Bitcoin Utopia – SETI.Germany Wiki

Bitcoin mentioned around Reddit: War on Cash: Banks, governments, credit card companies and fintech evangelists all want us to believe a cashless future is inevitable and good. But this isn't a frictionless utopia says Brett Scott, a /r/Economics

Bitcoin mentioned around Reddit: War on Cash: Banks, governments, credit card companies and fintech evangelists all want us to believe a cashless future is inevitable and good. But this isn't a frictionless utopia says Brett Scott, a /Economics submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Vitalik's response to Tuur

I interlaced everything between Vitalik and Tuur to make it easier to read.
1/ People often ask me why I’m so “against” Ethereum. Why do I go out of my way to point out flaws or make analogies that put it in a bad light?
Intro
2/ First, ETH’s architecture & culture is opposite that of Bitcoin, and yet claims to offer same solutions: decentralization, immutability, SoV, asset issuance, smart contracts, …
Second, ETH is considered a crypto ‘blue chip’, thus colors perception of uninformed newcomers.
Agree! I personally find Ethereum culture far saner, though I am a bit biased :)
3/ I've followed Ethereum since 2014 & feel a responsibility to share my concerns. IMO contrary to its marketing, ETH is at best a science experiment. It’s now valued at $13B, which I think is still too high.
Not an argument
4/ I agree with Ethereum developer Vlad Zamfir that it’s not money, not safe, and not scalable. https://twitter.com/VladZamfistatus/838006311598030848
@VladZamfir Eth isn't money, so there is no monetary policy. There is currently fixed block issuance with an exponential difficulty increase (the bomb).
I'm pretty sure Vlad would say the exact same thing about Bitcoin
5/ To me the first red flag came up when in our weekly hangout we asked the ETH founders about to how they were going to scale the network. (We’re now 4.5 years later, and sharding is still a pipe dream.)
Ethereum's Joe Lubin in June 2014: "anticipate blockchain bloat—working on various sharding ideas". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJG9g0lCPU8&feature=youtu.be&t=36m41s
The core principles have been known for years, the core design for nearly a year, and details for months, with implementations on the way. So sharding is definitely not at the pipe dream stage at this point.
6/ Despite strong optimism that on-chain scaling of Ethereum was around the corner (just another engineering job), this promise hasn’t been delivered on to date.
Sure, sharding is not yet finished. Though more incremental stuff has been going well, eg. uncle rates are at near record lows despite very high chain usage.
7/ Recently, a team of reputable developers decided to peer review a widely anticipated Casper / sharding white paper, concluding that it does not live up to its own claims.
Unmerciful peer review of Vlad Zamfir & co's white paper to scale Ethereum: "the authors do NOT prove that the CBC Casper family of protocols is Byzantine fault tolerant in either practice or theory".
That review was off the mark in many ways, eg. see https://twitter.com/technocrypto/status/1071111404340604929, and by the way CBC is not even a prerequisite for Serenity
8/ On the 2nd layer front, devs are now trying to scale Ethereum via scale via state channels (ETH’s version of Lightning), but it is unclear whether main-chain issued ERC20 type tokens will be portable to this environment.
Umm... you can definitely use Raiden with arbitrary ERC20s. That's why the interface currently uses WETH (the ERC20-fied version of ether) and not ETH
9/ Compare this to how the Bitcoin Lightning Network project evolved:
elizabeth stark @starkness: For lnd: First public code released: January 2016 Alpha: January 2017 Beta: March 2018…
Ok
10/ Bitcoin’s Lightning Network is now live, and is growing at rapid clip.
Jameson Lopp @lopp: Lightning Network: January 2018 vs December 2018
Sure, though as far as I understand there's still a low probability of finding routes for nontrivial amounts, and there's capital lockup griefing vectors, and privacy issues.... FWIW I personally never thought lightning is unworkable, it's just a design that inherently runs into ten thousand small issues that will likely take a very long time to get past.
11/ In 2017, more Ethereum scaling buzz was created, this time the panacea was “Plasma”.
@TuurDemeester Buterin & Poon just published a new scaling proposal for Ethereum, "strongly complementary to base-layer PoS and sharding": plasma.io https://twitter.com/VitalikButerin/status/895467347502182401
Yay, Plasma!
12/ However, upon closer examination it was the recycling of some stale ideas, and the project went nowhere:
Peter Todd @peterktodd These ideas were all considered in the Treechains design process, and ultimately rejected as insecure.
Just because Peter Todd rejected something as "insecure" doesn't mean that it is. In general, the ethereum research community is quite convinced that the fundamental Plasma design is fine, and as far as I understand there are formal proofs on the way. The only insecurity that can't be avoided is mass exit vulns, and channel-based systems have those too.
13/ The elephant in the room is the transition to proof-of-stake, an “environmentally friendly” way to secure the chain. (If this was the plan all along, why create a proof-of-work chain first?)
@TuurDemeester "Changing from proof of work to proof of stake changes the economics of the system, all the rules change and it will impact everything."
Umm... we created a proof of work chain first because we did not have a satisfactory proof of stake algo initially?
14/ For the uninitiated, here’s a good write-up that highlights some of the fundamental design problems of proof-of-stake. Like I said, this is science experiment territory.
And here's a set of long arguments from me on why proof of stake is just fine: https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Proof-of-Stake-FAQ. For a more philosophical piece, see https://medium.com/@VitalikButerin/a-proof-of-stake-design-philosophy-506585978d51
15/ Also check out this thread about how Proof of Stake blockchains require subjectivity (i.e. a trusted third party) to achieve consensus: https://forum.blockstack.org/t/pos-blockchains-require-subjectivity-to-reach-consensus/762?u=muneeb … and this thread on Bitcoin: https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/59t48m/proofofstake_question/
Yes, we know about weak subjectivity, see https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/11/25/proof-stake-learned-love-weak-subjectivity/. It's really not that bad, especially given that users need to update their clients once in a while anyway, oh and by the way even if the weak subjectivity assumption is broken an attacker still needs to gather up that pile of old keys making up 51% of the stake. And also to defend against that there's Universal Hash Time.
16/ Keep in mind that Proof of Stake (PoS) is not a new concept at all. Proof-of-Work actually was one of the big innovations that made Bitcoin possible, after PoS was deemed impractical because of censorship vulnerability.
@TuurDemeester TIL Proof-of-stake based private currency designs date at least back to 1998. https://medium.com/swlh/the-untold-history-of-bitcoin-enter-the-cypherpunks-f764dee962a1
Oh I definitely agree that proof of work was superior for bootstrap, and I liked it back then especially because it actually managed to be reasonably egalitarian around 2009-2012 before ASICs fully took over. But at the present time it doesn't really have that nice attribute.
17/ Over the years, this has become a pattern in Ethereum’s culture: recycling old ideas while not properly referring to past research and having poor peer review standards. This is not how science progresses.Tuur Demeester added,
[email protected] has been repeatedly accused of /criticised for not crediting prior art. Once again with plasma: https://twitter.com/DamelonBCWS/status/895643582278782976
I try to credit people whenever I can; half my blog and ethresear.ch posts have a "special thanks" section right at the top. Sometimes we end up re-inventing stuff, and sometimes we end up hearing about stuff, forgetting it, and later re-inventing it; that's life as an autodidact. And if you feel you've been unfairly not credited for something, always feel free to comment, people have done this and I've edited.
18/ One of my big concerns is that sophistry and marketing hype is a serious part of Ethereum’s success so far, and that overly inflated expectations have lead to an inflated market cap.
Ok, go on.
19/ Let’s illustrate with an example.
...
20/ A few days ago, I shared a critical tweet that made the argument that Ethereum’s value proposition is in essence utopian.
@TuurDemeester Ethereum-ism sounds a bit like Marxism to me:
  • What works today (PoW) is 'just a phase', the ideal & unproven future is to come: Proof-of-Stake.…
...
21/ I was very serious about my criticism. In fact, each one of the three points addressed what Vitalik Buterin has described as “unique value propositions of Ethereum proper”. https://www.reddit.com/ethereum/comments/5jk3he/how_to_prevent_the_cannibalism_of_ethereum_into/dbgujr8/
...
22/ My first point, about Ethereum developers rejecting Proof-of-Work, has been illustrated many times over By Vitalik and others. (See earlier in this tweetstorm for more about how PoS is unproven.)
Vitalik Non-giver of Ether @VitalikButerin: I don't believe in proof of work!
See above for links as to why I think proof of stake is great.
23/ My second point addresses Ethereum’s romance with the vague and dangerous notion of ‘social consensus’, where disruptive hard-forks are used to ‘upgrade’ or ‘optimize’ the system, which inevitably leads to increased centralization. More here:
See my rebuttal to Tuur's rebuttal :)
24/ My third point addresses PoS’ promise of perpetual income to ETHizens. Vitalik is no stranger to embracing free lunch ideas, e.g. during his 2014 ETH announcement speech, where he described a coin with a 20% inflation tax as having “no cost” to users.
Yeah, I haven't really emphasized perpetual income to stakers as a selling point in years. I actually favor rewards being as low as possible while still being high enough for security.
25/ In his response to my tweet, Vitalik adopted my format to “play the same game” in criticizing Bitcoin. My criticisms weren't addressed, and his response was riddled with errors. Yet his followers gave it +1,000 upvotes!
Vitalik Non-giver of Ether @VitalikButerin: - What works today (L1) is just a phase, ideal and unproven future (usable L2) is to come - Utopian concept of progress: we're already so confident we're finished we ain't needin no hard forks…
Ok, let's hear about what the errors are...
26/ Rebuttal: - BTC layer 1 is not “just a phase”, it always will be its definitive bedrock for transaction settlement. - Soft forking digital protocols has been the norm for over 3 decades—hard-forks are the deviation! - Satoshi never suggested hyperbitcoinization as a goal.
Sure, but (i) the use of layer 1 for consumer payments is definitely, in bitcoin ideology, "just a phase", (ii) I don't think you can make analogies between consensus protocols and other kinds of protocols, and between soft forking consensus protocols and protocol changes in other protocols, that easily, (iii) plenty of people do believe that hyperbitcoinization as a goal. Oh by the way: https://twitter.com/tuurdemeestestatus/545993119599460353
27/ This kind of sophistry is exhausting and completely counter-productive, but it can be very convincing for an uninformed retail public.
Ok, go on.
28/ Let me share a few more inconvenient truths.
...
29/ In order to “guarantee” the transition to PoS’ utopia of perpetual income (staking coins earns interest), a “difficulty bomb” was embedded in the protocol, which supposedly would force miners to accept the transition.
The intended goal of the difficulty bomb was to prevent the protocol from ossifying, by ensuring that it has to hard fork eventually to reset the difficulty bomb, at which point the status quo bias in favor of not changing other protocol rules at the same time would be weaker. Though forcing a switch to PoS was definitely a key goal.
30/ Of course, nothing came of this, because anything in the ETH protocol can be hard-forked away. Another broken promise.
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: Looks like another Ethereum hard-fork is going to remove the "Ice Age" (difficulty increase meant to incentivize transition to PoS). https://www.cryptocompare.com/coins/guides/what-is-the-ethereum-ice-age/
How is that a broken promise? There was no social contract to only replace the difficulty-bombed protocol with a PoS chain.
31/ Another idea that was marketed heavily early on, was that with ETH you could program smart contract as easily as javascript applications.
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: I forgot, but in 2014 Ethereum was quite literally described as "Javascript-on-the-blockchain"
Agree that was over-optimistic, though the part of the metaphor that's problematic is the "be done with complex apps in a couple hours" part, NOT the "general-purpose languages are great" part.
32/ This was criticized by P2P & OS developers as a reckless notion, given that every smart contracts is actually a “de novo cryptographic protocol”. In other words, it’s playing with fire. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1427885.msg14601127#msg14601127
See above
33/ The modular approach to Bitcoin seems to be much better at compartmentalizing risk, and thus reducing attack surfaces. I’ve written about modular scaling here...
To be fair, risk is reduced because Bitcoin does less.
34/ Another huge issue that Ethereum has is with scaling. By putting “everything on the blockchain” (which stores everything forever) and dubbing it “the world computer”, you are going to end up with a very slow and clogged up system.
Christopher Allen @ChristopherA: AWS cost: $0.000000066 for calc, Ethereum: $26.55. This is about 400 million times as expensive. World computer? https://hackernoon.com/ether-purchase-power-df40a38c5a2f
We never advocated "putting everything on the blockchain". The phrase "world computer" was never meant to be interpreted as "everyone's personal desktop", but rather as a common platform specifically for the parts of applications that require consensus on shared state. As evidence of this, notice how Whisper and Swarm were part of the vision as complements to Ethereum right from the start.
35/ By now the Ethereum bloat is so bad that cheaply running an individual node is practically impossible for a lay person. ETH developers are also imploring people to not deploy more smart contract apps on its blockchain.
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: But... deploying d-apps on the "Ethereum Virtual Machine" is exactly what everyone was encouraged to do for the past 4 years. Looks like on-chain scaling wasn't such a great idea after all.
Umm.... I just spun up a node from scratch last week. On a consumer laptop.
36/ As a result, and despite the claims that running a node in “warp” mode is easy and as good as a full node, Ethereum is becoming increasingly centralized.
@TuurDemeester Finally a media article touching on the elephant in the room: Ethereum has become highly centralized. #infura https://www.coindesk.com/the-race-is-on-to-replace-ethereums-most-centralized-layeamp?__twitter_impression=true
See above
37/ Another hollow claim: in 2016, Ethereum was promoted as being censorship resistant…
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: Pre TheDAO #Ethereum presentation: "uncensorable, code is law, bottom up". http://ow.ly/qW49302Pp92
Yes, the DAO fork did violate the notion of absolute immutability. However, the "forking the DAO will lead to doom and gloom" crowd was very wrong in one key way: it did NOT work as a precedent justifying all sorts of further state interventions. The community clearly drew a line in the sand by firmly rejecting EIP 867, and EIP 999 seems to now also be going nowhere. So it seems like there's some evidence that the social contract of "moderately but not infinitely strong immutability" actually can be stable.
38/ Yet later that year, after only 6% of ETH holders had cast a vote, ETH core devs decided to endorse a hard-fork that clawed back the funds from a smart contract that held 4.5% of all ETH in circulation. More here: ...
See above
39/ Other potential signs of centralization: Vitalik Buterin signing a deal with a Russian government institution, and ETH core developers experimenting with semi-closed meetings: https://twitter.com/coindesk/status/902892844955860993 …,
Hudson Jameson @hudsonjameson: The "semi-closed" Ethereum 1.x meeting from last Friday was an experiment. The All Core Dev meeting this Friday will be recorded as usual.
Suppose I were to tomorrow sign up to work directly for Kim Jong Un. What concretely would happen to the Ethereum protocol? I suspect very little; I am mostly involved in the Serenity work, and the other researchers have proven very capable of both pushing the spec forward even without me and catching any mistakes with my work. So I don't think any argument involving me applies. And we ended up deciding not to do more semi-closed meetings.
40/ Another red flag to me is the apparent lack of relevant expertise in the ETH development community. (Check the responses…)
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: Often heard: "but Ethereum also has world class engineers working on the protocol". Please name names and relevant pedigree so I can follow and learn. https://twitter.com/TuurDemeestestatus/963029019447955461
I personally am confident in the talents of our core researchers, and our community of academic partners. Most recently the latter group includes people from Starkware, Stanford CBR, IC3, and other groups.
41/ For a while, Microsoft veteran Lucius Meredith was mentioned as playing an important role in ETH scaling, but now he is likely distracted by the failure of his ETH scaling company RChain. https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/12/24/understanding-serenity-part-i-abstraction/
I have no idea who described Lucius Meredith's work as being important for the Serenity roadmap.... oh and by the way, RChain is NOT an "Ethereum scaling company"
42/ Perhaps the recently added Gandalf of Ethereum, with his “Fellowship of Ethereum Magicians” [sic] can save the day, but imo that seems unlikely...
Honestly, I don't see why Ethereum Gandalf needs to save the day, because I don't see what is in danger and needs to be saved...
43/ This is becoming a long tweetstorm, so let’s wrap up with a few closing comments.
Yay!
44/ Do I have a conflict of interest? ETH is a publicly available asset with no real barriers to entry, so I could easily get a stake. Also, having met Vitalik & other ETH founders several times in 2013-’14, it would have been doable for me to become part of the in-crowd.
Agree there. And BTW I generally think financial conflicts of interest are somewhat overrated; social conflicts/tribal biases are the bigger problem much of the time. Though those two kinds of misalignments do frequently overlap and reinforce each other so they're difficult to fully disentangle.
45/ Actually, I was initially excited about Ethereum’s smart contract work - this was before one of its many pivots.
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: Ethereum is probably the first programming language I will teach myself - who wouldn't want the ability to program smart BTC contracts?
Ethereum was never about "smart BTC contracts"..... even "Ethereum as a Mastercoin-style meta-protocol" was intended to be built on top of Primecoin.
46/ Also, I have done my share of soul searching about whether I could be suffering from survivor’s bias.
@TuurDemeester I just published “I’m not worried about Bitcoin Unlimited, but I am losing sleep over Ethereum” https://medium.com/p/im-not-worried-about-bitcoin-unlimited-but-i-am-losing-sleep-over-ethereum-b5251c54e66d
Ok, good.
47/ Here’s why Ethereum is dubious to me: rather than creating an open source project & testnet to work on these interesting computer science problems, its founders instead did a securities offering, involving many thousands of clueless retail investors.
What do you mean "instead of"? We did create an open source project and testnet! Whether or not ETH is a security is a legal question; seems like SEC people agree it's not: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/14/bitcoin-and-ethereum-are-not-securities-but-some-cryptocurrencies-may-be-sec-official-says.html
48/ Investing in the Ethereum ICO was akin to buying shares in a startup that had “invent time travel” as part of its business plan. Imo it was a reckless security offering, and it set the tone for the terrible capital misallocation of the 2017 ICO boom.
Nothing in the ethereum roadmap requires time-travel-like technical advancements or anything remotely close to that. Proof: we basically have all the fundamental technical advancements we need at this point.
49/ In my view, Ethereum is the Yahoo of our day - an unscalable “blue chip” cryptocurrency:
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: 1/ The DotCom bubble shows that the market isn't very good at valuing early stage technology. I'll use Google vs. Yahoo to illustrate.
Got it.
50/ I’ll close with a few words from Gregory Maxwell from 2016,: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1427885.msg14601127#msg14601127
See my rebuttal to Greg from 2 years ago: https://www.reddit.com/ethereum/comments/4g1bh6/greg_maxwells_critique_of_ethereum_blockchains/
submitted by shouldbdan to ethtrader [link] [comments]

