In Reply:
Answering silly rebuttals is making me yawn, maybe I should have gone on holiday this August
The Fork in the Ethereum blockchain is a Change
Therefore my words: "I prefer too back new innovation and discoveries" is being consistent with supporting the fork in the blockchain.
Therefore, the charge against me of logical fallacies, appears to be in somebody's imagination
Secondly the full paragraph you are quoting is:
"But, when it comes to my money and my time: I prefer too back new innovation and discoveries.
Some of these, may turn out be crap, but I'm certain their going to be winners amongst in that group."
Therefore, you comprehension is failing, because as sentence makes clear - this is not about the "Old Hat" policy of zero-bailouts, but a personal preference in trying out new features that appear in new Alts.
Turning to the guy using Latin:
argumentum ad populum= mass adoption is what every crypto currency is trying to achieve (popularity).
argumentum ad ignorantiam = ignorance requires trust, which needs history or proof of trustworthiness. Allowing 3.5 million ETH to be stolen is not going allow people to "ignorantly" trust the Ethereum Foundation and they can never achieve mass adoption of the crypto currency.
Therefore, doing the exact opposite of what you are arguing could make ETH the biggest crypto currency in world!
Answering silly rebuttals is making me yawn, maybe I should have gone on holiday this August
The Fork in the Ethereum blockchain is a Change
Therefore my words: "I prefer too back new innovation and discoveries" is being consistent with supporting the fork in the blockchain.
Therefore, the charge against me of logical fallacies, appears to be in somebody's imagination
Secondly the full paragraph you are quoting is:
"But, when it comes to my money and my time: I prefer too back new innovation and discoveries.
Some of these, may turn out be crap, but I'm certain their going to be winners amongst in that group."
Therefore, you comprehension is failing, because as sentence makes clear - this is not about the "Old Hat" policy of zero-bailouts, but a personal preference in trying out new features that appear in new Alts.
Turning to the guy using Latin:
argumentum ad populum= mass adoption is what every crypto currency is trying to achieve (popularity).
argumentum ad ignorantiam = ignorance requires trust, which needs history or proof of trustworthiness. Allowing 3.5 million ETH to be stolen is not going allow people to "ignorantly" trust the Ethereum Foundation and they can never achieve mass adoption of the crypto currency.
Therefore, doing the exact opposite of what you are arguing could make ETH the biggest crypto currency in world!
My comprehension despite your badly written English is actually perfectly fine. The logical fallacies have been explained to you, already.
The two Ethers can exist. Either could turn out to be crap, or both(probably both). ETH is still in infancy. Hell, even BTC is.
You have your personal preference and that's perfectly fine, but it changes nothing. ETH wrote one thing and did another. ETC followed the original plan. If you cannot accept that then I think you're the one having trouble comprehending things.
The way i see it. And i wonder if iceb and friends are having the same discussion on bitfinex threads. I mean i look at bfx as a doa. People dumped way too much into a place they didnt control the keys of. hacker got into it now we see the bailout. Socialized losses. No difference whatsoever.. Wheres all the fireworks about that.. Maybe i missed it or i havent seen it because ive smartened up and not keep large amount on exchanges.(btw i only put 10 eth into doa:) ). i say if icebreaker is to have his way then some should lose all on bfx and those not hacked should have access to pre hack funds.. Anyway.. I leave those that have nothing better to do to chew on this for a while..
best Regards
d57heinz
btw i support your position thevictimofuktyrrany. Follow the "good" fork and consensus and lets see where it leads.. If ice and company had it their way its a failure already.. No harm in trying and btc is its own chain again not effected by this whatsoever.
best Regards
d57heinz
btw i support your position thevictimofuktyrrany. Follow the "good" fork and consensus and lets see where it leads.. If ice and company had it their way its a failure already.. No harm in trying and btc is its own chain again not effected by this whatsoever.
LOL, as if I'm advocating a BTC hard fork to roll back and bail out Bitfinex losses? Where did you get that idea (and pass it over 'ere).
Slight difference: Bitfinex claimed to be insured and protected by known-good top-shelf security. DAO? Not so much....
You obviously have no idea what my opinion wrt Bitfinex is, yet don't hesitate to put conclusory words in my mouth and hold me accountable for them.
That's called a strawman.
I believe anyone risking BTC on any exchange, in order to possibly accrue reward from trading, has no right to expect ex post facto asset commingling and resultant socialized losses.
You'd know that if you weren't a noob and unfamiliar with my posting history, in which I put >1 exchange operator on full blast for pulling a Bitfinex (before it was cool).
Fuck you for making up stuff I don't agree with and attributing it to my paradigm.
I accept your apology for being a sorry sack of shit.
ahh must of hit some nails on the head ehh. Come back so angry.. Maybe you need to relax. http://www.floatingstl.com/ no i dont bother to read your history but thank you for clarifying. I didnt mean to imply btc was going to be rolled back at all.. I know that is not possible. well so we think lol. You just havent had the right person get fucked yet. Well anyway this is all fun and games dont get your panties in a bunch. Also dont invest more than you can afford to lose;)
Best Regards
d57heinz
BTC would lose support. There would be a fork of some kind, surely. That's what open source and decentralized really means.