing opinions about things you obviously don't understand. This is not productive and you should stop.

i told you why i'm bearish, using payment channels sounds complex as fuck and there is talk of mitigating risk is some cases.

this is nuts... https://youtu.be/fBS_ieDwQ9k?t=26m49s

multi sig
refund TX
bla bla bla sign here here here and here ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNND its gone!
bob and alis need a masters degree in crypto to use the payment channel properly
and at the end of the day it still makes a fucking TX on the blockchain.
this is insane.

Yes it does sound insane because you are an impressionable noob who is seemingly oblivious to the way technology progress.

Don't worry, much more intelligent people will make it trivial to use and abstract all that complexity for you. You just have to be patient

*Satoshi introduces Bitcoin*
*Adam: that's insane, bob and alis need a masters degree in crypto to use Bitcoin properly*
*Satoshi: you're right, let's scrap the whole thing*

I hope so but i'm not optimistic

That's unlike you. Sounds to me like you're pushing an agenda. Who paid you ? Angry

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 05:01:21 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:46:21 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 04:21:00 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:19:01 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:47:29 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

That's a lot of if Cheesy

Let's say Bitcoin fee go up

And people start using payment channels and other services for small payments. It already leverages Bitcoin's security and trustlessness. I gets more support hence more liquidity.

See I can also pull a completely fabricated scenario out of my ass but it really isn't productive

payment channels might work, but it has to be as easy and secure as bitcoin.

i'm very bearish as to payment channels being able to deliver.

i have a feeling its this massive complex story, i hear them talk about it, and they bring up possible scenarios about BOB losing all his money and then talk about mitigating that risk and i can't help but think this is no a good solution

For what reasons? (other than of course it would make all your attempts at bloating the blockchain look a bit stupid)

I can't help but think you insist on sharing opinions about things you obviously don't understand. This is not productive and you should stop.

i told you why i'm bearish, using payment channels sounds complex as fuck and there is talk of mitigating risk is some cases.

this is nuts... https://youtu.be/fBS_ieDwQ9k?t=26m49s

multi sig
refund TX
bla bla bla sign here here here and here ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNND its gone!
bob and alis need a masters degree in crypto to use the payment channel properly
and at the end of the day it still makes a fucking TX on the blockchain.
this is insane.

Yes it does sound insane because you are an impressionable noob who is seemingly oblivious to the way technology progress.

Don't worry, much more intelligent people will make it trivial to use and abstract all that complexity for you. You just have to be patient

*Satoshi introduces Bitcoin*
*Adam: that's insane, bob and alis need a masters degree in crypto to use Bitcoin properly*
*Satoshi: you're right, let's scrap the whole thing*

I hope so but i'm not optimistic

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:46:21 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 04:21:00 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:19:01 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:47:29 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

That's a lot of if Cheesy

Let's say Bitcoin fee go up

And people start using payment channels and other services for small payments. It already leverages Bitcoin's security and trustlessness. I gets more support hence more liquidity.

See I can also pull a completely fabricated scenario out of my ass but it really isn't productive

payment channels might work, but it has to be as easy and secure as bitcoin.

i'm very bearish as to payment channels being able to deliver.

i have a feeling its this massive complex story, i hear them talk about it, and they bring up possible scenarios about BOB losing all his money and then talk about mitigating that risk and i can't help but think this is no a good solution

For what reasons? (other than of course it would make all your attempts at bloating the blockchain look a bit stupid)

I can't help but think you insist on sharing opinions about things you obviously don't understand. This is not productive and you should stop.

i told you why i'm bearish, using payment channels sounds complex as fuck and there is talk of mitigating risk is some cases.

this is nuts... https://youtu.be/fBS_ieDwQ9k?t=26m49s

multi sig
refund TX
bla bla bla sign here here here and here ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNND its gone!
bob and alis need a masters degree in crypto to use the payment channel properly
and at the end of the day it still makes a fucking TX on the blockchain.
this is insane.

