Quote from: brg444 on November 06, 2014, 01:21:08 AM

Quote from: Adrian-x on November 06, 2014, 12:52:21 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 06, 2014, 12:46:41 AM

Quote from: Adrian-x on November 06, 2014, 12:40:18 AM

Quote from: rocks on November 06, 2014, 12:03:20 AM

Quote from: Adrian-x on November 05, 2014, 11:44:47 PM

Quote from: rocks on November 05, 2014, 11:39:30 PM

Quote from: Adrian-x on November 05, 2014, 11:35:28 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 11:10:57 PM

Quote from: Adrian-x on November 05, 2014, 11:09:20 PM

Altcoins are competition, that's good, I'm not advocating you should buy them.

No, money doesn't need competition. Money thrives the most as a singular, monopolistic participant in the market.

why adopt bitcoin?

Because there is nothing else in the modern era that functions as money, at least since paper gold destroyed real gold.

"No, money doesn't need competition" BS - people think this guy has insight? we have a Fiat monopoly we need competition, if there is something better than Fiat i want it, I want it to thrive in a free market as proof, if there is something better than Bitcoin I want that too.

It was just a light comment, driven by the fact that Fiat is not actually money. Calm down.

why adopt bitcoin? is light question reflecting the ignorance that we need to destroy competition to make bitcoin succeed. the only problem with fiat is inflation, the majority in the world believe that make it good money.

Bitcoin the Blockchain - not BTC, its the value is resides, BTC is how we manage proof of ownership. it is preserved and regulated because of the incentive structure that is what makes it viable, Bitcoin is the only shot we have an hard money, and the proposed protocol change will Preserve the 21M BTC but allow institutions to extract value from the blockchain by creating assets outside the incentive structure.

this is the same problem with fiat, 1 in a million see the problem of inflation, this proposed change will have the same effect on Bitcoin.

this is where you are continuously wrong.

the incentive structure doesn't get avoided, it merely expands into sub network of shared value

My deductions can be wrong, but Im talking about a situation where I MM and as a miner I can get 70% of my income from MM SC and 30% while MM bitcoin?

As time goes on and the block chain subsidy is reduced is it conceivable that a situation could arise where I MM and as a miner I can get 95% of my income from MM SC and 5% while MM bitcoin? is it not?

my answer is categorically NO.

it is not black or white. it is also yellow, green, purple, orange, red.

in a sidechain world, value resides on multiple different chains that operate in synergy. miners will mine wherever there is value. when you consider that the 5% you are referring to might translate to millions of dollars I don't see any reason for them to abandon that revenue stream since it is trivial for them to support it.

so your saying NO it is categorically imposable for a situation to arise where where I MM and as a miner I can get 70% of my income from MM SC and 30% while MM bitcoin?

or just saying NO becaue your not reading? and trimming posts and sporting nonce.