when cash is banned.................

https://news.bitcoin.com/when-cash-is-banned-centralized-cryptos-are-not-going-to-save-you/


Australia is now moving forward with its proposed legislation to ban cash purchases over 10,000 AUD ($6,900) for business purposes. According to the treasury website: “The Black Economy Taskforce recommended this action to tackle tax evasion and other criminal activities.” While many Aussies are celebrating Bitcoin’s exclusion from this clause, others find the move away from hard cash somewhat chilling. After all, if this finally goes through, banks and the state will be given sole power to deny or approve any and all purchases above this limit. Crypto is not yet affected, but when cash is erased, and the control grid is tightened, be sure that centralized shitcoins are not going to save anyone, either.

There’s always been a lot of zealous hype in crypto circles. Search “bitcoin” on Twitter and you’ll be overwhelmed with an avalanche of largely meaningless noise. “Feeling really bullish right now thanks to X, Y, Z!” “If you don’t have any Bitcoin by now, you’re doing it wrong.” “Crypto #Revolution.” These hyped-up voices flash in the pan like cheap sparklers, and tend go quiet when the markets tank. They talk about being “unbanked” and the revolution of all things “powered by blockchain.”

But at the end of the day, what the hell does all this really mean? A lot of people seem to think that freedom in finance can come easily, without a fight or intentional action. That the dynasty of powers that be are just going to roll over and accept a money they cannot control. For all the shouts of “ditch fiat!” and “why are people still using statist play money?” very few seem to understand the real score, which is this: there’s no war being waged on your technology, but on its ability to provide you with financial autonomy, self-sufficiency, and privacy.
The really bad news for these folks, though, is that if Australia pushes through this ban on cash purchases, and they are forced to use only digital assets and credit, it doesn’t matter how much of whatever centralized crypto shitcoin anyone holds. At that point, the state is in control, and fiat cash–as evil as it is–would be a lot more friendly.

The alliance of Five Eyes nations (FVEY) really seems to have chosen Australia as a testing ground for implementing Orwellian, anti-privacy measures. Aussies are no longer allowed to be secure in their communications thanks to a controversial new law outlawing encrypted devices and chat applications. Now they are moving away from the privacy of paper money as well. This ostensibly to combat drug trafficking and terrorism via almost completely state-supervised monetary transactions for everyone.
It likely won’t be long until similar laws make their way into other FVEY countries like the United States, the U.K., Canada, and New Zealand. If that happens, the only cryptocurrencies that will be able to help secure value are those that are open source, private, secure and decentralized. Not surprisingly, these are the very coins now being specifically targeted by these nations, and slandered as “tools for criminals.”

If sound money is to survive this financial tyranny, it seems there might be some kind of battle. Many believe technological innovation can make this struggle a more or less peaceful one. When dealing with groups that do not respect the individual, inalienable rights of human beings to their bodies, minds, and property, however, there always comes a point where “no” must be uttered.
Whether it be boldly proclaimed from a stage in the spotlight or silently through a private action or transaction, it still must happen. There is no change without conscious, human action. Bitcoin allows for this by being decentralized. No state has control over the network. “No” is still an option. “No” is still somewhat of an option with fiat paper as well, as much as sensationalists might hate to hear it, or fear to say it.

These aforementioned hypesters don’t get that the propagandized fiat money they rail against (and indeed they are correct in their criticisms) is still much more private and useful than a centralized, government-regulated digital money could or ever would be. The Ripple crowd, for example, brags about how realistic and adoption-friendly they are, the company itself writing a saccharine, syrupy letter to Congress on July 29. They speak about wanting to comply with whatever regulations must be put in place:
We don’t take for granted the vital role of central banks in issuing currencies and setting monetary policy in concert with the complex dynamics of economies around the world. For centuries, governments have been well suited for the job because paramount to the acceptance of any currency is trust.
Well-suited? For what job? Is debasing and devaluing people’s money, letting terrorists and violent traffickers off the hook, and losing trillions, spending trillions to finance the death and destruction of hundreds of thousands in war and democide “well-suited”? They’ve lost their minds.
If crypto is to be useful, it has to resemble the models of gold and cash, as far as privacy and user autonomy is concerned, and improve upon them immensely–not make a mealy-mouthed return to state-sponsored, central bank-controlled play money irrelevancy. Imagine being an Australian business owner and trying to buy something, but it’s too expensive to pay for with cash. For whatever reason, your bank cannot approve the purchase. Your account is frozen, or their servers are down. You’re stuck. This issue doesn’t exist with physical money. But it already does with bank accounts and centralized crypto exchanges.

The moment someone tells you in your private life that you’re “not allowed” to have something that is rightfully yours, and they try to steal it, you cease trusting them, and cut off the relationship. Why, when it comes to the state, should things be any different?
Like a patient off his head on painkillers, these people talk about pie-in-the-sky crypto utopias to be brought about by “blockchain revolutions” controlled by the very people who oppress them the most. Writing letters to Congress. Laughing at the “idealists” who wish to retain the keys to their holdings.
When cash is out, erased, kaput, if blockchain is going to save people, it’s going to be secure money, and not state shitcoins or digital, bank-regulated credit and debt. What the poor Twitter zealots have missed is that this peaceful resistance for non-violent money called the “crypto revolution” is not about just “getting rich,” but at its root is about preserving the dignity of precious, individual human life everywhere.
submitted by mohtasham22 to btc [link] [comments]

Utopia.best Review: 0.32%-0.5% daily for 365 days and principal included

Utopia.best is an online investment program which started on 21st Sep 2019. An investors bought Premium listing on my website 45 days ago. My first withdrawal received successfully. Its model is a little different from other projects. Now let me introduce it.
Investment Plans
(1) Deposit 500–999 dollars, earn 0.32% daily for 365 days and principal included, you will earn 116.8% totally
(2) Deposit 1000–2999 dollars, earn 0.35% daily for 365 days and principal included, you will earn 127.75% totally
(3) Deposit 3000–6999 dollars, earn 0.38% daily for 365 days and principal included, you will earn 138.70% totally
(4) Deposit 7000–9999 dollars, earn 0.42% daily for 365 days and principal included, you will earn 153.30% totally
(5) Minimum deposit $10000, earn 0.46% daily for 365 days and principal included, you will earn 167.90% totally
(6) Minimum deposit $10000, earn 0.50% daily for 365 days and principal included, you will earn 182.50% totally
These are all the investment plans which provide low profit. But if you use the compound function, you will get higher profit. For example, if you deposit $1000 today and use the compound function, then you will get 3580$ after one year, $12816 after two years, and $45883 after three years. Of course, you will not be able to withdraw daily profit if you use the compound function. For my part, I suggest you not to use the compounding function and withdraw profit regularly.
Payment Options
Utopia.best only accept Bitcoin for deposit and withdrawals. The Utopia system requires at least 6 block confirmations before the deposit is credited to your account.
Withdrawal Type
Minimum withdrawal amount is $100. All withdrawal transactions will incur a 2% fee to cover the lost of mining the Bitcoin transaction, as charged by the network. Utopia is a decentralized network that is managed by all Utopia users. When you make a withdrawal request, your request order will be displayed to at least 9 community users. After 6 confirmations are completed, the withdrawal request system will automatically pay the money without any manual intervention. Whenever you help others, you will increase the scope of your withdrawal orders, so by helping others, more people will help you. My last withdrawal request was processed within 12 hours since submission.
Domain
Its domain is registered from 26th Jul 2019 to 27th Jul 2024, using a dedicated IP address.
Other Information
Utopia.best designed an original template for its website. You can create multiple accounts. Just log in to your utopia.best account and click on “Link Account” and you can then create multiple sub-accounts.
Register: https://293640.utopia.best
Read More: https://www.hyiper.net/blog/122.html
submitted by vipinvestor1988 to u/vipinvestor1988 [link] [comments]

Utopia, 1984 Group, bad PR, 1984 Group and [NetStalkers] media garbage

Utopia, 1984 Group, bad PR, 1984 Group and [NetStalkers] media garbage
What would you understand immediately reading my post, I do not want to throw mud at the program or the team of 1984. I just want to explain to everyone that you need to look for advantages in everything and bring the matter to a logical conclusion. And the most important thing is to be committed to your work. And if you choose any product, you must be faithful to it to the end. Be the captains who are to the end with the ship, not the rats running from it.

Hello
In today's post, I would like to tell an interesting story that there is really worthwhile software in the world, what marketing is wrong, and how it is bad to turn to wrong media personalities. Of course, most people know about it. But I think this should be publicly shown, maybe for many and will be useful in the future.

But every cloud has a silver lining. In any case, I think this will be a good stress test for the web. So I can say that even if a bad PR company gives a good result.

Let's start from the very beginning, namely from the software Utopia and the 1984 Group. Of course, little is known about them; more precisely, practically nothing is known. But there is a brief information about her. All of course taken only from the official beta of the portal and block hackology
Spoiler for compact post) About Utopia ecosystem
Utopia – Anti 1984 Ecosystem
Utopia is a decentralized peer-to-peer network, With Utopia you can send instant text and voice messages, transfer files, create group chats and channels, send emails and conduct a private discussion. Currently Utopia is an application for Windows, iOS and Linux which offers all the features within one application. Utopia users get on their ‘Utopia ecosystem‘ as the application also provides a built-in Idyll browser to view websites within Utopia peer-to-peer network . Utopia comes with a Cryptocurrency which is called ‘Crypton‘ and is Proof-of-Stake. uWallet allows you to store,transfer your Crypton(CRP) or even create vouchers and credit cards, Utopia Network includes Utopia Name System (UNS) which is a decentralized registry of names that are impossible to expropriate, freeze or corrupt by 3rd-party as no one has control over the system rather its self-governed by rules set in place which are applicable to everyone.

Register yourself as a Beta Tester, Contributor or a Promoter. Each category gets to enjoy the ecosystem while the rewards vary (reward system will be explained shortly).
Utopia ecosystem is a culmination of multi-year effort by a group of technology enthusiasts dedicated to freedom of self-expression and privacy. We call ourselves a 1984 Group. Among us there are top-notch professionals in almost every IT field, such as cryptographic, software, networking engineers and many more. This has been a long and challenging journey. After all this had never been done before! Finally, we present an ecosystem that will change the way World communicates and handles financial transactions. Utopia brief taken from their official website. Mentioning ‘financial transactions’ makes one wonder that Bitcoin was also disrupting the conventional financial system
Lets Explore Utopia and all the features in detail. please note as this is a beta application many of the features might change in future or some even get removed.
Utopia Encryption
Each user participates in transmission of network data but only the recipient can decrypt the data. Advanced encryption ensures interception-proof communication channel to all Utopia users. All communication is secure and protected by Curve25519 high-speed elliptic curve cryptography while local storage is encrypted by 256-bit AES. Big Brother is no longer watching you!
Installing Utopia
Once you register on the Beta Portal you have to download Utopia Application. After installing the application you will be given a Hardware ID and a Private Key, these keys are required to activate your beta license which can be done from the Activation Page. Please keep in mind that your beta portal website login credentials are not linked with Utopia Application and you can have a different username for the app and the website. Once you activate the license your utopia account will be tied with your beta portal account. A step by step procedure for easy understanding of the activation procedure:
Register at Utopia Beta Portal
Download Utopia software
Install the program by following simple instructions on installation wizard
Run Utopia and Create your account. You will be provided with Public Key and Hardware ID. Those are needed to activate your Utopia software
Login to your account
Click on JOIN BETA
Agree to the Rules and click SUBMIT
Click on NEW ACTIVATION and Enter Public Key and Hardware ID
Click ADD
Now your Utopia is activated and you are ready to test it

https://preview.redd.it/gq8brrk1rmc31.jpg?width=880&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=02a96016755765dfef53309eb78a4abf0011d9c6
Utopia Dashboard
Utopia is a feature-rich platform that is specifically designed to protect privacy of communication, confidentiality and security of personal data. It was created for privacy-conscious public who believe that privacy is paramount. Utopia is a decentralized network, with no central server involved in data transmission or storage. The network is supported by people who use it’s many high quality features.

https://preview.redd.it/w2nhvx54rmc31.jpg?width=1366&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d5f7a958c67ca46ba2c2d34489c83579c0d18d0b
The first glimpse we get of the application is at the Dashboard which has navigational menu for easy access to all of its many features for us to explore, use and report bugs while it is in beta testing phase.

uMail (Utopia Mail)
uMail is a secure alternative to classic e-mail. uMail can be sent to Utopia users that are in your contact list for now. uMail has all functionality of email localized to Utopia ecosystem. No servers are used for mail transmission or storage. uMail account, that is created by default when you join the Utopia network, enables unlimited messaging and attachment storage. Utopia ecosystem encryption guarantees the security of mail transmission and storage. Your uMail, as an internal part of Utopia, cannot be blocked or seized.

https://preview.redd.it/8q7ljch6rmc31.jpg?width=1366&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2bcc4896fa74bb5d2ca23c4c9414fcd4d015ab41


All those who value their data privacy would find this useful including activists and journalists knowing that their data is going straight to the designated user and no 3rd party can intercept their data. Currently the limit set for the attachments is 100 MB but as per the team it may be increased in future.

uWallet (Utopia Wallet)
All financial functionality can be found in Utopia built-in uWallet. uWallet allows you to make and accept payments denominated in Utopia cryptocurrency ‘Crypton‘, accept payments at your website, pay by Crypto Cards without revealing your Identity or bill fellow Utopia users for your services. With uWallet you can store value in Cryptons, receive mining rewards, use uVouchers, request payments and accept payments using the built-in API.


Utopia Mining – Crypton
Utopia has an inbuilt cryptocurrency called Crypton (CRP), which is proof-of-stake therefore a modest machine can also be used to mine cryptons through the GUI based Utopia application or with terminal based Mining bot which comes with the application.

https://preview.redd.it/aadlqb8crmc31.jpg?width=814&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2a100b98b2d912898d1b4a316f05f999846ab7b1


Utopia rewards users that support the ecosystem through Mining by emission of new Cryptons. When you run your Utopia software or bot you will receive your share of collective reward. Mining does not slow your computer down and is environmentally friendly. You may also run a number of bots at several servers or computers to multiply the Crypton mining speed.

https://preview.redd.it/2yktqfkermc31.jpg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c099c8439d25ea1e95682c14116d812f85180dc6


uNS (Utopia Naming System)
Utopia has introduced uNS (Utopia Naming System) which is a unique naming system and independent from the conventional Domain Naming System. DNS is subject to pressure and censorship from less than prefect international laws. Domains can be revoked or suspended due to multiple reasons, such as non-response to WhoIS inquiry or other register policies, non-payment, government actions and so on.
uNS, in contrast, is a truly decentralized non-censored registry hosted by Utopia Network participants with no expiration dates, renewal fees, suspensions and revocations. There is only one rule: First come, First served.

https://preview.redd.it/pfwstp5grmc31.jpg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1e282b2ad57f61ae3e4a114e75a96e20f7fc3a73


uNS registered name should be unique. You may register as many uNS registered names as you want while registration is not free and costs are paid in crypton:
Single letter uNS costs 1000 CRP
Two letter uNS costs 500 CRP
Three letter uNS costs 5 CRP
Four letter or more costs 0.1 CRP

Miscellaneous Features
Making Groups, Adding users, Chatting and Emailing, Sending Mails and Mining Cryptons might be the highlights but Utopia claims to be an ecosystem therefore they had to incorporate many more features so that users of Utopia ecosystem do not feel the need to go out of the system. List of other useful features within the Utopia Application are listed
Packet Forwarding : uNS Manager lists option of ‘Packet Forwarding’ which is an internal system allowing any utopian user to host a website which can be accessed by the Idyll browser, the naming system of the website is explained above, if you register hackology uNS you can make a website and it will open when you visit http://hackology/ and that is it. This option allows to tunnel any kind of data between users in ecosystem, making possible to host different types of resources including websites inside Utopia Network. At the time of writing few fellow Utopia users made Utopia sites which can be accessed at http://trade/ and at http://crystalforest

https://preview.redd.it/1z5pbk8jrmc31.jpg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=03d088e681d00b7c65610a0672ade07f593fb62b


File Manager : All files which are sent or received in Utopia can be accessed from the builtin file manager which also includes an image viewer. As of now the file transfers are limited to 100MB.
Voice Notes : Utopia also supports sending and receiving of Voice messages which you can send to those who are added with you.
Dark Theme : The program comes in standard theme but how can they miss out a Dark Theme for the privacy savvy ? Users can opt for dark theme by going to Tools > Settings > Interface and selecting the ‘Dark Space‘ theme
Utopia API : Utopia comes with a comprehensive API for users to incorporate in their own projects. For instance, using API you can accept payments denominated in Crypton at your website, automatically manage your channels, send instant messages and much more. To get started once you enable the API you can also access the API documentation.
Network Fee Structure : Utopia provides us with an option to view all the network enforced fee and they are updated live on the network as the fee structure changes, thus one can stay updated with the current fee structure. You can access the Network Fee from uWallet > Treasury Data > Network Fee

https://preview.redd.it/62ofvlrormc31.jpg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9ab0ecd8eda8f17290f1e10afd23c67ec828ecb5
Game : Utopia also supports in-app games which can be played in multiplayer, as of writing there is a working Chess game.


You can find more about Utopia on Hackology Blog.

Well, now I want to say personally my opinion after using Utopia.

It is very difficult to judge a product at the beta test stage, but at the moment I can highlight both the pros and cons of both the program and the team that develops it. I want to notice that this is my subjective opinion and you can or may not share it. So, let's begin:

Advantages:
  1. In principle, everything is really anonymous, as far as can be judged really using this software.
  2. Non-indexable channels (If you make it private and hide it from the search) at least we tested it inside the ecosystem. To find even by keywords is not real
  3. Non-indexable pages that you create. If you do not have a direct link, find a site even in the global search is not possible
  4. Easy mining of krypton. Even the weakest computers do not load, very comfortable
  5. Convenient system of anonymity of user information (Without exchange of public keys, even the avatar will not work)
  6. An easy-to-learn interface that arrived to us from 2004 (Old School will understand and appreciate)
  7. In fact, it reminds the decentralized Internet and may well become such with the proper development
  8. Inside the ecosystem there are no labels and notions of who is who, which simplifies the interaction within it
  9. Intervention from outside is at least very difficult, tried methods known to us, failed
  10. Indeed similar to a decentralized ecosystem.
  11. The team quickly fix problems
  12. Availability of detailed and collapsible instructions to all APIs within the ecosystem

There are many advantages and if I list everything, the post will be unrealistically large, therefore I have identified the main ones, and everyone after use must decide for himself what he liked.

And now about the shortcomings, they will be more likely related to common problems than specifically to the software or the command:

  1. Many functions that will have to be mastered by yourself, almost 0 guides
  2. The reaction of the team to the problems through the support leaves much to be desired
  3. The presence of bugs (not critical and absolutely, just not pleasant, both visually and in use)
  4. Not the right choice of PR company to promote software
  5. The team is known for development but is not good friends with product promotion.
  6. Localization, while only English (Well, this is a lesser problem)
  7. Absence of the familiar function (for example, attached videos and the like)
  8. All traffic from the site, even if you put it on the UPU goes through you, and in fact it denies anonymity. Why is this a disadvantage? Not only which VPS will agree that you would put Utopia, because the software scans the ports, which is forbidden without identification on most of the UPU. This is problem. If you put on the UPU, of course, the ends will not come to you, but if Utopia is on your car and the site is on the UPU, all site traffic will go through your public IP, which does not promise any anonymity.

While this is the most powerful problems of utopia, there may be more petty, but it is really not significant.


And now let's talk about NetStalkers, and here they are, because in the title they are.

The fact is that the 1984 Group bought advertising from this media team. I’ll say right away that I have nothing against the truly existing NetStalkers movement, now it concerns only the YouTube media community. So, having bought advertising from this wretched, deceitful and hypocritical community, Utopi had problems, because lovers of free-mining mining, children and inadequacies from all over the CIS and their usefulness were even zero, rushed into the software, moreover, all this garbage put a system on the blades because of spam, a huge amount of spam for which the 1984 Group was not ready. This is actually a terrible move.

Our small team very much hopes that this team can still draw conclusions from this, since only we worked, we chose the most adequate and interested contingent for this software from the CIS and we hope that in the future we will continue to cooperate with them.

If you like this post, I will continue to conduct similar topics and develop these areas, perhaps I will write guides on Utopia and will support this direction.

At the moment, because of the bad PR campaigns from the media slag community, the CIS, they no longer approve traffic, however, it’s even embarrassing to say that it’s from the CIS because such a manifestation of our community leaves much to be desired and even shows us adequate people in extremely bad light .


With you was MrHarr1son I was glad for you to try. If there are comments, or add something, write. I will be glad to discuss.
Our telegrams channels:
https://t.me/utopianews
https://t.me/hiddenthems
https://t.me/antinetstalkers (New channel created for fight with garbage media community)
Link to beta portal https://beta.u.is/
submitted by MrHarr1son to u/MrHarr1son [link] [comments]

Can someone explain to me the utility of seti, large prime research and btcoins?

So first and foremost, I believe that whatever the knowledge collected it would be useful sooner or later. For example from seti boinc developed.
Second I believe that at the end one does whatever he can do, in the respect of the others.
Nevertheless I cannot find seti, prime search and btcoins useful. And those are the projects that mostly collect most of the credits and therefore computational power.
I mean finding possible extra terrestrial intelligence would be super cool but it is (a) unlikely and (b) as far as I understood in the research there are no side discoveries.
Knowing the largest prime (see the videos on numberphile) is super cool too. I mean already doing the statistics on a single large number would be interesting.
But is it useful? I mean in the next 5-20 years, given the experience already collected on the consequences of those searches.
The same for bitcoins to sustain the current projects. Bitcoins utopia has almost all the boinc credits, for what? Maybe 10.000 dollars of value? Moreover in this case the research value is close to zero as far as I understood.
So, could someone change my view?
submitted by pier4r to BOINC [link] [comments]

BITCOIN DIVORCE – BITCOIN CORE VS BITCOIN CASH EXPLAINED

Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash are confusing, especially to newbies. They are likely unaware of the history and reasoning for the existence of these two coins. This ignorance is likely persisted by the censorship practised at bitcoin and Bitcointalk.org for several years. (rbitcoinbanned includes examples of the censoring.)
Most of the following is an explanation of the history of Bitcoin, when there was only one Bitcoin. Then it explains the in-fighting and why it forked into two Bitcoins: 1) Bitcoin Legacy and 2) Bitcoin Cash, which happens in the last section (THE DIVORCE). Feel free to suggest edits or corrections. Later, I will publish this on Medium as well.
BITCOIN WAS AN INSTRUMENT OF WAR
For Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator, and the initial supporters, Bitcoin was more than just a new currency. It was an instrument of war.
Who are they fighting against?
The government and central banks.
There is an abundance of evidence of this, starting with Satoshi Nakamoto’s original software.
BATTLE FOR ONLINE GAMBLING
Governments around the world ban online gambling by banning their currency from being used as payment. The original Bitcoin software included code for Poker. Yes, Poker.
Here is the original code: https://github.com/trottieoriginal-bitcoin/blob/mastesrc/uibase.cpp
Search for “Poker”, “Deal Me Out”, “Deal Hand”, “Fold”, “Call”, “Raise”, “Leave Table”, “DitchPlayer”.
Bitcoin gave the middle finger to the government and found a way to get around their ban. In the initial years, it was mainly gambling operators that used Bitcoin, such as SatoshiDice. Was this a coincidence? Gambling is one of the best, if not, the best application for Bitcoin. It was no wonder that gambling operators embraced Bitcoin, including gambling mogul Calvin Ayre.
Bitcoin enabled people to rebel against the government in other ways as well, such as Silk Road, which enabled people to buy and sell drugs.
ANTI-GOVERNMENT LIBERTARIANS AND CYPHERPUNKS
Libertarians seek to maximize political freedom and autonomy. They are against authority and state power. Cypherpunks are activists advocating widespread use of cryptography as a route to social and political change. Their common thread is their dislike for the government.
Bitcoin was created by libertarians and cypherpunks.
Satoshi Nakamoto used cryptography mailing lists to communicate with other cypherpunks such as Wei Dai. Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
“It’s very attractive to the libertarian viewpoint if we can explain it properly. I’m better with code than with words though.”
Satoshi Nakamoto was rebellious to government control. Someone argued with Satoshi by stating: “You will not find a solution to political problems in cryptography.” Satoshi replied:
"Yes, but we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom for several years.
Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally controlled networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem to be holding their own.”
Nakamoto was critical of the central bank. He wrote:
"The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust that's required to make it work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve. We have to trust them with our privacy, trust them not to let identity thieves drain our accounts.”
It is no wonder that the first supporters of Bitcoin were libertarians as well, who agreed with Satoshi’s ideology and saw the potential of Bitcoin to fulfill their ideology.
One of the biggest benefits that Bitcoin supporters want, is “censorship resistance”. What does this mean? It means: to be able to spend your money any way you want. It means: how to get around government regulations and bans. It means: how to do something despite the government.
Roger Ver, an early Bitcoin supporter, heavily criticizes the government for engaging in wars around the world that kills civilians and children. When he ran as a Libertarian candidate in an election against the Republicans and Democrats, he criticized the ATF and FBI for murdering children in their raid in Waco, Texas. At the time, Ver and many other merchants were selling fireworks on eBay without a license. The ATF charged Ver and sent him to prison, but did not charge any of the other merchants. (https://youtu.be/N6NscwzbMvI?t=47m50s) This must have angered Ver a lot.
Since then, Ver has been on a mission to weaken and shrink the government. When he learned about Bitcoin in February 2011, he saw it as his weapon to accomplish his goal…his instrument of war.
Ver was already a multi-millionaire entrepreneur. He sold his company, bought Bitcoins and was the first to invest in Bitcoin startups, such as Bitpay, Blockchain.info, Kraken, Bitcoin.com, Bitcoinstore.com and others. Then he worked full-time to promote Bitcoin. Bitpay became the largest Bitcoin payment processor. Blockchain.info became the largest provider of Bitcoin wallets. Much of the growth of Bitcoin since 2011 can be attributed to Ver's companies.
More evidence of Ver’s anti-government sentiment emerged when he recently announced that he is working to create a society with no government at all (FreeSociety.com).
HOW TO WIN THE WAR
To win the war, Bitcoin must be adopted and widely used by the masses. When people use Bitcoin instead of their national fiat currency, the government becomes weaker. The government can no longer do the following:
It is not only important to get the masses to adopt Bitcoin, but it is also important to get them to adopt it quickly. If it takes a long time, governments will have more time to think twice about allowing Bitcoin to exist and will have more justifications to ban it. They can claim that Bitcoin is used for ransomware, terrorism, etc. If Bitcoin is adopted by the masses to buy everyday goods, such as food and clothing, then it will be harder for them to stop it.
IS BITCOIN WINNING?
Yes and no.
Bitcoin has definitely become more popular over the years. But, it is not achieving Satoshi Nakamoto’s goals.
Satoshi defined Bitcoin and his goal. The title of his white paper is:
“Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System”
Is Bitcoin being used as cash? Unfortunately, it is not. It is being used as a store of value. However, the title of Satoshi’s white paper was not:
“Bitcoin: A Store of Value”
There is utility in having a store of value, of course. People need it and Bitcoin has superior features to gold. Therefore, it is likely that Bitcoin can continue gaining in popularity and price as it continues to compete and take market share away from gold.
However, both gold and Bitcoin are not being used as currency.
If Bitcoin does not replace fiat currencies, will it weaken governments? No, because no matter how many people buy gold or Bitcoin (as a store of value), they do not weaken governments. To do so, Bitcoin must replace fiat currencies.
BITCOIN LOSING TO FIAT
In the initial years, Bitcoin was taking market share from fiat currencies. But, in the past year, it is losing market share. Dell, Wikipedia and airlines have stopped accepting bitcoin. SatoshiDice and Yours switched to Bitcoin Cash. According to Businessinsider:
"Out of the leading 500 internet sellers, just three accept bitcoin, down from five last year.”
Why is Bitcoin losing market share to fiat? According to Businessinsider:
“when they do try to spend it, it often comes with high fees, which eliminates the utility for small purchases, or it takes a long time to complete the transaction, which could be a turn-off.”
Why are there high fees and long completion times?
Because of small blocks.
SCALING DEBATE – THE BIG MARITAL FIGHT
Why isn't the block size increased?
Because Core/Blockstream believes that big blocks lead to centralization to fewer people who can run the nodes. They also believe that off-chain solutions will provide faster and cheaper transactions. There are advocates for bigger blocks, but because Core/Blockstream control the software, Bitcoin still has the original, one megabyte block since 8 years ago. (Core developers control Bitcoin’s software and several of the key Core developers are employed by Blockstream, a private, for-profit company.)
Businesses, users and miners have asked for four years for the block size to be increased. They point out that Satoshi has always planned to scale Bitcoin by increasing the block size. For four years, Core/Blockstream has refused.
The Bitcoin community split into two factions:
This scaling debate and in-fighting went on for several years. You can read more about it at: https://np.reddit.com/BitcoinMarkets/comments/6rxw7k/informative_btc_vs_bch_articles/dl8v4lp/?st=jaotbt8m&sh=222ce783
SMALL BLOCKERS VS BIG BLOCKERS
Why has Blockstream refused to increase block size? There are a few possible reasons:
  1. They truly believe that big blocks means that fewer people would be able to run full nodes, which would lead to centralization and that the best roadmap is with off-chain solutions. (However, since 2009, hard disk space has exploded. A 4TB disk costs $100 and can store 10 years of blocks. This price is the equivalent to a handful of Bitcoin transaction fees. Also, Satoshi never planned on having every user run full nodes. He envisioned server farms. Decentralization is needed to achieve censorship-resistance and to make the blockchain immutable. This is already accomplished with the thousands of nodes. Having millions or billions of nodes does not increase the censorship-resistance and does not make the blockchain more immutable.)
  2. Blockstream wants small blocks, high fees and slow confirmations to justify the need for their off-chain products, such as Liquid. Blockstream sells Liquid to exchanges to move Bitcoin quickly on a side-chain. Lightning Network will create liquidity hubs, such as exchanges, which will generate traffic and fees for exchanges. With this, exchanges will have a higher need for Liquid. This is the only way that Blockstream will be able to repay the $76 million to their investors.
  3. They propose moving the transactions off the blockchain onto the Lightning Network, an off-chain solution. By doing so, there is a possibility of being regulated by the government (see https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/7gxkvj/lightning_hubs_will_need_to_report_to_irs/). One of Blockstream’s investors/owners is AXA. AXA’s CEO and Chairman until 2016 was also the Chairman of Bilderberg Group. The Bilderberg Group is run by politicians and bankers. According to GlobalResearch, Bilderberg Group wants “a One World Government (World Company) with a single, global marketplace…and financially regulated by one ‘World (Central) Bank’ using one global currency.” Does Bilderberg see Bitcoin as one component of their master plan?
  4. They do not like the fact that most of the miners are in China. In this power-struggle, they would like to take away control and future revenues from China, by scaling off-chain.
Richard Heart gives his reasons why block size should not be increased, in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2941&v=iFJ2MZ3KciQ
He cites latency as a limitation and the reason for doing off-chain scaling. However, latency has been dramatically reduced since 2009 when Bitcoin started with 1MB blocks. Back then, most residential users had 5-10 Mbps internet speed. Now, they have up to 400 Mbps up to 1 Gbps. That’s a 40 to 200X increase. Back in 2009, nobody would’ve thought that you can stream 4k videos.
He implies that 10 minute intervals between block creations are needed in order for the blocks to sync. If internet speed has increased by 40-200X, why can’t the block size be increased?
He claims that bigger blocks make it more difficult for miners to mine the blocks, which increases the chances of orphaned blocks. However, both speeds and the number of mining machines have increased dramatically, causing hashing power on the network to exponentially increase since 2009. This will likely continue increasing in the future.
Richard says that blocks will never be big enough to do 2,000 transactions per second (tps). He says that all of the forks in the world is only going to get 9 tps. Since his statement, Peter Rizun and Andrew Stone have shown that a 1 core CPU machine with 3 Mbps internet speed can do 100 tps. (https://youtu.be/5SJm2ep3X_M) Rizun thinks that visa level (2,000 tps) can be achieved with nodes running on 4-core/16GB machines, bigger blocks and parallel processing to take advantage of the multiple CPU cores.
Even though Rizun and Stone are showing signifiant increases in tps with bigger blocks, the big blockers have never been against a 2nd layer. They’ve always said that you can add a 2nd layer later.
CORE/BLOCKSTREAM VS MINERS
According to Satoshi, Bitcoin should be governed by those with the most hashing power. One hash, one vote. However, Core/Blockstream does not agree with this. Due to refusals for four years to increase block size, it would seem that Core/Blockstream has been able to wrestle control away from miners. Is this because they want control? Is this because they don’t want the Chinese to have so much, or any, control of Bitcoin? Is this because they prefer to eventually move the revenue to the West, by moving most of the transactions off chain?
DIFFERENT AGENDAS
It would seem that Businesses/Users and Core/Blockstream have very different agendas.
Businesses/Users want cheap and fast transactions and see this as an immediate need. Core/Blockstream do not. Here are some quotes from Core/Blockstream:
Greg Maxwell: "I don't think that transaction fees mattering is a failing-- it's success!”
Greg Maxwell: "fee pressure is an intentional part of the system design and to the best of the current understanding essential for the system's long term survial. So, uh, yes. It's good."
Greg Maxwell: "There is a consistent fee backlog, which is the required criteria for stability.”
Peter Wuille: "we - as a community - should indeed let a fee market develop, and rather sooner than later”
Luke-jr: "It is no longer possible to keep fees low.”
Luke-jr: "Just pay a $5 fee and it'll go through every time unless you're doing something stupid.”
Jorge Timón: "higher fees may be just what is needed”
Jorge Timón: "Confirmation times are fine for those who pay high fees.”
Jorge Timón: “I think Adam and I agree that hitting the limit wouldn't be bad, but actually good for an young and immature market like bitcoin fees.”
Mark Friedenbach: "Slow confirmation, high fees will be the norm in any safe outcome."
Wladimir J. van der Laan: “A mounting fee pressure, resulting in a true fee market where transactions compete to get into blocks, results in urgency to develop decentralized off-chain solutions.”
Greg Maxwell: “There is nothing wrong with full blocks, and blocks have been “full” relative to what miners would produce for years. Full blocks is the natural state of the system”
Wladimir J. van der Laan: “A mounting fee pressure, resulting in a true fee market where transactions compete to get into blocks, results in urgency to develop decentralized off-chain solutions. I'm afraid increasing the block size will kick this can down the road and let people (and the large Bitcoin companies) relax”
Why don’t Core/Blockstream care about cheap and fast transactions? One possible reason is that they do not use Bitcoin. They might own some, but they do not spend it to buy coffee and they do not use it to pay employees. They aren’t making hundreds of transactions per day. They do not feel the pain. As engineers, they want a technical utopia.
Businesses/Users on the other hand, feel the pain and want business solutions.
An analogy of this scaling debate is this:
You have a car that is going 50 kph. The passengers (Bitcoin users) want to go 100 kph today, but eventually in the future, they want to go 200 kph. The car is capable of going 100 kph but not 200 kph. Big blockers are saying: Step on the accelerator and go 100 kph. Small blockers are saying: Wait until we build a new car, which will go 200 kph. Meanwhile, the passengers are stuck at 50 kph.
Not only do Big blockers think that the car can simply go faster by stepping on the accelerator, they have already shown that the car can go even faster by adding a turbocharger (even bigger blocks) and making sure that every cylinder is firing (parallel process on multiple CPU cores). In addition, they are willing to use the new car if and when it gets built.
CORE/BLOCKSTREAM VS USERS
If you watch this debate from 2017-02-27 (https://youtu.be/JarEszFY1WY), an analogy can be made. Core/Blockstream is like the IT department and Bitcoin.com (Roger Ver and Jake Smith) is like the Sales/Marketing department (users). Core/Blockstream developers hold, but do not use Bitcoin. Blockstream does not own nor use Bitcoin.
Roger Ver's companies used to use or still use Bitcoin every day. Ver’s MemoryDealers was the first company to accept Bitcoin. Johnny seems to think that he knows what users want, but he rarely uses Bitcoin and he is debating one of the biggest users sitting across the table.
In all companies, Marketing (and all other departments) are IT’s customer. IT must do what Marketing wants, not the other way around. If Core/Blockstream and Roger Ver worked in the same company, the CEO would tell Core/Blockstream to give Roger what he wants or the CEO would fire Core/Blockstream.
But they don’t work for the same company. Roger and other businesses/users cannot fire Core/Blockstream.
Core/Blockstream wants to shoot for the best technology possible. They are not interested in solving short term problems, because they do not see high fees and long confirmation times as problems.
BLOCKSTREAM VS LIBERTARIANS
There are leaders in each camp. One can argue that Blockstream is the leader of the Small Blockers and Roger Ver (supported by Gavin Andresen, Calvin Ayre, businesses and some miners) is the leader of the Big Blockers.
Blockstream has openly called for full blocks and higher fees and they are preparing to scale with Lightning Network. As mentioned before, there is a possibility that Lightning hubs will be regulated by the government. Luke-jr tweeted “But State has authority from God” (https://twitter.com/LukeDashjstatus/934611236695789568?s=08)
Roger Ver wants Bitcoin to regulate the government, not the other way around. He wants to weaken and shrink the government. In addition to separation of church and state, he wants to see separation of money and state. He felt that Bitcoin can no longer do this. He pushed for solutions such as Bitcoin Unlimited.
THE DIVORCE
To prepare for off-chain scaling, Core/Blockstream forked Bitcoin by adding Segwit, which I will refer to as Bitcoin Legacy. This is still referred to by the mainstream as Bitcoin, and it has the symbol BTC.
After four years of refusal by Blockstream, the big blockers, out of frustration, restored Bitcoin through a fork, by removing Segwit from Bitcoin Legacy and increased the block size. This is currently called Bitcoin Cash and has the symbol BCH.
Bitcoin Legacy has transformed from cash to store-of-value. It had a 8 year head start in building brand awareness and infrastructure. It’s likely that it will continue growing in popularity and price for a while.
Bitcoin Cash most resembles Satoshi’s “peer-to-peer cash”. It will be interesting to see if it will pick up from where Bitcoin Legacy left off and take market share in the fiat currency space. Libertarians and cypherpunks will be able to resume their mission of weakening and shrinking the government by promoting Bitcoin Cash.
Currently, Bitcoin Cash can fulfill the role of money, which includes medium of exchange (cash) and store-of-value functions. It will be interesting to see if off-chain scaling (with lower fees and faster confirmations) will enable Bitcoin Legacy to be used as a currency as well and fulfill the role of money.
This is an example of the free market and open competition. New companies divest or get created all the time, to satisfy different needs. Bitcoin is no different.
Small blockers and big blockers no longer need to fight and bicker in the same house. They have gone their separate ways.
Both parties have want they want. Blockstream can store value and generate revenue from their off-chain products to repay their investors. Libertarians (and gambling operators) can rejoice and re-arm with Bitcoin Cash to take on the government. They can continue with their mission to get freedom and autonomy.
submitted by curt00 to btc [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Divorce - Bitcoin [Legacy] vs Bitcoin Cash Explained

Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash are confusing, especially to newbies. They are likely unaware of the history and reasoning for the existence of these two coins. This ignorance is likely persisted by the censorship practised at bitcoin and Bitcointalk.org for several years. (rbitcoinbanned includes examples of the censoring.)
Most of the following is an explanation of the history of Bitcoin, when there was only one Bitcoin. Then it explains the in-fighting and why it forked into two Bitcoins: 1) Bitcoin Legacy and 2) Bitcoin Cash, which happens in the last section (THE DIVORCE). Feel free to suggest edits or corrections. Later, I will publish this on Medium as well.
BITCOIN WAS AN INSTRUMENT OF WAR
For Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator, and the initial supporters, Bitcoin was more than just a new currency. It was an instrument of war.
Who are they fighting against?
The government and central banks.
There is an abundance of evidence of this, starting with Satoshi Nakamoto’s original software.
BATTLE FOR ONLINE GAMBLING
Governments around the world ban online gambling by banning their currency from being used as payment. The original Bitcoin software included code for Poker. Yes, Poker.
Here is the original code: https://github.com/trottieoriginal-bitcoin/blob/mastesrc/uibase.cpp
Search for “Poker”, “Deal Me Out”, “Deal Hand”, “Fold”, “Call”, “Raise”, “Leave Table”, “DitchPlayer”.
Bitcoin gave the middle finger to the government and found a way to get around their ban. In the initial years, it was mainly gambling operators that used Bitcoin, such as SatoshiDice. Was this a coincidence? Gambling is one of the best, if not, the best application for Bitcoin. It was no wonder that gambling operators embraced Bitcoin, including gambling mogul Calvin Ayre.
Bitcoin enabled people to rebel against the government in other ways as well, such as Silk Road, which enabled people to buy and sell drugs.
ANTI-GOVERNMENT LIBERTARIANS AND CYPHERPUNKS
Libertarians seek to maximize political freedom and autonomy. They are against authority and state power. Cypherpunks are activists advocating widespread use of cryptography as a route to social and political change. Their common thread is their dislike for the government.
Bitcoin was created by libertarians and cypherpunks.
Satoshi Nakamoto used cryptography mailing lists to communicate with other cypherpunks such as Wei Dai. Satoshi Nakamoto disappeared after 2010, but we can refer to his writings. He wrote:
“It’s very attractive to the libertarian viewpoint if we can explain it properly. I’m better with code than with words though.”
Satoshi Nakamoto was rebellious to government control. Someone argued with Satoshi by stating: “You will not find a solution to political problems in cryptography.” Satoshi replied:
"Yes, but we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom for several years.
Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally controlled networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem to be holding their own.”
Nakamoto was critical of the central bank. He wrote:
"The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust that's required to make it work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve. We have to trust them with our privacy, trust them not to let identity thieves drain our accounts.”
It is no wonder that the first supporters of Bitcoin were libertarians as well, who agreed with Satoshi’s ideology and saw the potential of Bitcoin to fulfill their ideology.
One of the biggest benefits that Bitcoin supporters want, is “censorship resistance”. What does this mean? It means: to be able to spend your money any way you want. It means: how to get around government regulations and bans. It means: how to do something despite the government.
Roger Ver, an early Bitcoin supporter, heavily criticizes the government for engaging in wars around the world that kills civilians and children. When he ran as a Libertarian candidate in an election against the Republicans and Democrats, he criticized the ATF and FBI for murdering children in their raid in Waco, Texas. At the time, Ver and many other merchants were selling fireworks on eBay without a license. The ATF charged Ver and sent him to prison, but did not charge any of the other merchants. (https://youtu.be/N6NscwzbMvI?t=47m50s) This must have angered Ver a lot.
Since then, Ver has been on a mission to weaken and shrink the government. When he learned about Bitcoin in February 2011, he saw it as his weapon to accomplish his goal…his instrument of war.
Ver was already a multi-millionaire entrepreneur. He sold his company, bought Bitcoins and was the first to invest in Bitcoin startups, such as Bitpay, Blockchain.info, Kraken, Bitcoin.com, Bitcoinstore.com and others. Then he worked full-time to promote Bitcoin. Bitpay became the largest Bitcoin payment processor. Blockchain.info became the largest provider of Bitcoin wallets. Much of the growth of Bitcoin since 2011 can be attributed to Ver's companies.
More evidence of Ver’s anti-government sentiment emerged when he recently announced that he is working to create a society with no government at all (FreeSociety.com).
HOW TO WIN THE WAR
To win the war, Bitcoin must be adopted and widely used by the masses. When people use Bitcoin instead of their national fiat currency, the government becomes weaker. The government can no longer do the following:
It is not only important to get the masses to adopt Bitcoin, but it is also important to get them to adopt it quickly. If it takes a long time, governments will have more time to think twice about allowing Bitcoin to exist and will have more justifications to ban it. They can claim that Bitcoin is used for ransomware, terrorism, etc. If Bitcoin is adopted by the masses to buy everyday goods, such as food and clothing, then it will be harder for them to stop it.
IS BITCOIN WINNING?
Yes and no.
Bitcoin has definitely become more popular over the years. But, it is not achieving Satoshi Nakamoto’s goals.
Satoshi defined Bitcoin and his goal. The title of his white paper is:
“Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System”
Is Bitcoin being used as cash? Unfortunately, it is not. It is being used as a store of value. However, the title of Satoshi’s white paper was not:
“Bitcoin: A Store of Value”
There is utility in having a store of value, of course. People need it and Bitcoin has superior features to gold. Therefore, it is likely that Bitcoin can continue gaining in popularity and price as it continues to compete and take market share away from gold.
However, both gold and Bitcoin are not being used as currency.
If Bitcoin does not replace fiat currencies, will it weaken governments? No, because no matter how many people buy gold or Bitcoin (as a store of value), they do not weaken governments. To do so, Bitcoin must replace fiat currencies.
BITCOIN LOSING TO FIAT
In the initial years, Bitcoin was taking market share from fiat currencies. But, in the past year, it is losing market share. SatoshiDice, Yours.org and Bitmain switched to Bitcoin Cash. According to Businessinsider:
"Out of the leading 500 internet sellers, just three accept bitcoin, down from five last year.”
Why is Bitcoin losing market share to fiat? According to Businessinsider:
“when they do try to spend it, it often comes with high fees, which eliminates the utility for small purchases, or it takes a long time to complete the transaction, which could be a turn-off.”
Why are there high fees and long completion times?
Because of small blocks.
SCALING DEBATE – THE BIG MARITAL FIGHT
Why isn't the block size increased?
Because Core/Blockstream believes that big blocks lead to centralization to fewer people who can run the nodes. They also believe that off-chain solutions will provide faster and cheaper transactions. There are advocates for bigger blocks, but because Core/Blockstream control the software, Bitcoin still has the original, one megabyte block since 8 years ago. (Core developers control Bitcoin’s software and several of the key Core developers are employed by Blockstream, a private, for-profit company.)
Businesses, users and miners have asked for four years for the block size to be increased. They point out that Satoshi has always planned to scale Bitcoin by increasing the block size. For four years, Core/Blockstream has refused.
The Bitcoin community split into two factions:
This scaling debate and in-fighting went on for several years. During this time, the controllers of bitcoin and Bitcointalk censored big blockers. Comments that criticized small blocks or supported big blocks, were deleted. You can read more about it at: https://np.reddit.com/BitcoinMarkets/comments/6rxw7k/informative_btc_vs_bch_articles/dl8v4lp/?st=jaotbt8m&sh=222ce783
SMALL BLOCKERS VS BIG BLOCKERS
Why has Blockstream refused to increase block size? There are a few possible reasons:
  1. They truly believe that big blocks means that fewer people would be able to run full nodes, which would lead to centralization and that the best roadmap is with off-chain solutions. (However, since 2009, hard disk space has exploded. A 4TB disk costs $100 and can store 10 years of blocks. This price is the equivalent to a handful of Bitcoin transaction fees. Also, Satoshi never planned on having every user run full nodes. He envisioned server farms. Decentralization is needed to achieve censorship-resistance and to make the blockchain immutable. This is already accomplished with the thousands of nodes. Having millions or billions of nodes does not increase the censorship-resistance and does not make the blockchain more immutable.)
  2. Blockstream wants small blocks, high fees and slow confirmations to justify the need for their off-chain products, such as Liquid. Blockstream sells Liquid to exchanges to move Bitcoin quickly on a side-chain. Lightning Network will create liquidity hubs, such as exchanges, which will generate traffic and fees for exchanges. With this, exchanges will have a higher need for Liquid. This is the only way that Blockstream will be able to repay the $76 million to their investors.
  3. They propose moving the transactions off the blockchain onto the Lightning Network, an off-chain solution. By doing so, there is a possibility of being regulated by the government (see https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/7gxkvj/lightning_hubs_will_need_to_report_to_irs/). One of Blockstream’s investors/owners is AXA. AXA’s CEO and Chairman until 2016 was also the Chairman of Bilderberg Group. The Bilderberg Group is run by politicians and bankers. According to GlobalResearch, Bilderberg Group wants “a One World Government (World Company) with a single, global marketplace…and financially regulated by one ‘World (Central) Bank’ using one global currency.” Does Bilderberg see Bitcoin as one component of their master plan?
  4. They do not like the fact that most of the miners are in China. In this power-struggle, they would like to take away control and future revenues from China, by scaling off-chain.
Richard Heart gives his reasons why block size should not be increased, in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2941&v=iFJ2MZ3KciQ
He cites latency as a limitation and the reason for doing off-chain scaling. However, latency has been dramatically reduced since 2009 when Bitcoin started with 1MB blocks. Back then, most residential users had 5-10 Mbps internet speed. Now, they have up to 400 Mbps up to 1 Gbps. That’s a 40 to 200X increase. Back in 2009, nobody would’ve thought that you can stream 4k videos.
He implies that 10 minute intervals between block creations are needed in order for the blocks to sync. If internet speed has increased by 40-200X, why can’t the block size be increased?
He claims that bigger blocks make it more difficult for miners to mine the blocks, which increases the chances of orphaned blocks. However, both speeds and the number of mining machines have increased dramatically, causing hashing power on the network to exponentially increase since 2009. This will likely continue increasing in the future.
Richard says that blocks will never be big enough to do 2,000 transactions per second (tps). He says that all of the forks in the world is only going to get 9 tps. Since his statement, Peter Rizun and Andrew Stone have shown that a 1 core CPU machine with 3 Mbps internet speed can do 100 tps. (https://youtu.be/5SJm2ep3X_M) Rizun thinks that visa level (2,000 tps) can be achieved with nodes running on 4-core/16GB machines, bigger blocks and parallel processing to take advantage of the multiple CPU cores.
Even though Rizun and Stone are showing signifiant increases in tps with bigger blocks, the big blockers have never been against a 2nd layer. They’ve always said that you can add a 2nd layer later.
CORE/BLOCKSTREAM VS MINERS
According to Satoshi, Bitcoin should be governed by those with the most hashing power. One hash, one vote. However, Core/Blockstream does not agree with this. Due to refusals for four years to increase block size, it would seem that Core/Blockstream has been able to wrestle control away from miners. Is this because they want control? Is this because they don’t want the Chinese to have so much, or any, control of Bitcoin? Is this because they prefer to eventually move the revenue to the West, by moving most of the transactions off chain?
DIFFERENT AGENDAS
It would seem that Businesses/Users and Core/Blockstream have very different agendas.
Businesses/Users want cheap and fast transactions and see this as an immediate need. Core/Blockstream do not. Here are some quotes from Core/Blockstream:
Greg Maxwell: "I don't think that transaction fees mattering is a failing-- it's success!”
Greg Maxwell: "fee pressure is an intentional part of the system design and to the best of the current understanding essential for the system's long term survial. So, uh, yes. It's good."
Greg Maxwell: "There is a consistent fee backlog, which is the required criteria for stability.”
Peter Wuille: "we - as a community - should indeed let a fee market develop, and rather sooner than later”
Luke-jr: "It is no longer possible to keep fees low.”
Luke-jr: "Just pay a $5 fee and it'll go through every time unless you're doing something stupid.”
Jorge Timón: "higher fees may be just what is needed”
Jorge Timón: "Confirmation times are fine for those who pay high fees.”
Jorge Timón: “I think Adam and I agree that hitting the limit wouldn't be bad, but actually good for an young and immature market like bitcoin fees.”
Mark Friedenbach: "Slow confirmation, high fees will be the norm in any safe outcome."
Wladimir J. van der Laan: “A mounting fee pressure, resulting in a true fee market where transactions compete to get into blocks, results in urgency to develop decentralized off-chain solutions.”
Greg Maxwell: “There is nothing wrong with full blocks, and blocks have been “full” relative to what miners would produce for years. Full blocks is the natural state of the system”
Wladimir J. van der Laan: “A mounting fee pressure, resulting in a true fee market where transactions compete to get into blocks, results in urgency to develop decentralized off-chain solutions. I'm afraid increasing the block size will kick this can down the road and let people (and the large Bitcoin companies) relax”
Why don’t Core/Blockstream care about cheap and fast transactions? One possible reason is that they do not use Bitcoin. They might own some, but they do not spend it to buy coffee and they do not use it to pay employees. They aren’t making hundreds of transactions per day. They do not feel the pain. As engineers, they want a technical utopia.
Businesses/Users on the other hand, feel the pain and want business solutions.
An analogy of this scaling debate is this:
You have a car that is going 50 kph. The passengers (Bitcoin users) want to go 100 kph today, but eventually in the future, they want to go 200 kph. The car is capable of going 100 kph but not 200 kph. Big blockers are saying: Step on the accelerator and go 100 kph. Small blockers are saying: Wait until we build a new car, which will go 200 kph. Meanwhile, the passengers are stuck at 50 kph.
Not only do Big blockers think that the car can simply go faster by stepping on the accelerator, they have already shown that the car can go even faster by adding a turbocharger (even bigger blocks) and making sure that every cylinder is firing (parallel process on multiple CPU cores). In addition, they are willing to use the new car if and when it gets built.
CORE/BLOCKSTREAM VS USERS
If you watch this debate from 2017-02-27 (https://youtu.be/JarEszFY1WY), an analogy can be made. Core/Blockstream is like the IT department and Bitcoin.com (Roger Ver and Jake Smith) is like the Sales/Marketing department (users).
Core/Blockstream developers hold, but do not use Bitcoin. Blockstream does not own nor use Bitcoin. Roger Ver's companies use use Bitcoin every day. Ver’s MemoryDealers was the first company to accept Bitcoin. Johnny seems to think that he knows what users want, but he rarely uses Bitcoin and he is debating one of the biggest users sitting across the table.
In all companies, Marketing (and all other departments) is IT’s customer. IT must do what Marketing wants, not the other way around. If Core/Blockstream and Roger Ver worked in the same company, the CEO would tell Core/Blockstream to give Roger what he wants or the CEO would fire Core/Blockstream.
But they don’t work for the same company. Roger and other businesses/users cannot fire Core/Blockstream.
Core/Blockstream wants to shoot for the best technology possible. They are not interested in solving short term problems, because they do not see high fees and long confirmation times as problems.
BLOCKSTREAM VS LIBERTARIANS
There are leaders in each camp. One can argue that Blockstream is the leader of the Small Blockers and Roger Ver (supported by Gavin Andresen, Calvin Ayre, businesses and some miners) is the leader of the Big Blockers.
Blockstream has openly called for full blocks and higher fees and they are preparing to scale with Lightning Network. As mentioned before, there is a possibility that Lightning hubs will be regulated by the government. Luke-jr tweeted “But State has authority from God” (https://twitter.com/LukeDashjstatus/934611236695789568?s=08) According to this video, Luke-jr believes that the government should tax you and the government should execute heretics. Luke-jr's values are diametrically opposed to libertarians'.
Roger Ver wants Bitcoin to regulate the government, not the other way around. He wants to weaken and shrink the government. In addition to separation of church and state, he wants to see separation of money and state. He felt that Bitcoin can no longer do this, so he pushed for solutions such as Bitcoin Unlimited.
MIKE HEARN EXPLAINS BLOCKSTREAM
Mike Hearn is one of the first Bitcoin developers. He explained how Core/Blockstream developers (source):
THE DIVORCE
To prepare for off-chain scaling, Core/Blockstream forked Bitcoin by adding Segwit, which I will refer to as Bitcoin Legacy. This is still referred to by the mainstream as Bitcoin, and it has the symbol BTC.
After four years of refusal by Blockstream, the big blockers, out of frustration, restored Bitcoin through a fork, by removing Segwit from Bitcoin Legacy and increased the block size. This is currently called Bitcoin Cash and has the symbol BCH.
Bitcoin Legacy has transformed from cash to store-of-value. It had a 8 year head start in building brand awareness and infrastructure. It’s likely that it will continue growing in popularity and price for a while.
Bitcoin Cash most resembles Satoshi’s “peer-to-peer cash”. It will be interesting to see if it will pick up from where Bitcoin Legacy left off and take market share in the fiat currency space. Libertarians and cypherpunks will be able to resume their mission of weakening and shrinking the government by promoting Bitcoin Cash.
Currently, Bitcoin Cash can fulfill the role of money, which includes medium of exchange (cash) and store-of-value functions. It will be interesting to see if off-chain scaling (with lower fees and faster confirmations) will enable Bitcoin Legacy to be used as a currency as well and fulfill the role of money.
This is an example of the free market and open competition. New companies divest or get created all the time, to satisfy different needs. Bitcoin is no different.
Small blockers and big blockers no longer need to fight and bicker in the same house. They have gone their separate ways.
Both parties have what they want. Blockstream can store value and generate revenue from their off-chain products to repay their investors. Libertarians (and gambling operators) can rejoice and re-arm with Bitcoin Cash to take on the government. They can continue with their mission to get freedom and autonomy.
submitted by curt00 to btc [link] [comments]

The Economics of the Current State of BTC

(Tried to post but I think it got auto-mod deleted? Not sure why...?)
The goal of this post is not to convince you one way or another, but to start a discussion. Disclaimer: my “formal training” (aka academia) is in economics and psychology - a combination I thought could help get a full grasp on the world of finance and how markets work. Second disclaimer: I’m a huge proponent of the free market and a libertarian, go figure. I’m also blessed with a life that allows me to make some risky (although not fuck it yolo risky) moves, so I’ve got about a 20% exposure to crypto total, spread across A few, although weighted about 75% towards BTC.
Ok, now that all disclaimers are out of the way, I want to create a dialogue about the economics behind Bitcoin. The goal is not to bicker about what “should” happen in an ideal world (I am a Libertarian, after all, so in my perfect utopia the answer is bitcoin, assuming the transaction issues get addressed), but to discuss the most probable outcomes.
Like I said - trying to open a discussion about the economics of BTC today, not the ideology behind why it SHOULD or WILL or WILL NOT succeed for the greater good. These are just meant to be some high level talking points. Really interested in COUNTER points more than anything...
Go on then...
submitted by pfthrowaway12317 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Wondering about a few things with Ancapistan from a Libertarian

So as the title says, I'm a Libertarian, I consider myself still on the Statist side, but because of a couple things that I'll ask here.
How is property official upheld in a community? I get that there's the simple, I claim this area, and I fence it off, people around me acknowledge and accept this as a legitimate claim to that land, and I own that land, whether I work it, live on it, or am holding onto it for the future to turn it into something productive, or a home.
But in ancapistan, there is no centralized legitimate authority to say, yes this is in fact "Dagreenskinorcs property". And any potential buyer, or renter, or w/e could contact me easily by grabbing information from this one centralized authority. So in ancapistan, how would this work? Is it likely that a privatized version of this would arise and with private security, they can legitimately protect and acknowledge the existence, and my ownership of that land? Or whatever other way.
This one is very important to me because I'm an automation freak and Transhumanist, I'm extremely excited for this. Negative Income Tax or similar UBI to deal with automation. So as is to be expected according to major experts like Ray Kurzweil who I love, we're fast approaching a point where AI is going to toss us out of work, right now driving jobs are in serious danger, and in America that's something like 5 million jobs that could be eliminated. We're going to reach a point soon where people will lose jobs to automation, and can't retrain fast enough before the next job is automated, meaning that without a means of redistributing the income, usually like an automation tax, people during this period are going to suffer greatly before the utopia begins. How would ancapistan deal with this period, which probably will last 10 or so years based on at least how I'm hearing experts like Ray explain. I know that in my statist system, we'd have the negative income tax, and so when we inevitably get smacked out of the job, we can live on the negative income tax as a sort of UBI. Until hopefully soon enough, money is unnecessary and we live in post-scarcity. But in ancapistan, no such safety net exists, there is charity but we can't guarantee systematically that those who still make money will donate enough to keep us chugging along until money is unneeded. Would this be perhaps where communists win because they more or less already believe in sharing production and wealth and all that?
How would transactions with currency work in a simple, quick way for the average joe? So for example nowadays it's easy, I use my credit card or debit card or American dollars and I get what I want, I see the price, I more or less know the value of my dollar and if the item I'm buying is outside my budget or if it's worth it, etc. But in ancapistan, I could have idk lets say 10 pounds of gold, 50 bitcoin, 50 dogecoin, some yen (lets say ancapistan is former United States so no dollars for this issue), some euro, etc. How would we be able to convert that into a standard, universal currency so we don't have to dick around trying to figure out how much of one currency or another will get me the item at the price it's being sold for, so I don't buy lets say a 5 dollar box of pepsi, for 50 dollars worth of bitcoin by accident. Like the only thing I can think of it maybe some sort of company will arise that automatically converts the currencies you have into one single one like a bitcoin is 5 credits lets say, a yen is 0.8, etc. But that's like a big maybe. Is there any idea in the ancap community?
City planning, roads, infrastructure, all that. How do you think ancapistan would develop from scratch? How do you think cities would grow and develop, and do you think it will be better or similar to how cities today end up? Because like for example, Chicago compared to London or some other European city, you can definitely see the age and obsolete design in European cities. They're complicated, very tightly squeezed together, about as structured as an explosion. But Chicago is like a grid, to the point that some people here more or less can just figure out where to go by looking at the addresses and not needed a map, because they know if they go this way, then these numbers go up or down, then this way will be this and that.
How would we do things like sewers, or other underground things with no state to unfortunately, but more or less say, we're putting these pipes through here and that's it. Whereas in ancapistan, I'd imagine to do this, you have to ask property owners and all that shit, and they might not necessary always agree to have something go through their property, even if it's assured that the company will pay for all maintenance, and building the pipes. Maybe they might listen more if they got paid, but that's not always guaranteed either unfortunately.
How would roads end up in ancapistan? Do you think we'd trade concrete roads for gravel in most places? Maybe ancapistanis decide they're happier going mad max during their commute on cleaned up dirt paths, our cars in such a situation built for all terrain instead of how they're built now? Would a highway exist or be considered even necessary to a free market society or is that more or less a thing of the state?
What would happen to home owners associations and what not? Would they cease to exist without the state allowing them imo, to ruin our lives or what?
How would emergency situations be handled in ancapistan? So what I mean by this is things like natural disasters. Nowadays the state moves in and tries to get people out in an organized manner, there's a huge organization effort involved that involves land, water, and air rescue. But in ancapistan, there's probably not going to be a big military like a state one, a big police force with helicopters and such, etc. How would it be handled in that situation then, or would we just rely on people getting out on their own?
How could ancapistan achieve a powerful military presence not including in any way, a militia. So like a professional army that can break anyone who tried to hurt us? The only way I can think of it maybe bigger companies pay for big bad killy military companies, and much like how they pay for many of the sites we use, parks, and wifi through simply asking for their name to be put on the thing they give money to, they tell these companies that they want their assets protected, but also their customers and workers in the area. Is that a possibility, or would we survive purely on militia?
What do we do in a hypothetical situation, where other nations decide to push in on us, not through violence, but by buying up land in perfectly voluntary transactions, and of course, being their property, they spread the rule of their government to that land. Obviously we'd have no state, so we can't make it illegal to do so, you could attack people who try this but then you'd be more or less doing what our government would do if someone tried to basically secede. Do we just accept the eating away of ancapistan by nations or what?
What if nations decide to play on the edge of it being an invasion, and simply only take up lands they know aren't property by sending people to investigate and ask around? Do you think that maybe all of ancapistan would be claimed so any incursion in that former statist society is an invasion?
What stops people who shouldn't own an rpg from saving up the cash to own one and the rockets or w/e it uses? Do we rely on companies trying to be responsible and keeping a higher reputation deciding there's no way in hell they'll sell dangerous weaponry like that?
What would be used to create a universally recognized standard of certain things like child abuse, or rape, or slavery, or whatever? As it is right now, each government, even at least as far as I know in the US, each state has its own definitions and views on those subjects. So in ancapistan, what would be used to create a universally recognized standard of law and definitions for things like that?
That's about all I can think of atm, some of these things might seem like I support one thing or another, that's not necessarily true, like the military one might make you think I support a state military, I don't at all. But these are concerns that I'm sure most other people would have so I figured why not bring it up. Some of these are concerns that keep me on the statist side, often it's the little things that could be a big pain, so maybe you'll make me see different. Hope to see some interesting answers.
submitted by dagreenskinorc to Anarcho_Capitalism [link] [comments]

Why BitCoin will fail – it has no value – don’t be the last one caught with BitFud in your wallet, sell your bitcoin now and invest in a crypto that has real value.

UPDATE 1 - Bitcoin Deleted this article within 10 minutes of being posted, I though bitcoin stood for fighting against censorship? I guess Bitcoin oligarchs think otherwise.

The single greatest reason why the US fiat Dollar is the greatest currency on the planet, is because it is backed by guns. It is backed by lots of gun. The US Dollar is backed by the strongest military in the world, most effective battle hardened Army, largest most powerful navy that opens the world’s water ways for free trade to benefit all the world, and has the strongest Air Force. Like it or not it’s true. You might think that the computing power of Bitcoin as a support for value but it is not. They are known as miners, miners only maintain bitcoin blockchain and that is it. Once the price of bitcoin falls AGAIN miners will shut down and reallocate their capital towards crypto with real value.

Because bitcoin has no value, it makes Bitcoin’s perceived price based off of speculation. Basically, what the next guy is willing to pay for it. If that next guy doesn’t want to buy because they realize that it has zero value, then the price drops. We all understand that it meets the college text book definitions of money, but like all college freshman who worships Che Guevara and Fidel Castro and the Bolivarian socialist utopia, you soon grow up and realize that it is all Fud. The concept of bitcoin reads well and in a text book and could operate as a functioning currency in a utopian society, but once you begin to understand that the only thing propping up the value is the next fool that is willing to pay for it, then the bottom begins to falls out. People will point to other things like gold and say that it is driven by perceived value. While this is true, however, with gold people can actually hold it in their hands and wear it as jewelry ect... Because bitcoin is only driven by speculation and had no value you better sell bitcoin now, because once intelligent money moves away from bitcoin only fools will be left holding Fud.

Smart money will move towards crypto projects that have real value. For example, Enigma, the value of Enigma is basically the value of information. Like Facebook, Google, and all the other tech companies their business model is based off of having information and selling it. Enigma will be the medium of exchange for information and the network will house and process data. If you are looking to invest in the next project like Google who will revolutionize the world, then invest in Enigma now before the price passes bitcoin.

This post is marked Spoiler because some of y'all will now realize that your Bitcoin is valueless.

*I am not your financial advisor and write this as my personal opinion. In full disclosure I recently bought Enigma because this project is a winner and to show how serious I am about investing in this project I actually barrowed money on a credit card through Binance to purchase Enigma. Some might say I am a degenerate speculating on this project and I will rebuttal with that I have meticulously studied the crypto market and this project far exceeds all others and will change the world in the next couple of years.

At the time of writing this article the price of Enigma is $.43, so If you like this article, feel free to throw some crypto this way, my ERC-20 wallet address is: 0x0b8396CbD9199D47216A703EB861af632fC9ad46
submitted by rho300 to u/rho300 [link] [comments]

03-19 00:03 - 'Why BitCoin will fail – it has no value – don’t be the last one caught with BitFud in your wallet, sell your bitcoin now and invest in a crypto that has real value.' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/rho300 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 12-22min

'''
The single greatest reason why the US fiat Dollar is the greatest currency on the planet, is because it is backed by guns. It is backed by lots of gun. The US Dollar is backed by the strongest military in the world, most effective battle hardened Army, largest most powerful navy that opens the world’s water ways for free trade to benefit all the world, and has the strongest Air Force. Like it or not it’s true. You might think that the computing power of Bitcoin as a support for value but it is not. They are known as miners, miners only maintain bitcoin blockchain and that is it. Once the price of bitcoin falls AGAIN miners will shut down and reallocate their capital towards crypto with real value.

Because bitcoin has no value, it makes Bitcoin’s perceived price based off of speculation. Basically, what the next guy is willing to pay for it. If that next guy doesn’t want to buy because they realize that it has zero value, then the price drops. We all understand that it meets the college text book definitions of money, but like all college freshman who worships Che Guevara and Fidel Castro and the Bolivarian socialist utopia, you soon grow up and realize that it is all Fud. The concept of bitcoin reads well and in a text book and could operate as a functioning currency in a utopian society, but once you begin to understand that the only thing propping up the value is the next fool that is willing to pay for it, then the bottom begins to falls out. People will point to other things like gold and say that it is driven by perceived value. While this is true, however, with gold people can actually hold it in their hands and wear it as jewelry ect... Because bitcoin is only driven by speculation and had no value you better sell bitcoin now, because once intelligent money moves away from bitcoin only fools will be left holding Fud.
Smart money will move towards crypto projects that have real value. For example, Enigma, the value of Enigma is basically the value of information. Like Facebook, Google, and all the other tech companies their business model is based off of having information and selling it. Enigma will be the medium of exchange for information and the network will house and process data. If you are looking to invest in the next project like Google who will revolutionize the world, then invest in Enigma now before the price passes bitcoin.

