Im going obliterate[debunk] CoinCubes, CoinHoarders, and your myopia now
(no personal slander intended, this is just discussion, I hope all of you wake up)
Note that the mining farms (especially in politically corrupt China or near dams where electricity is free or nearly free) have very low costs per BTC mined. Thus their profit tends to remain the same regardless of the price decline, because the difficulty drops as the marginal miners must quit.
Moreover, I keep seeing this argument and I had already explained why afaics it makes no economic sense:
Fact is that control over mining is centralized from the foundation and unavoidably so (!!) even into the future:
The only reason for anyone to be into mining is for world domination by taking control over the blockchain. Otherwise it is a horrible business to be in.
The whales (even the millionaire BTC kingpin over at Trilema.com) try to pretend to themselves that they have the power to keep the blockchain decentralized, but they do not. Someone has to control it, so ultimately the whales either need to destroy each other or form an oligarchy. They have no other choice.
If you do not understand this, then you understand nothing about blockchains. Ditto for proof-of-stake. (which is why my decentralized ledger is not a block chain)
The miners need to try to obscure this reality as much as possible to keep the sheep fooled. Your job as herded greedy sheep is to regurgitate the obfuscation and lies (mind programming) as much as possible so that the other sheep only look at the ass of the sheep in front of them. Lulz. So hilarious.
Technological research is very important for having a coherent perspective in our sector. You cant make correct decisions if youre a n00b.
I do research. Others talk out of their ass because they do not do enough research.
Im crowd sourcing peer review of my thoughts+research now. That is the entire point of this thread. Can anyone cogently and coherently refute my points?
You need to re-read this thread and digest that the posited SegWit pay to anyone booty is a centralized funding for a mining cartel attack.
As explained above, How will your cute community spirit fork off when the whales are getting rich on your unintended BTC donations?.
@CoinCube explained it well how sheep herd together for surety and think this somehow protects them from reality as they push each other over the edge of the cliff because they were only looking at the ass of the sheep in front of them and greedily copying each other:
After losing their BTC, everyone is going to become a lot more circumspect about trading off security for transaction volume scaling.
The mining cartel will be doing the right thing and everybody who still has any BTC will (eventually) realize that. Those who (because of their greed, intransigence, and foolishness) have no more BTC are irrelevant.
Thus we will have BTCSatoshi and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) remaining. BTCSatoshi for maximum security, and BCH (which is not a Rube Goldberg machine) for those who still believe we should scale transaction volume on proof-of-work. SegWit or extension blocks experimentation may continue on LTC.
That is why in my group we hodl BTCSatoshi (no BTC acquired after late July), LTC, and BCH as our core holdings. Eventually we may dump LTC and BCH for BTCSatoshi when it becomes safe to acquire BTC again (after the SegWit and other double-spendable shit has been already taken by the mining cartel). We may also speculate on various other altcoins.
(Note I would caution about acquiring LTC at $68 as it has run up very fast. BTC probably has another leg up still and LTC is highly volatile thus could possibly correct a bit before moving higher. Patience. I sold at $80 and repurchased at $44. I sold BCH at $800 and repurchased at $450 and $350, but I was a bit premature.)
I vehemently disagree with this.
The decentralized ledgers consensus algorithm is absolutely critical. It impacts not only security, but also the type of applications that can scale, which impacts marketing and user adoption.
I have expended the past 4 years researching and designing my decentralized ledger algorithm, which I hope will replace proof-of-work, proof-of-stake, and Dan Larimers dPoS. I have a detailed document which compares my technology to those and also Byteball, IOTA, and SPECTRE (which is not the same as Spectrecoin). I am excited to release this document soon and my new project, during the coming crypto winter. Which has been my plan all along.
P.S. @CoinHoarder, youre apparently skilled in website development. As a friendly suggestion, I hope you apply those skills to building an app on my project for others to use, and not make your commentary the focus on your future.
BTCSatoshi has never forked. There was an instance of some bug fixes only, which made the whales furious:
Ethereum is an experimental blockchain. Its not a secure store-of-value nor the reserve currency of the crypto ecosystem.
Equating Zimbabwes (or even Chinas) relatively shallow liquidity currency and Treasury bond market, to the USA dollar and US Treasuries is not a cogent analysis of reality.
But in the case of ethereum, it was hackers who stole it. In this case, this FUDster is saying that the miners would steal it. Theres no reason why miners would do that, as they receive fees and rewards, and are supported by the network. If they would steal, the network would collapse and so would their profits.
Note that the mining farms (especially in politically corrupt China or near dams where electricity is free or nearly free) have very low costs per BTC mined. Thus their profit tends to remain the same regardless of the price decline, because the difficulty drops as the marginal miners must quit.
