The trade-off is of course that on-chain tx fees increase, and systemic risk accumulates on more fragile higher layers (like LN). People judge this trade-off differently, hence BTCers and BSVers.
1CtfHj…zVrZ
1CtfHjRxn4UzNinEgUJgCCSV98yAZ6zVrZ
- 0 Following
- 0 Followers
- 345 Posts
Activity
Paul's small-block arguments were not very good. It is not really about validating incoming transactions, but about validating the composition of the coin. It is akin to the ability to extremely cheaply validate that gold is gold.
Productive discussion between @4179 and @truthcoin.
Steve is intellectually honest, listens and is not a snowflake with regards to different opinions. Not a waste of time!
It's over, the lockdowners who destroyed the livelihood for so many, and who have caused needless starvation among the poor, have nowhere to flee to.
/trolltoll set @1466 $1
That's going to happen with Bitcoin even if no one lost his or her coins. Productivity growth in the economy, combined with no growth in money supply means purchasing power grows even if you do nothing.
Bad economic theory is thinking it's good for a growing Bitcoin economy to have its money suffer arbitrary code base changes related to such a fundamental thing as property rights.
The only way your 80-year scheme could be implemented in practice is through a code change, right?
The brute force thing is just reality. If a hashing algo is 'broken', you gotta change the algo and move the coins.
Well, ok. My point was just that I am rather tired of seeing 'clever' proposals that change how the money works. We have had to dealt with that since forever, and the code base freeze of BSV is one if its most attractive qualities imo.
You can't change the location or composition of all gold atoms, not even when some gold tragically sank to the bottom of the sea. That's one thing that's good about gold as money.
1.) Why am I so against all monetary tinkering? Because unlike over-regulating single industries, screwing around with money affects everything; money is the glue that keeps whole societies cooperative and peaceful, as opposed to divided and hostile.
2.) What do you think happens when Division of Labor implodes? A world of trading partners devolves into a world of looters, as acquiring wealth through violence has suddenly become cheaper than acquiring it through production.
Reposted
twetch#8530 6.1y
The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master.
For every added item on a central bank's balance sheet, the risk of spiraling inflation and deconstruction of Division of Labor increases. But they don't care; what do they know of adversarial thinking. They are busy planning for the next office party.
If companies go bankrupt, and equity is wiped out while bonds face haircuts, the systematic way for issued money to be 'deissued'/burned is severed. When the money then is stuck in the economy forever, that's when the real fun begins!
Mocking Calvin or Craig with memes is a costly signal. Less Fit Males don't survive Thai prison. @17294
Well if acquiring the Bitcoins in the first place was at least close to unforgeably costly, then losing control over them is a cost.
But I'm not saying it is the same as the POW approach, just curious what peoples' opinions are.
Reposted
twetch#24100 6.1y
Is there a simple explanation why sending bitcoins to burn address is not as good a costly signal as commissioning POW?
Did Indiana Jones really have a permit for all those temple expeditions? Smh
The one thing money needs the most is the one thing BCH will never have; being left alone. They mess around with the very keystone of the bridge they have built their budding economy on.
Reposted
173jtY…Ttp1 6.1y
Thanks for the warm welcome everyone ! Please tell me why i should own BSV in comparision to BCH. I dont want to shut down my eyes.
If i am sold, best 3 replies will get 3 BSV, 2 BSV and 1 BSV respectively. Please Branch and like for visibility !
Reposted
twetch#116 6.1y
You saw what happened to BCH, Marc. It’s going to keep happening because they have no intentions of ever stopping their developer tinkering, even if they get rid of Amaury now. There will be a new “French“ asshole in a year fucking it up, I guarantee it.
You dont go around saying "I own the Bitcoin database" unless you have the biggest goal of them all in sight.
When a certain pair in the future go for Satoshi's coins through proposed code changes, having intimidated everyone with continuous lawsuits may be what tips the scale in their favor.
Is there a simple explanation why sending bitcoins to burn address is not as good a costly signal as commissioning POW?
Initial PR:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19227
'Reverting' PR:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19897
When is Boost POW implemented for Bitcoin SV Improvement Proposal process? Would make for a nice showcase.
There is GitHub pull request drama in BTC-land. Yesterday, a change pandering to SJW language policing (a variable had been named BLACKLIST) was quickly merged. Today people are asking why no one has solved the filtering out of such useless spam.
John Law was brought up in the last Numpties. He is the embodiment of tinkerlust and the fatal intersection of law and money. @2956 @109 @931 @4179 https://medium.com/@bdratings/tales-of-soft-money-john-law-and-the-humiliation-of-dignity-9cfa363fa11a