28382 USD
15.41 BTC
roughly the daily swap interest payments
15.41 BTC
roughly the daily swap interest payments
Very roughly!
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 22143. (Read 26608864 times)
April 03, 2015, 09:01:41 PM
Very roughly!
April 03, 2015, 09:00:07 PM
As said before, the "small group" [ that could take control of bitcoin ] will be the top 4-6 miners, who already have enough power to overcome all the others.
That is a paradoxical thing about the bitcoin protocol: no matter how massive he mining network, there will always be a potential enemy with the all power needed to take control of it. Just as, no matter how big of an army a country has, it will never be big enough to protect it from a military coup...
That is a paradoxical thing about the bitcoin protocol: no matter how massive he mining network, there will always be a potential enemy with the all power needed to take control of it. Just as, no matter how big of an army a country has, it will never be big enough to protect it from a military coup...
Yes but, notice, that countries with small armies, do exist.
Sure, a bigger army could , right now, tomorrow take over the whole world, and then a little country would not have the ability to "protect itself" but do you notice, that the people of Luxemburg, the people of Ireland, the people of New Zealand, manage to get to sleep just fine.
Whether big armies are good or bad is not the point. The point is that, no matter how big or small is the network (or the army), the risk of one part of it taking power and defeating the rest is about the same. In other words, a bigger network (or army) may offer more protection against attacks from outside, but not against attacks from inside. There have been military coups in countries of all sizes, from tiny Pacific(!) islands to large countries like Brazil, Pakistan, Indonesia, ...
April 03, 2015, 08:58:43 PM
April 03, 2015, 08:57:10 PM
yes jorge take it to the technical discussion section you coward.
[noise]
ok, so you found the fatal flaw in bitcoin ... go, make yourself rich exploiting it, let us know how your academic exercises pay off.
This is the problem: exploiting an idea means work, actually doing something, which is the antithesis of ivory tower academia where the only "work" done is relentlessly attacking the work of other people.
April 03, 2015, 08:44:07 PM
28382 USD
15.41 BTC
roughly the daily swap interest payments
15.41 BTC
roughly the daily swap interest payments
April 03, 2015, 08:40:33 PM
I watched a documentary last night that had this full-blooded giraffe neck fight. It was vicious...
Good morning, bitcoiners!
Good morning, bitcoiners!
http://blog.goeco.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Giraffes-engaged-in-a-neck-fight.jpg
Crazy no?
Giraffes are just weird. They have weird knobby things on their heads. They drink weird. Pretty much everything about them is weird.
Really cute in pictures tho, never seen one outside the zoo
April 03, 2015, 08:38:11 PM
A brief moment of silence for tarmi's short going briefly into the red again.
April 03, 2015, 08:35:22 PM
Why do you presume you have the consensus on your side? Do you think a majority of the users/miners/pools will suddenly adopt your, or a like minded model?
You come across with great egotism and hubris, like you have all the answers. As if no-one has ever dared deliberate your concerns.
He's a concern-troll in sheep's clothing, grasping at straws to perpetuate any half-baked FUD story he can come up with. I strongly recommend reading his retarded analogy about people sitting in a circle passing dollars around to see what kind of disingenuous mentality we're dealing with here.
April 03, 2015, 08:28:59 PM
I watched a documentary last night that had this full-blooded giraffe neck fight. It was vicious...
Good morning, bitcoiners!
Good morning, bitcoiners!
Crazy no?
They are neck and neck
April 03, 2015, 08:26:04 PM
I watched a documentary last night that had this full-blooded giraffe neck fight. It was vicious...
Good morning, bitcoiners!
Good morning, bitcoiners!
Crazy no?
April 03, 2015, 08:20:03 PM
... I really dislike justin bieber's music. Maybe I should register an account on a bieber forum and bash him all day! ...
Maybe. Guessing you'll find Bieber fan antics a bit less amusing than Bitcoin cultists' wacky shenanigans tho.
How about you give Bitcointalk another try, huh buddy?
April 03, 2015, 08:19:40 PM
All this talk about how "miners would never attack the network because that would destroy confidence in the blockchain and they would stop making money" is kinda bogus IMHO.
Basically double spends already happened but the bitcoin community just looks the other way and pretends that never happened.
Are you sure "miners have no incentive to perform double spend attacks" if all that happens after a double spend (that doesn't seem that easy to investigate into too apparently) is some posts on reddit trying to figure out what the hell happened and bitcoiners just forgetting about it?
Basically double spends already happened but the bitcoin community just looks the other way and pretends that never happened.
Are you sure "miners have no incentive to perform double spend attacks" if all that happens after a double spend (that doesn't seem that easy to investigate into too apparently) is some posts on reddit trying to figure out what the hell happened and bitcoiners just forgetting about it?
Apart from, are there more miners trying to destroy the network, or trying to facilitate it?
If the market really says that its more profitable to destroy it, then maybe that will happen....if not, then why would the attackers choose a less profitable option? if it was more profitable to support the network than decide to take it down? if attackers manage to destroy the network, then miners, will obviously shut up shop and go home, and become tulip farmers.
If they get caught doing it (like the GHASH.io double spend on that gambling site I posted from last year) what's the problem? Bitcoiners look the other way and say "you see? nothing happened? Everything's fine"
of course they do because charity... right?
Because everyone involved in BTC just wants to throw money away right? like charity....
Self interest.
If its broken, it will fall... if not, it wont.
If it is more profitable to attack the network, then it will happen, if it is not then it will not happen.
If it is more profitable to facilitate the network, then it will happen, if it is not then it will not happen.
So , the parameters are clear.. as they have been the past 6 years.
So......
Go.
April 03, 2015, 08:16:32 PM
Why do you presume you have the consensus on your side? Do you think a majority of the users/miners/pools will suddenly adopt your, or a like minded model?