Moreover, I keep seeing this argument and I had already explained why afaics it makes no economic sense:
Another very important factor to consider is that I explained why the miners are owned by the whales and others explained that mining is a horrible business to be in unless you have a plan for world domination. Tie that together with my exposition on why proof-of-work has to become run by a mining oligarchy else it fails to converge as transaction fees increase. Then you can analyse who is into mining and why. 
Fact is that control over mining is centralized from the foundation and unavoidably so (!!) even into the future:
Including the scam of decentralized mining which is utter nonsense given that there are only two 14nm custom ASIC fabs in the world, and they are both controlled by the powers that be (aka the banksters who run this world and who also control Bitmain). And please dont give me that unresearched n00b nonsense about ASIC resistance and well just change the proof-of-work algorithm, because Ive done the research.
The only reason for anyone to be into mining is for world domination by taking control over the blockchain. Otherwise it is a horrible business to be in.
The whales (even the millionaire BTC kingpin over at Trilema.com) try to pretend to themselves that they have the power to keep the blockchain decentralized, but they do not. Someone has to control it, so ultimately the whales either need to destroy each other or form an oligarchy. They have no other choice.
If you do not understand this, then you understand nothing about blockchains. Ditto for proof-of-stake. (which is why my decentralized ledger is not a block chain)
The miners need to try to obscure this reality as much as possible to keep the sheep fooled. Your job as herded greedy sheep is to regurgitate the obfuscation and lies (mind programming) as much as possible so that the other sheep only look at the ass of the sheep in front of them. Lulz. So hilarious.
They own you. You have no rights.
All this democracy BS about SegWit has won because everybody gets a community vote is complete nonsense. Cryptocurrency is not democracy. The economic reality is the whales decide and they use deception and take their time in harvesting as many sheep into the corral as possible before they pounce.
Bitmain cleverly pulled the wool over everyones eyes by feigning agreement to the NYA, but I presume it was always planning to let 2X fail so that the big blockers head into BCH (Bcash) and then that will give them the leverage against SegWit to at some point begin the mining attack to restore BTC back to purely a Satoshi protocol while stealing a lot of BTC from intransigent fools. The banksters have always been about profit and deception. And the intransigent sheep walk into the traps over and over and over again. Lol.
I already provided the link (and the link to the clarifying discussion) in my prior post to the research which shows that decentralized proof-of-work is a lie and it can not remain decentralized, because without an oligarchy in control then as revenue from transaction fees rises to greater than the revenue from the protocol block reward, then the economic incentives for the choosing one of competing orphaned blocks to arrive at a consensus are no longer aligned. The research models that without an oligarchy in control, then in the future every proof-of-work blockchain (not just Bitcoin, but also all altcoins based on proof-of-work) no longer converges and instead would diverge into a proliferation of every increasing number of forks!
[ ]
Lets see what you will say after all your recently acquired BTC is stolen by the blockchain. How will your cute community spirit fork off when the whales are getting rich on your unintended BTC donations?
How high will your confidence be then?
Might you end up being cross-eyed and bit confused about your former idealism, hubris, and overconfidence?
All this democracy BS about SegWit has won because everybody gets a community vote is complete nonsense. Cryptocurrency is not democracy. The economic reality is the whales decide and they use deception and take their time in harvesting as many sheep into the corral as possible before they pounce.
Bitmain cleverly pulled the wool over everyones eyes by feigning agreement to the NYA, but I presume it was always planning to let 2X fail so that the big blockers head into BCH (Bcash) and then that will give them the leverage against SegWit to at some point begin the mining attack to restore BTC back to purely a Satoshi protocol while stealing a lot of BTC from intransigent fools. The banksters have always been about profit and deception. And the intransigent sheep walk into the traps over and over and over again. Lol.
I already provided the link (and the link to the clarifying discussion) in my prior post to the research which shows that decentralized proof-of-work is a lie and it can not remain decentralized, because without an oligarchy in control then as revenue from transaction fees rises to greater than the revenue from the protocol block reward, then the economic incentives for the choosing one of competing orphaned blocks to arrive at a consensus are no longer aligned. The research models that without an oligarchy in control, then in the future every proof-of-work blockchain (not just Bitcoin, but also all altcoins based on proof-of-work) no longer converges and instead would diverge into a proliferation of every increasing number of forks!
[ ]
Lets see what you will say after all your recently acquired BTC is stolen by the blockchain. How will your cute community spirit fork off when the whales are getting rich on your unintended BTC donations?
How high will your confidence be then?
Might you end up being cross-eyed and bit confused about your former idealism, hubris, and overconfidence?
Technological research is very important for having a coherent perspective in our sector. You cant make correct decisions if youre a n00b.