Yes it does sound insane because you are an impressionable noob who is seemingly oblivious to the way technology progresses.

Don't worry, much more intelligent people will make it trivial to use and abstract all that complexity for you. You just have to be patient

*Satoshi introduces Bitcoin*
*Adam: that's insane, bob and alis need a masters degree in crypto to use Bitcoin properly*
*Satoshi: you're right, let's scrap the whole thing*

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 04:21:00 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:19:01 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:47:29 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

That's a lot of if Cheesy

Let's say Bitcoin fee go up

And people start using payment channels and other services for small payments. It already leverages Bitcoin's security and trustlessness. I gets more support hence more liquidity.

See I can also pull a completely fabricated scenario out of my ass but it really isn't productive

payment channels might work, but it has to be as easy and secure as bitcoin.

i'm very bearish as to payment channels being able to deliver.

i have a feeling its this massive complex story, i hear them talk about it, and they bring up possible scenarios about BOB losing all his money and then talk about mitigating that risk and i can't help but think this is no a good solution

For what reasons? (other than of course it would make all your attempts at bloating the blockchain look a bit stupid)

I can't help but think you insist on sharing opinions about things you obviously don't understand. This is not productive and you should stop.

i told you why i'm bearish, using payment channels sounds complex as fuck and there is talk of mitigating risk is some cases.

this is nuts... https://youtu.be/fBS_ieDwQ9k?t=26m49s

multi sig
refund TX
bla bla bla sign here here here and here ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNND its gone!
bob and alis need a masters degree in crypto to use the payment channel properly
and at the end of the day it still makes a fucking TX on the blockchain.
this is insane.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: mallard on September 11, 2015, 04:21:24 PM

Quote from: GreydonIselmoe on September 10, 2015, 01:12:21 PM

Quote from: CIYAM on September 10, 2015, 01:00:37 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

That sounds very inconvenient for merchants and confusing for customers.

Bitcoin needs to be easier to use. As one of the Winklevoss twins said: people shouldn't have to deal with Bitcoin addresses.

Well actually it would be much simpler if you had an app that let you spend your Starbucks credits when you go to that store (with no need for a Bitcoin address to do so). As a payment system Bitcoin *sucks* as it is much easier to use virtually any other existing payment system (why people have got so enthused about Bitcoin as a payment system is actually beyond me).

If you find Bitcoin too hard to use then you use a fiat exchange to get your credits - so those that don't want to see a Bitcoin address don't need to and actually most likely don't want to use Bitcoin at all (all they want is a coffee).

Also trying to shove every single tx in the world into the blockchain is just plain stupid (and doesn't actually make things easier as it will just overload the network to the point you'd be waiting until your coffee got cold before the payment was accepted).

Did someone say Starbucks "Credits"? I think having the large businesses using their own coin would be interesting.. would allow a developed sidechain coin like CRE to find a niche!

In terms of bitcoin becoming more centralized, that's just inevitable as large entities see different ways to exploit Bitcoin for profits. Not everyone cares about the future of the coin, many just care about their return on investment.

Ethereum lets people build their own tokens on the network.

Could easily be done with sidechains as well.

mallard

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: GreydonIselmoe on September 10, 2015, 01:12:21 PM

Quote from: CIYAM on September 10, 2015, 01:00:37 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

That sounds very inconvenient for merchants and confusing for customers.

Bitcoin needs to be easier to use. As one of the Winklevoss twins said: people shouldn't have to deal with Bitcoin addresses.

Well actually it would be much simpler if you had an app that let you spend your Starbucks credits when you go to that store (with no need for a Bitcoin address to do so). As a payment system Bitcoin *sucks* as it is much easier to use virtually any other existing payment system (why people have got so enthused about Bitcoin as a payment system is actually beyond me).

If you find Bitcoin too hard to use then you use a fiat exchange to get your credits - so those that don't want to see a Bitcoin address don't need to and actually most likely don't want to use Bitcoin at all (all they want is a coffee).