You come across with great egotism and hubris, like you have all the answers. As if no-one has ever dared deliberate your concerns.
April 03, 2015, 08:16:01 PM
I am not even kidding though....
If I do not get some DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM and soon....
Then I am gunna be all disgruntled and discombobulated and shit.
Well at the very least I am gonna lose my DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM boner.... which would be sad.
Not even in the slightest bit kidding though... spike that shit down overlords
Spike it down.
Make me happy.
Make it shnappy.
If I do not get some DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM and soon....
Then I am gunna be all disgruntled and discombobulated and shit.
Well at the very least I am gonna lose my DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM boner.... which would be sad.
Not even in the slightest bit kidding though... spike that shit down overlords
Spike it down.
Make me happy.
Make it shnappy.
April 03, 2015, 08:13:35 PM
All this talk about how "miners would never attack the network because that would destroy confidence in the blockchain and they would stop making money" is kinda bogus IMHO.
Basically double spends already happened but the bitcoin community just looks the other way and pretends that never happened.
Are you sure "miners have no incentive to perform double spend attacks" if all that happens after a double spend (that doesn't seem that easy to investigate into too apparently) is some posts on reddit trying to figure out what the hell happened and bitcoiners just forgetting about it?
Basically double spends already happened but the bitcoin community just looks the other way and pretends that never happened.
Are you sure "miners have no incentive to perform double spend attacks" if all that happens after a double spend (that doesn't seem that easy to investigate into too apparently) is some posts on reddit trying to figure out what the hell happened and bitcoiners just forgetting about it?
Apart from, are there more miners trying to destroy the network, or trying to facilitate it?
If the market really says that its more profitable to destroy it, then maybe that will happen....if not, then why would the attackers choose a less profitable option? if it was more profitable to support the network than decide to take it down? if attackers manage to destroy the network, then miners, will obviously shut up shop and go home, and become tulip farmers.
If they get caught doing it (like the GHASH.io double spend on that gambling site I posted from last year) what's the problem? Bitcoiners look the other way and say "you see? nothing happened? Everything's fine"
of course they do because charity... right?
April 03, 2015, 08:12:48 PM
All this talk about how "miners would never attack the network because that would destroy confidence in the blockchain and they would stop making money" is kinda bogus IMHO.
Basically double spends already happened but the bitcoin community just looks the other way and pretends that never happened.
Are you sure "miners have no incentive to perform double spend attacks" if all that happens after a double spend (that doesn't seem that easy to investigate into too apparently) is some posts on reddit trying to figure out what the hell happened and bitcoiners just forgetting about it?
Basically double spends already happened but the bitcoin community just looks the other way and pretends that never happened.
Are you sure "miners have no incentive to perform double spend attacks" if all that happens after a double spend (that doesn't seem that easy to investigate into too apparently) is some posts on reddit trying to figure out what the hell happened and bitcoiners just forgetting about it?
Apart from, are there more miners trying to destroy the network, or trying to facilitate it?
If the market really says that its more profitable to destroy it, then maybe that will happen....if not, then why would the attackers choose a less profitable option? if it was more profitable to support the network than decide to take it down? if attackers manage to destroy the network, then miners, will obviously shut up shop and go home, and become tulip farmers.
If they get caught doing it (like the GHASH.io double spend on that gambling site I posted from last year) what's the problem? Bitcoiners look the other way and say "you see? nothing happened? Everything's fine"
of course they do because charity... right?
April 03, 2015, 08:11:43 PM
This guy makes good points (read the other posts also):
https://twitter.com/patio11/status/583697371378257920
Basically, bitcoiners don't know how remittances actually work.
https://twitter.com/patio11/status/583697371378257920
Basically, bitcoiners don't know how remittances actually work.
Car manufacturers did not necessarily know how horses worked either.
Sure, right on point there.
April 03, 2015, 08:05:42 PM
April 03, 2015, 08:05:38 PM
This guy makes good points (read the other posts also):
https://twitter.com/patio11/status/583697371378257920
Basically, bitcoiners don't know how remittances actually work.
https://twitter.com/patio11/status/583697371378257920
Basically, bitcoiners don't know how remittances actually work.
Car manufacturers did not necessarily know how horses worked either.
^^
are you lost, or getting paid? You know I really dislike justin bieber's music. Maybe I should register an account on a bieber forum and bash him all day! ... nope sorry I actually have a life that's not worth wasting. April 03, 2015, 08:05:10 PM
All this talk about how "miners would never attack the network because that would destroy confidence in the blockchain and they would stop making money" is kinda bogus IMHO.
Basically double spends already happened but the bitcoin community just looks the other way and pretends that never happened.
Are you sure "miners have no incentive to perform double spend attacks" if all that happens after a double spend (that doesn't seem that easy to investigate into too apparently) is some posts on reddit trying to figure out what the hell happened and bitcoiners just forgetting about it?
Basically double spends already happened but the bitcoin community just looks the other way and pretends that never happened.
Are you sure "miners have no incentive to perform double spend attacks" if all that happens after a double spend (that doesn't seem that easy to investigate into too apparently) is some posts on reddit trying to figure out what the hell happened and bitcoiners just forgetting about it?
Apart from, are there more miners trying to destroy the network, or trying to facilitate it?
If the market really says that its more profitable to destroy it, then maybe that will happen....if not, then why would the attackers choose a less profitable option? if it was more profitable to support the network than decide to take it down? if attackers manage to destroy the network, then miners, will obviously shut up shop and go home, and become tulip farmers.
If they get caught doing it (like the GHASH.io double spend on that gambling site I posted from last year) what's the problem? Bitcoiners look the other way and say "you see? nothing happened? Everything's fine"
Jump to: