Quote from: brg444 on November 15, 2014, 05:31:06 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 15, 2014, 04:00:34 AM

the same doom and gloom ppl like brg444 were trying to scare us all about 51% attacks. where did all that FUD go? and now just look at the evening out of the pooling percentages just as i predicted according to the Pure Strategy Nash Equilibrium:

What are you talking about? Cheesy

When have I ever tried to scare people? You've been doing a good job at it ever since we started discussing sidechains

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 15, 2014, 04:00:34 AM

and that means stopping any conflicted, self interested, unethical group from coming in and changing the rules of the game which will destroy confidence in Bitcoin as Sound Money.

The reality is there is plenty of things wrong about Bitcoin if we want it to effectively change the world of money as we think it will.

At its core it is unfortunately very limited. There may be good reasons for this but if we're gonna have the world's economy sitting on top of this thing, status quo does not cut it.

It's like trying to invent the internet with only TCP/IP. It is very shortsighted to imagine Bitcoin is perfect as is and needs not to improve. This thing need to develop and be able to adapt to the new realities.

The simple fact that schemes like Counterparty, Ethereum, Coloredcoins are getting traction is a clear representation of a demand and a need for such additional layer built on top of Bitcoin and that the Bitcoin blockchain alone does not suffice.

The decision is whether or not we want these layers to be as equally decentralized as Bitcoin in the event that a majority of us gets to use them. Read this again, maybe you'll get a clue.

Quote from: brg444 on November 15, 2014, 02:44:41 AM

It is an improvement on the current situation where transactions are ALREADY tending to be processed off-chain for convenience, speed and utility. Given the absolute existence and growth of demand for transactions types that are not implementable on the Bitcoin sidechain, the exodus of transactions to off-chain schemes is a rational concern going forward.

This is not only true with concern to miners and their transaction fees but also because for the integrity of the Bitcoin ledger. Off-chain schemes inherently require additional trust in that the ledger will be preserved. The most likely suspects to inflate Bitcoin in its current state are these off-chain schemes. SPVProof sidechains enables the possibility to ensure the conservation of the ledger on a protocol level. With this we potentially eliminate fractional reserve schemes. If your chain/service/application do not recognize and preserve my stake in the ledger, at the extent that I am not looking to speculate on it, then you will not have my money and neither will you profit from the ledger's network

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 15, 2014, 04:00:34 AM

who really needs absolute anonymity? sure, for illegal stuff. but most of us don't do that.

Please don't make me laugh...

Quote from: cypherdoc on October 27, 2014, 09:57:19 PM

i believe the vast majority of BTC holders value anonymity. therefore perfect anonymity should be better than pseudonymity.

since that's the case, why wouldn't you then move ALL your BTC into scBTC?

I'm so glad we got to the bottom of this.

brg444 and Blockstream are here to fix Bitcoin.

All hail to the new Fedstream!