Vinanz Share Discussion Threads

[mcbeanburger] 03/12/2017 18:08

spad:"I think the mainstream are all over Bitcoin core" unless I misunderstood, you meant bch+btc? or just bch?

----

the whole btc scene is full of itself.. silly agruments, massive ego's etc etc. which of them can you use to buy something and walk away right away? (not wait 30min etc)

[jamski68] 03/12/2017 17:52

I just sold some to buy more EOS... IOTA's current partnerships are slightly concerning, MS et al...

[spadman] 03/12/2017 17:48

Compound up I think we want the same things so lets just see which fork the market prefers. There is plenty of FUD on both sides, wilfully ignoring Blockstreams conflict of interest is also FUD.

Im not against side chains as such, they have effectively been used for a long time. Exchanges etc when mcbean is in and out all day each of his trades aren't on the blockchain. Thats fine if it's voluntary, but the truth is if you dont own the private keys you dont own the coins. If your transaction isn't on the blockchain you dont own the private keys.

Read the Bitcoin White paper, PEER TO PEER electronic CASH.

Higher highs for bitcoin core, an even bigger move with the real bitcoin.

Cheers

[patientcapital] 03/12/2017 17:34

Briefly...

[patientcapital] 03/12/2017 17:33

IOTA just overtaken gold.

[compoundup] 03/12/2017 15:34

SPADman - re 3259 - that video is pure BS. Another FUD from the big blockers whose chief advocate has descended to name calling and tantrums because he can't admit his centralised hard fork protocol is built on quicksand. i.e:

1. making it impossible to achieve instant transactions means BCH is just another Paypal and
2. block sizes that are bound to grow to petabytes due to the intransigent refusal that multi-layer has benefits. (e.g. where would the Internet be without SSL).

Specifically taking issue with the issue of high fees on the original chain, there is plenty of evidence to show that spam transactions have been used to fill blocks in correlation with the timing of BCH pumps. The converse is true. Fees drop back to modest levels when these bad actors stop spamming. Without spam, fees are very low for people who use SegWit addresses at both ends of a transaction.

The presenter also wilfully misrepresents the function of Lightning Networks by suggesting:
1. "we're a few years away from..." - No, they're on testnet now
2. "doesn't really work alongside...[is a] replacement" - No, either he evidently either doesn't understand "escrow" or it is deliberate FUD.
3. "central bank...IOUs" - No, the LN is demonstrably trustless. If it weren't it wouldn't be acceptable to users.
4. "transaction fees likely over $100" - notably he puts forward no backup for this assertion. Currently the blockchain has adequate capacity, spamming excepted as mentioned above, and will continue to have sufficient in the short term as more lazy actors take up SegWit (e.g. inefficient operators such as Coinbase). Some exchanges did so long ago, e.g. Bitstamp.
5. "...[Core] won't change the block size" - is just FUD. Core are not ruling out a hard fork to increase the block size in the future:

(search string "ultimately miners" to get to the point)

Then we get into conspiracy theories from 2:30 onwards...[yawn]

Let's be honest the NYA and BCH came about because DCG group miners wanted Asicboost so that they could out-compete and centralise on themselves. They could not countenance SegWit because it rendered Asicboost worthless after they had invested huge sums. It was a clear message that user interests were of no concern to them.

I don't think it's clever to call out DCG as bad actors just because they organised the NYA anti-consensus conference any more than this twit on Youtube is calling out Blockstream because he thinks [but gives no credible argument] that they are looking for a way of establishing a stream of fees for themselves out of Lightning Networks.



I'm for decentralisation and consensus. Clearly the latter can be difficult to achieve if impatient contributors with agendas persist in setting up obstacles when the direction of travel doesn't suit their financial objectives.

There are bigger issues facing the ecosystem right now, which are more deserving of the focus of attention than slanging across the centralise/de-centralise debate. For example: Bitfinex and whether Tether is going to become the millstone that drowns them causing shockwaves across other exchanges.

[spadman] 03/12/2017 08:01

What makes you think I said that?

[mcbeanburger] 03/12/2017 02:06

why do you think msm knows or understands the difference? or even that there is two chains.

[spadman] 02/12/2017 22:55

McBean I think the mainstream are all over Bitcoin core, thats why they don't laugh about it in the News these days.

[mcbeanburger] 02/12/2017 18:38

erik - that might be a sign to take some off the table. but given where we are and what happened last week probably will continue up.

Dan Larimer - hadn't reaslised he's from bitshare. i remember listening to him a couple of years ago when i thought bitshares would take off. its centralised ownship meant no dev work could be done. not surprised he moved on.

[eriktherock] 02/12/2017 18:21

Thanks McB. EOS market cap has risen by circa $400m this week alone.

[mcbeanburger] 02/12/2017 18:14

topping stuff that compound.... are the mainstream going to bite though? most won't my thinks.

[compoundup] 02/12/2017 17:50

Secrecy is coming to BTC on sidechains using MimbleWimble. I hear the name originates from a particular Hogwarts spell to do with obfuscation. If that's what is happening to the transaction, why not give it an epigrammatical name?

Mainstream is coming and not so slowly. Today in the D Tel, rather than the usual phobic nonsense, I have seen informed articles in both the main paper and the Business section whose general thrust is that if you can comprehend crypto it is not unreasonable behaviour to dabble. An establishment-supporting broadsheet endorsing crypto? Who'd have thought that would happen so soon?

[mcbeanburger] 02/12/2017 16:32

eos - i held it recently but sold it too early. trading well.good luck. ignore spad he's a single cell thinker. ;o)

as i mentioned elsewhere me thinks we are now going to push into the cme event. crazy highs coming? put your sell orders into the 25k range?.... fingers crossed.

[spadman] 01/12/2017 22:00

Its another pre mine pump. Newbies be warned.

[jamski68] 01/12/2017 19:16

I think Dan Larimer's goal is to create a truly decentralised platform on which to run applications on... see the white paper here: hxxps://github.com/EOSIO/Documentation/blob/master/TechnicalWhitePaper.md

Very exciting.

[spadman] 01/12/2017 18:44

The protocol is a means to an end, the ledger is the important thing to preserve. If you start with a new ledger simply because you believe you have a slightly better protocol no ledger can ever have longevity.

If any altcoin can come up with some sort of superior protocol using open software there is no reason the longest running ledger cant simply be cut and pasted into that protocol.

Seriously none of the use cases of complicated blockchain smart contracts are viable if ledgers come and go.

[mcbeanburger] 30/11/2017 17:52

agree and not say one of the secretive coins. or business coins like eth

[corriegarth] 30/11/2017 17:42

Big assumption that everyone new to crytos would only buy bitcoin.

[spadman] 30/11/2017 17:08

Although there are more participants still only about 0.1% of the population have ever had a position in crypto, so we have a long way to go. Gold probably has about 95%, stocks even more.

Bitcoin if it scales or Bitcoin cash will only resemble familiar markets when adoption has reached saturation point.

To reach 51% of the population the user base needs to double 9 times. If the price doubles 9 times we are looking at $5,120,000 per btc aprox.

[mcbeanburger] 30/11/2017 09:56

anyway btc and bch are the same markets with only slightly different participants. large holders probably never sold bch or btc just hold both.

[mcbeanburger] 30/11/2017 09:54

"now there are more participants you would expect btc price action to resemble more widely traded markets, tops there are usually a longer process so insiders can offload, and invariably there are a number corrections on the way to the top, each one a temporary set back, conditioning buyers not to sell when it sells off, then it sells off, lets see :)"

this is my expectation of the top - it will slowly roll over. yesterday's action is just the start as it was too fast and too violent to hold any length of time.