Also trying to shove every single tx in the world into the blockchain is just plain stupid (and doesn't actually make things easier as it will just overload the network to the point you'd be waiting until your coffee got cold before the payment was accepted).

Did someone say Starbucks "Credits"? I think having the large businesses using their own coin would be interesting.. would allow a developed sidechain coin like CRE to find a niche!

In terms of bitcoin becoming more centralized, that's just inevitable as large entities see different ways to exploit Bitcoin for profits. Not everyone cares about the future of the coin, many just care about their return on investment.

Ethereum lets people build their own tokens on the network.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:19:01 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:47:29 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

That's a lot of if Cheesy

Let's say Bitcoin fee go up

And people start using payment channels and other services for small payments. It already leverages Bitcoin's security and trustlessness. I gets more support hence more liquidity.

See I can also pull a completely fabricated scenario out of my ass but it really isn't productive

payment channels might work, but it has to be as easy and secure as bitcoin.

i'm very bearish as to payment channels being able to deliver.

i have a feeling its this massive complex story, i hear them talk about it, and they bring up possible scenarios about BOB losing all his money and then talk about mitigating that risk and i can't help but think this is no a good solution

For what reasons? (other than of course it would make all your attempts at bloating the blockchain look a bit stupid)

I can't help but think you insist on sharing opinions about things you obviously don't understand. This is not productive and you should stop.

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:47:29 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

That's a lot of if Cheesy

Let's say Bitcoin fee go up

And people start using payment channels and other services for small payments. It already leverages Bitcoin's security and trustlessness. I gets more support hence more liquidity.

See I can also pull a completely fabricated scenario out of my ass but it really isn't productive

payment channels might work, but it has to be as easy and secure as bitcoin.

i'm very bearish as to payment channels being able to deliver.

i have a feeling its this massive complex story, i hear them talk about it, and they bring up possible scenarios about BOB losing all his money and then talk about mitigating that risk and i can't help but think this is no a good solution

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 04:13:46 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 04:08:49 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:53:52 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:48:52 PM

Quote from: knight22 on September 11, 2015, 03:43:50 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

Some people don't understand what value proposition means. Security is just being one.

The primary value proposition is security by decentralization.

If you don't agree with that then my I suggest dogecoin? Very cheap. Much spending!

ALL crypto have security by decentralization. dogecoin included.

bitcoin has the most for many reasons

start taking away some of these reasons ( aka low fees ) and see what happens

cryptonic value = decentralization * security * usage / usage_cost;

so be carefull fucking with usage_cost
Cheesy

Capital has not poured into Bitcoin because "low fees". You are mistaken Undecided

Well anyway, Bitcoin vs. Dogecoin, may the best man win. Have you converted your BTCs yet?

that like your opinion man
mirco TX is something bitcoin did better than anyone else
end users don't give a fuck about decentralization they care about costs/usefulness.

Again: wealth all over the world is not restricted so much by usage cost as it is by political friction. Bitcoin removes the latter but makes no promises of staying cheap. That's not a problem because the rich (the ones who owns the resources in the economy) are not deterred by transactions cost.

Bitcoin is not an "app". The "end users" you are thinking of provide little value to an economy. This economy will not be built on the back of adoption by the mainstream herd but by rich people, as is the case with any economy worth talking about.

Stop with this obsession of Bitcoin only being a tool for the common man. Your focus is on the wrong things.

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 04:08:49 PM

Well anyway, Bitcoin vs. Dogecoin, may the best man win. Have you converted your BTCs yet?

its to early to see where this is all going, if i don't like where bitcoin goes i will move somewhere else, yes.

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 04:08:49 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:53:52 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:48:52 PM

Quote from: knight22 on September 11, 2015, 03:43:50 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

Some people don't understand what value proposition means. Security is just being one.

The primary value proposition is security by decentralization.

If you don't agree with that then my I suggest dogecoin? Very cheap. Much spending!

