Quote from: brg444 on November 16, 2014, 07:01:36 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 16, 2014, 06:55:35 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 16, 2014, 06:52:49 AM

and you are one senile grampa

what you keep emphasizing is your opposition to the detachement of the BTC asset from the BTC mainchain onto potentially speculative sidechains that could drain away the value off the BTC mainchain. I hope you did not forget this. If so I can gladly pull up your numerous posts that clearly imply this mechanism would "destroy Bitcoin"

what I keep emphasizing, which you are seemingly to stupid or disingenuous to comprehend, is that federated servers do exactly this.

it has never been a debate about changing the source code or not. so unless you are trying to move the goal post ONCE AGAIN, then at least make at attempt at being honest.

you concern is Bitcoin's Sound Money property.

my answer to your concern is you should see your bitcoins RIGHT NOW because SIDECHAINS using a federated model are this danger you so very much fear

no, that's just been your misperception of my argument. it's ALWAYS been about changing source code.

OH IS THAT RIGHT

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 14, 2014, 04:14:07 PM

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

Well tough luck brothers, because the BTC unit CAN and WILL be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) by SIDECHAINS running on a federated server model. That very mechanism is possible without any change to the source code.

So...it seems my good man that Bitcoin as Money is broken ALREADY which brings me to ask you......

.... sold your Bitcoins already?

in this entire 200 pg discussion, my arguments have centered on the SPVproof mainly b/c that is Blockstreams main goal; to insert SPVproof into the source. even they say federated servers are an interim insecure, centralized step. i agree, i discount them as any real long term implementation of SC's for exactly those reasons. the real meat of everything i've argued has and always will apply to SPVproof as it systematizes the SC concept and implies that a community consensus has been reached regarding these things.

stop pretending that i'd be upset at the federated model as you keep gloating and screaming about as above. i could give a shit b/c it's not a threat and should NOT be a reason for us to scream in fear "OMG, give us SPVproof!"