I do research. Others talk out of their ass because they do not do enough research.
Im crowd sourcing peer review of my thoughts+research now. That is the entire point of this thread. Can anyone cogently and coherently refute my points?
The only way for a massive stealing would be someone hacking the second layer, the LN itself. But for this, it would require a centralized structure [
]
You need to re-read this thread and digest that the posited SegWit pay to anyone booty is a centralized funding for a mining cartel attack.
I think that you are underestimating the power of "Social Consensus". The market, press, and users have all already determined that Bitcoin Segwit is Bitxoin, and there can only be one Bitcoin. All others (Bitcoin Satoshi, Bitcoin Cash, etc.) are alternative cryptocurrencies, as decided by Social Consensus.
After that Social Consensus has been reached, there is no turning back (or reverting back) to Bitcoin Satoshi or Bitcoin Cash. This remains true even if the fatal Segwit flaws rear their ugly head on the real Bitcoin (aka. Bitcoin Segwit... as determined by Social Consensus).
After that Social Consensus has been reached, there is no turning back (or reverting back) to Bitcoin Satoshi or Bitcoin Cash. This remains true even if the fatal Segwit flaws rear their ugly head on the real Bitcoin (aka. Bitcoin Segwit... as determined by Social Consensus).
As explained above, How will your cute community spirit fork off when the whales are getting rich on your unintended BTC donations?.
@CoinCube explained it well how sheep herd together for surety and think this somehow protects them from reality as they push each other over the edge of the cliff because they were only looking at the ass of the sheep in front of them and greedily copying each other:
Sheep Logic - This Is The Age Of The High-Functioning Sociopath
Quote from: Ben Hunt
The determination to pursue any behavior that meets Hallmark #1 and #2 to absurd ends, even unto death. My worst sheep suicide story? The first year we kept sheep, we thought it would make sense to set up a hay net in their pen, which keeps the hay off the ground and lets the sheep feed themselves by pulling hay through the very loose loops of the net. Turned out, though, that the loops were so loose that a determined sheep could put her entire head inside the net, and if one sheep could do that, then two sheep could do that. And given how the hay net was hung and how these sheep were sensing each other, they started to move clockwise in unison, each trying to get an advantage over the other, still with their heads stuck in the net. At which point the net starts to tighten. And tighten. And tighten. My daughter found them the next morning, having strangled each other to death, unable to stop gorging themselves or seeking an advantage from the behavior of others. The other sheep were crowded around, stepping around the dead bodies, pulling hay for themselves out of the net. That was a bad day.
In both markets and in politics, our human intelligences are being trained to be sheep intelligences. That doesnt make us sheep in the modern vernacular.
We are not becoming docile, stupid, and blindly obedient. On the contrary, we are becoming sheep as the Old Stories understood sheep intensely selfish, intensely intelligent (but only in an other-regarding way) and intensely dogmatic, willing to pursue a myopic behavior even unto death.
In both markets and in politics, our human intelligences are being trained to be sheep intelligences. That doesnt make us sheep in the modern vernacular.
We are not becoming docile, stupid, and blindly obedient. On the contrary, we are becoming sheep as the Old Stories understood sheep intensely selfish, intensely intelligent (but only in an other-regarding way) and intensely dogmatic, willing to pursue a myopic behavior even unto death.
If theft of coins due to fatal flaws in Segwit does occur, then I think a new fork will become the new real Bitcoin... not Bitcoin Cash and not Bitcoin Satoshi. Similar to how Ethereum and Ethereum Classic split. Segwit will be fixed/removed from the codebase and the chain rolled back to before the attacks, and then due to Social Consensus Bitcoin (Segwit then minus Segwit) will become the real Bitcoin, and Bitcoin Segwit will become an alternative cryptocurrency. Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Satoshi will remain alternative cryptocurrencies.
After losing their BTC, everyone is going to become a lot more circumspect about trading off security for transaction volume scaling.
The mining cartel will be doing the right thing and everybody who still has any BTC will (eventually) realize that. Those who (because of their greed, intransigence, and foolishness) have no more BTC are irrelevant.
Thus we will have BTCSatoshi and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) remaining. BTCSatoshi for maximum security, and BCH (which is not a Rube Goldberg machine) for those who still believe we should scale transaction volume on proof-of-work. SegWit or extension blocks experimentation may continue on LTC.
That is why in my group we hodl BTCSatoshi (no BTC acquired after late July), LTC, and BCH as our core holdings. Eventually we may dump LTC and BCH for BTCSatoshi when it becomes safe to acquire BTC again (after the SegWit and other double-spendable shit has been already taken by the mining cartel). We may also speculate on various other altcoins.