ALL crypto have security by decentralization. dogecoin included.

bitcoin has the most for many reasons

start taking away some of these reasons ( aka low fees ) and see what happens

cryptonic value = decentralization * security * usage / usage_cost;

so be carefull fucking with usage_cost
Cheesy

Capital has not poured into Bitcoin because "low fees". You are mistaken Undecided

Well anyway, Bitcoin vs. Dogecoin, may the best man win. Have you converted your BTCs yet?

Money haven't been poured in because security neither but because it is programmable cash which means HUGE use case potential. Drive the cost of these use cases up and the applications will just migrate to another cheaper and secure system.

You should dig more into this subject which you seem totally unfamiliar ----> http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/market-dynamics.asp

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 04:08:49 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:53:52 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:48:52 PM

Quote from: knight22 on September 11, 2015, 03:43:50 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

Some people don't understand what value proposition means. Security is just being one.

The primary value proposition is security by decentralization.

If you don't agree with that then my I suggest dogecoin? Very cheap. Much spending!

ALL crypto have security by decentralization. dogecoin included.

bitcoin has the most for many reasons

start taking away some of these reasons ( aka low fees ) and see what happens

cryptonic value = decentralization * security * usage / usage_cost;

so be carefull fucking with usage_cost
Cheesy

Capital has not poured into Bitcoin because "low fees". You are mistaken Undecided

Well anyway, Bitcoin vs. Dogecoin, may the best man win. Have you converted your BTCs yet?

that like your opinion man
mirco TX is something bitcoin did better than anyone else
end users don't give a fuck about decentralization they care about costs/usefulness.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:53:52 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:48:52 PM

Quote from: knight22 on September 11, 2015, 03:43:50 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

Some people don't understand what value proposition means. Security is just being one.

The primary value proposition is security by decentralization.

If you don't agree with that then my I suggest dogecoin? Very cheap. Much spending!

ALL crypto have security by decentralization. dogecoin included.

bitcoin has the most for many reasons

start taking away some of these reasons ( aka low fees ) and see what happens

cryptonic value = decentralization * security * usage / usage_cost;

so be carefull fucking with usage_cost
Cheesy

Capital has not poured into Bitcoin because "low fees". You are mistaken Undecided

Well anyway, Bitcoin vs. Dogecoin, may the best man win. Have you converted your BTCs yet?

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:48:52 PM

Quote from: knight22 on September 11, 2015, 03:43:50 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

Some people don't understand what value proposition means. Security is just being one.

The primary value proposition is security by decentralization.

If you don't agree with that then my I suggest dogecoin? Very cheap. Much spending!

ALL crypto have security by decentralization. dogecoin included.

bitcoin has the most for many reasons

start taking away some of these reasons ( aka low fees ) and see what happens

cryptonic value = decentralization * security * usage / usage_cost;

so be carefull fucking with usage_cost
Cheesy

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: knight22 on September 11, 2015, 03:43:50 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

Some people don't understand what value proposition means. Security is just being one.

The primary value proposition is security by decentralization.

If you don't agree with that then my I suggest dogecoin? Very cheap. Much spending!

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:40:20 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:45 PM

If bitcoin does not provide a cheap and secure ledger something else will ( simply because it's possible ) and it will prevail over bitcoin.

No, security needs to be paid for.

Why don't you use VISA and CAD? Sounds cheap and secure enough for you.

I do. because it is cheap and secure way to pay for shit.

let say bitcoin fee go up

and poeple start using LTC to do small payments

LTC value goes up, so more poeple mine it, so it becomes more secure, it might start to get more support, maybe a blockchain app needs to be able to do alot of cheep TX's it cant use bitcoin fees are to high, it uses LTC, after a while LTC has more usefullness, and then it take over bitcoins "cryptonic value" property Cool

thats right cryptonic value.

That's a lot of if Cheesy

Let's say Bitcoin fee go up

And people start using payment channels and other services for small payments. It already leverages Bitcoin's security and trustlessness. I gets more support hence more liquidity.

See I can also pull a completely fabricated scenario out of my ass but it really isn't productive

Topic: the 1MB limit will centralize bitcoin (Read 3647 times)