Quote from: Adrian-x on November 15, 2014, 12:30:38 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 15, 2014, 12:23:49 AM

Quote from: Adrian-x on November 15, 2014, 12:08:32 AM

the only point with merit worth debating is the last one in red, the diminishing return in the block halving is not a feature that incentivises mining, it is one that reduces the cost of protecting the network to the marginal of service. Miners should hate this but tolerate it as the networks growth creates abundant profit. increasing there profits, above the marginal cost of securing the value in network puts a burden on the system akin to inflation.

Decentralized SC that supplement miners income, or as time goes by provide the majority of there income is not innovation, its a failure in the Bitcoin prototypical. Dont let it happen on your watch.

Oh so you want to debate but you only try to poke holes in my position without adressing yours.

So let us again turn your argument against you.

By suggesting that the majority of the miners income will be provided by SC you propose that the sidechains utility, security & liquidity will be such that the market will have no use for the Bitcoin mainchain. This is the result of a demand for various features that are NOT implementable on the Bitcoin mainchain.

This demand does not go away or does it exist because of SPVproof sidechain.

Consequently, the market will look to other options to fullfill this demand. All of the other options will be more centralized services using oracles, federated servers and the like.

So what happens when the same exodus you propose will happen through SPVproof sidechains happen through these other services?

Well the mainchain is abandoned and miners are left with no incentive to mine.

See how this goes both way? Wink

Bitcoin has grown on average an order of magnitude every year since inception, I think you may be lacking in understanding on how the incentive structures have facilitated that growth.

How does this adress my arguments?

It feels like you and cypher are the same person. Same motus operandi : deflect, avoid adressing the actual argument and reply with convenient nonsense.