(Note I would caution about acquiring LTC at $68 as it has run up very fast. BTC probably has another leg up still and LTC is highly volatile thus could possibly correct a bit before moving higher. Patience. I sold at $80 and repurchased at $44. I sold BCH at $800 and repurchased at $450 and $350, but I was a bit premature.)
Quote from: https://www.decentralized.tech/blogs/part-2-bitcoin-core-bitcoin-cash-bitcoin-gold-and-bitcoin-2x-oh-my
Yet, a lot of people still use this as a measuring "measuring stick" when judging whether or not to invest in (or support) a certain cryptocurrency. It is high time that this changes. All major cryptocurrencies' consensus algorithms are practically equally sufficient for providing what I term "Day-To-Day Consensus" of a decentralized blockchain. That is evidenced by the years of secure transaction histories accumulated by the major consensus algorithms. Other than analyzing the economic and social impact of each consensus algorithm, I suggest not worrying too much about the security of such when analyzing them. (Note: I am referring only to established and practiced consensus algorithms- not newer and untested ones)
[ ]
In summary, the next time you find yourself considering the security of different consensus algorithms, or which branch of a fork you should support, stop and ask yourself... does it even matter?
[ ]
In summary, the next time you find yourself considering the security of different consensus algorithms, or which branch of a fork you should support, stop and ask yourself... does it even matter?
I vehemently disagree with this.
The decentralized ledgers consensus algorithm is absolutely critical. It impacts not only security, but also the type of applications that can scale, which impacts marketing and user adoption.
I have expended the past 4 years researching and designing my decentralized ledger algorithm, which I hope will replace proof-of-work, proof-of-stake, and Dan Larimers dPoS. I have a detailed document which compares my technology to those and also Byteball, IOTA, and SPECTRE (which is not the same as Spectrecoin). I am excited to release this document soon and my new project, during the coming crypto winter. Which has been my plan all along.
P.S. @CoinHoarder, youre apparently skilled in website development. As a friendly suggestion, I hope you apply those skills to building an app on my project for others to use, and not make your commentary the focus on your future.
Quote from: https://www.decentralized.tech/blogs/part-2-bitcoin-core-bitcoin-cash-bitcoin-gold-and-bitcoin-2x-oh-my
The most established and longest running cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin and Litecoin, have forked many times.
BTCSatoshi has never forked. There was an instance of some bug fixes only, which made the whales furious:
Again a rule-of-thumb in software engineering is complexity kills. And the founder of Trilema had a scalding thread on BCT explaining his anger about how the Core devs were incompetent, adding unnecessary complexity, and not developing a specification (the code was the only specification) formalism. He was pointing out that getting the foundation perfected and clean was a higher priority than attaching bells & whistle experiments.
Quote from: https://www.decentralized.tech/blogs/part-2-bitcoin-core-bitcoin-cash-bitcoin-gold-and-bitcoin-2x-oh-my
There are an endless amount of examples of Social Consensus trumping actual autonomous consensus algorithms. Another example is when Ethereum rolled back their blockchain after the DAO hack, and the resulting fork was established as being the "main chain".
Ethereum is an experimental blockchain. Its not a secure store-of-value nor the reserve currency of the crypto ecosystem.
Equating Zimbabwes (or even Chinas) relatively shallow liquidity currency and Treasury bond market, to the USA dollar and US Treasuries is not a cogent analysis of reality.
Quote from: https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/china/china-to-open-bond-market-to-foreign-investors/
China to Open Bond Market to Foreign Investors
Without a viable bond market, no currency can become the reserve currency and compete against the dollar. It does not matter what you price in yuan, it still requires a trustworthy place to park your money. This is basis fundamental international economics 101. Schools teach domestic economics and are generally ignorant of international economics.
Without a viable bond market, no currency can become the reserve currency and compete against the dollar. It does not matter what you price in yuan, it still requires a trustworthy place to park your money. This is basis fundamental international economics 101. Schools teach domestic economics and are generally ignorant of international economics.
Until debt ceases to be money that simply pays interest, the dollar will not vanish as a reserve currency. There is no replacement as of yet. Even when China becomes the largest economy, that will not displace the reserve status of the dollar until there is a deep market to park cash. That is separate and distinct from trade being conducted in a variety of currencies. We have to revise the world monetary system. When we reach that point, then we can deal with creating an alternative for a reserve currency that is entirely distinct from trade currencies.
Some comments are saying that China follows every word I say. I think that is an exaggeration. Yes, before my ordeal, we entered into an arrangement with China to do the forecasting for about 1,000 government entities. Yes, I was invited to the Central Bank when the Asian Currency Crisis hit. Yes, I recommended going to the US Treasury and demanding to buy bonds directly circumventing the New York bankers. True, our services are not blocked in China.