That isn't what begs the question means.
touché!
You may indeed welcome it. But others may have many reasons not to do so.
It raises the risk to the minority.
It is similar to the problem of democratic voting. One wins, one loses. If you do not agree with the majority, you lose.
So "we" in this case is a subset of "we" that may not include cypherdoc or any other particular person.
Do you see why this is not a compelling argument?
It raises the risk to the minority.
It is similar to the problem of democratic voting. One wins, one loses. If you do not agree with the majority, you lose.
So "we" in this case is a subset of "we" that may not include cypherdoc or any other particular person.
Do you see why this is not a compelling argument?
No. I don't, because any evolution in the technology of money that serves the greater good should win.
"You may indeed welcome Bitcoin. But others may have many reasons not to do so. It raises the risk to the (cash) minority."
Your opinion is noted. We disagree. I think it is a closer analogy to any of those you've used.
The bitcoin is contained within the SC similar to how it is contained within a physical bitcoin. The physical bitcoin offers features that are not available on the main chain. Transactions with physical bitcoin do not affect the Bitcoin block chain. Huh, asinine... ok
The bitcoin is contained within the SC similar to how it is contained within a physical bitcoin. The physical bitcoin offers features that are not available on the main chain. Transactions with physical bitcoin do not affect the Bitcoin block chain. Huh, asinine... ok
Is the physical bitcoin mined and profitable to the miners? Is the digital Bitcoin redeemable from the physical bitcoin at the algorithm level? Yes, asinine.
Analogy aside, consider here that you are postulating that the SC features may bleed out some of the contained bitcoin to be used for TX fees and claiming that this potential feature which has never been implemented is going to happen, and so no one should have any worries about this?
Not certain what you are insinuating here?
Right... There is no peg. You claiming that there is one does not make it so. The SC is a container for bitcoin with different characteristics. This is not the same thing as a peg.
(a peg is not necessarily a good thing in any case)
Are you entirely certain you know what a Side Chain is? Your explanation of them makes them sound really horrible.
(a peg is not necessarily a good thing in any case)
Are you entirely certain you know what a Side Chain is? Your explanation of them makes them sound really horrible.
There is no peg
But there absolutely is and should be a peg. The SC is a cointainer for bitcoin yes, but the innovation the two-way peg. Correct. I think its worth clarifying that the peg is algorithmic, because its seems from the thread that some people may not understand that. You, personally, can ask the network automatically to swap unlimited quantities of BTC on the sidechain for BTC on the main bitcoin chain.
Maybe you mean there should not necessarily be a peg? Sure, but then it becomes just another altcoin.