*I am not your financial advisor and write this as my personal opinion. In full disclosure I recently bought Enigma because this project is a winner and to show how serious I am about investing in this project I actually barrowed money on a credit card through Binance to purchase Enigma. Some might say I am a degenerate speculating on this project and I will rebuttal with that I have meticulously studied the crypto market and this project far exceeds all others and will change the world in the next couple of years.

At the time of writing this article the price of Enigma is $.43, so If you like this article, feel free to throw some crypto this way, my ERC-20 wallet address is: 0x0b8396CbD9199D47216A703EB861af632fC9ad46
'''
Why BitCoin will fail – it has no value – don’t be the last one caught with BitFud in your wallet, sell your bitcoin now and invest in a crypto that has real value.
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: rho300
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Qtum Co Founder Patrick Dai | "3 o'clock no sleep blockchain" depth of sharing

In the industry known as the "first block of the block community," the three o'clock sleepless block chain group, brought together the heavyweight figures in the domestic block chain industry. On the second day of the New Year, starting at 11 am, the group members with a total market capitalization of about 1 trillion yuan, as the traditional world still rejoice in the Great Reign, Technology, valuation, investment and future, the main questions raised in the group were carefully answered and shared. The full text is as follows:
 
Q1: Stellar recently fierce in Silicon Valley, do you think the threat to eth big?
Patrick Dai: ETH has become an ecosystem where the greatest risk comes from the risks inherent in one's own ecology but less from outside risks unless there is a tenfold increase in Ethereum's advanced ideas and technologies, giving it an opportunity to replace Ethereum , Otherwise it is a big threat to the nature, but not competing with the front of Ethereum, in other areas (outside the ICO) force, there are still a lot of business and investment opportunities.
 
Q2: What do you think about the millions of TPS that eos claims?
Patrick Dai: Blockchain is not born for the TPS, if we need faster TPS, the existing banking system and Paypal and WeChat payment, is a better choice. In addition to the degree of decentralization and TPS is basically an irreconcilable conflict, many of the replacement of TPS is to sacrifice network to the degree of centralization to obtain, I personally think, simply in pursuit of higher TPS, but it makes no sense , Especially if the network after only a few dozen large nodes (this is not the early stages of the bank?), Then the high TPS, very often not significant.
 
TPS makes sense for specific things, but requires a compromise with the philosophy behind cryptocurrencies. Because traditional IT technology has been studied for distributed systems for decades, all algorithms based on BFT and various variants can achieve very high TPS, but their degree of centralization is relatively high. The average person in the network is Can not get the right of reciprocity If you can not participate in the supervision and verification of the network, in fact, the use of existing financial services are more than enough.
 
Question 3: Qtum Chain initial design of the core of what is the point? Qtum how to build their own ecology? Qtum globalization is good, even South Koreans like Qtum,landing strategies and methods in different states around the world how to look?**
 
Patrick Dai:
The core of Qtum Blockchain design:
  1. Security, security is the number one priority for cryptocurrency systems, with no foundation for security and sophisticated software as a back-up.
  2. Qtum chain is basically compatible with bitcoin's UTXO and all BIPs, and is also compatible with EVM and EVM-based ecology.
  3. Flexible, the biggest innovation in Qtum is based on bitcoin transaction model, which supports the implementation of smart contract, so that Ethereum's virtual machine can run on the bitcoin network. In addition, the current Qtum network is already in the POS phase, and around 3000 A full node. POS is more friendly to business applications. Through technical support, development tools, Community Roadshow investment hatching in the constant construction of the ecology of the Qtum Blockchain. The more important thing is landing on the local community developers and local project developers to achieve localization, the international team will also be a lot of help.
 
Question 4: Decentralized trading system, the future direction of development is?
 
Patrick Dai: to the center of the trading system of my research is not much to talk about a few specific cases, the earliest to the center of the trading system is based on the colorcoin mastercoin and counterparty transactions colorcoin on the back appeared on NXT and the BTS Decentralized trading systems, followed by the emergence of etherdelta (based on the smart contract trading system), from the experience above, several decentralized trading system experience, similar to the centralized trading system of high-frequency mobile Sex, a great gap. About decentralized trading system in the order matching and order synchronization, this can find some developers in this area, consult.
 
Q5: ipfs really can really decentralized web and app? Not a simple one? What is the point of going to a centralized app?
Patrick Dai: IPFS specific technology to achieve no in-depth study, but read the design concept, the project itself also mentioned for several years, to the center of the web and app should be serverless service to developers, as long as the interface , Regardless of who behind the service to provide. Is not a simple token, depending on the ecology behind it, bitcoin is essentially just a piece of data in a bitcoin network, and decentralized apps make sense, but at the moment many of Dapp's really just an app + blockchain as a settlement layer .
However, the future of blockchain and Dapp's future will transcend the existence of cryptocurrency and will become a social infrastructure: trust. Dapp has a lot of good direction: the game (props channels), content (movie music text), Internet of things, ID and so on.
 
Q6: Everyone has been saying that it is necessary to decentralize and intensify the high level of Dapp's certain degree of contradictions. However, we can not just stay at the stage where btc is used as a currency and eth only serves as a currency to be raised. Developing Dapps to address user needs, that is, the need to strike a balance between a purely decentralized utopia and user application world, Dpos is a solution for now, what do you think? How to grasp the degree of the two?
Patrick Dai: Indeed, many Dapp is a pseudo-concept, but cryptocurrency itself has begun to penetrate into various places as the first successful application based on blockchain technology. My consideration for the future blockchain system is that there is enough decentralization at the bottom and the application layer can be neutralized. We need a trustless bottom plus an application layer that requires trust, on the one hand, a trustless premium (trust cost Lowest) + centralized premium (centralized), Dapp still has a lot to see in the future, such as gaming (virtual assets and channel changes) digital content (movie music) Internet of Things security and management of digital identities Areas of Pratt & Whitney Finance (Insurance-autonomous finance and micro-financial services, etc.).
At present, many Dapp just use the characteristics of a blockchain, that is, the issuance and clearing of tokens. The blockchain has many other features that need to be discovered and discovered.
 
Q7: How do you think about the feasibility and security of cross-link technology? At present, you are optimistic about this project. In addition, how to ensure the trust and reliability of the link in the chain?
Patrick Dai: I personally feel that the current cross-link area is still in its early stages, both in bitcoin and Ethereum network have limited processing power, and the process of continuous evolution, I personally feel that this one cross-chain is not yet mature enough, and from the solution Just need to point out whether cross-link at least at this stage is not just a need.
On the Oracle side, this is a need, especially in the popularization of smart contracts, we need the blockchain can access external systems, in a sense, the current blockchain is an algorithm-driven self-consistent Closed system, the logic is pre-set. Through Oracle we can introduce external data sources to trigger the execution of the contract. There are many directions on how to solve the problem of credible data sources.
One is a centralized approach, such as providing data sources by auditing companies and government departments. Another way to go to the center is to introduce games and mortgages. Punish fraud and reward honest data sources and establish a preferred positive feedback mechanism. Of course, there are many other solutions, there is a lot of community research, Microsoft also has a cryptolet project.
 
Q8: Ask a funny, 10 times eth, I have been curious about this issue, high-dimensional playing low-dimensional, non-dimensional entanglement. You must have thought about this 10 times the problem or possible direction method, want to hear you talk about the possibility of 10 times the direction of eth?
Patrick Dai: 10 times ETH advanced concepts and technology iteration, ETH basically invest this thing is done through the ICO done the ultimate, 15 seconds to complete the investment process (DD TS Token release). It takes a few months, compared to the traditional melting of an angel, which is a difference of 15 seconds vs 3 months. So somehow, ETH becomes the largest investment and financing platform in the world. This is also the largest application of Ethereum, but the application of other smart contracts but did not develop.
 
From the cash point of view there are several directions:
  1. distributed governance (refer to bitcoin 1M to 2M process and DAO processing);
  2. system of self-evolution and evolution;
  3. ease of use 10 times the increase;
 
From a technical point of view:
  1. scalability (full node size participation threshold TPS reciprocal rights);
  2. privacy and application independence and loose coupling (refer to Parity theft);
  3. Better flexibility (more types of virtual machines and a wider range of smart contract languages);
  4. network layering and partitioning and data compression;
  5. new consensus mechanisms (often requiring years of testing and practice) and more.
 
Q9: On the current blockchain + distributed computing issues, I think in the future if the dapp market can really make it indispensable based on the blockchain program to solve the calculation, storage, node acceleration and other issues. Currently I see several projects on distributed computing are based on the construction of Ethereum, are worrying about the performance, how do you think?
Patrick Dai: Distributed Computing I did not study much, but its initial project should come from MaidSafe (https://maidsafe.net/), a nearly 10-year project, essentially Proof of Resource, and many others. The type of computation is actually not very suitable for distributed processing, requiring serial processing of data that is essentially not accelerated through distributed computing, and distributed computing may be able to handle similar game rendering and image rendering needs, but I do not know How big is a market?
In addition, in distributed computing, it is also a problem how to use a common programming language to describe the computing task to be calculated and submit it accurately to the computing node. This one can consult the head of distributed computing projects.
 
Q10: Analysis of the following characteristics and advantages and disadvantages of the underlying chain: BTC / QTUM / ETH / EOS / NEO / ELASTOS?
 
Q11: At present more discussion is the public chain and the basic agreement, the application of technology in the future how to develop, what application scenarios faster landing?
Patrick Dai: The current blockchain technology is still in its early stages of evolution, standing in the Internet era 20 years ago, when we can hardly imagine today can be called a mobile phone uber, the development of technology to give everyone a more rich diversity The possibility is the future.
From an application perspective, the blockchain industry is indeed in the early stages of its application. Cryptocurrency is relative to the blockchain, similar to Email versus Internet, but the development behind the Internet goes far beyond emailing for information exchange, Then the future development of the blockchain will certainly not stop at cryptocurrencies born for value exchange.
Cryptocurrency is just the beginning. From a scenario perspective, the biggest feature of blockchain technology is that it guarantees a trustless platform through a variety of technologies, a trust-free platform that reduces the cost of all business transactions.
 
Q12: First ask yourself a few questions: blockchain where the biggest investment opportunities?
Patrick Dai: Based on the changes and disruptiveness brought by cryptocurrency, its wealth is created faster than the industrial revolution and the information revolution. From an investment point of view, I personally feel that there are several good directions:
  1. Encrypted currency (cryptocurrency and token) in the underlying publicchain, which basically became the industry's first token-based blockchain technology with a close combination of blockchain
  2. Technologies and specific application scenarios (the industry is in its infancy)
  3. Encryption Asset Services Portal (Wallet Exchange IM)
  4. Breaking Down Scenarios Across Industries (Games, Entertainment, IoT, ID, Healthcare, Supply Chain)
  5. Organizational Change Research, Economics, Think Tanks, Deep Media.
 
Q13: Is cryptocurrency popular at large scale?
Patrick Dai: the development of technology with jumping, but difficult to retract, with the car, the car will never disappear, although the carriage also continued to exist for hundreds of years. The advent of cryptocurrency is not a coincidence, but is accompanied by the maturity of various internet infrastructures and the enlightenment of Cyber ​​punk movement concept. It belongs to the fusion of technology and thought, not just to technological innovation.
Personally, I think the cryptocurrency is unlikely to disappear, the widespread adoption of cryptocurrency depends on the applicability of the cryptocurrency system, including what rigid demands are being addressed, and for the moment, the greatest use is to provide people around the world an option: a very fluid Transparent, credible, secure global assets.
 
Q14: How to build a valuation model of blockchain platform?
Patrick Dai: I have sent an article before. At present, this is a big problem in the industry. We do not have a set of valuation system to realize early warning and assessment of risks. What is the valuation of a project? Before writing something for your reference. http://www.gongxiangcj.com/posts/3895 "The number of nodes and cryptocurrency valuation model."
 
Q15: Who is Nakamoto?
Patrick Dai: From what I learned, Nakamoto was a hardworking man with idealistic feelings. It should be done independently by one person. There are many anonymous tech bucks in IRC channel in 2011 and 2012, on which you can see Nakamoto's figure. In addition to the birth of BTC, there is also some relationship with a Chinese Wei Dai.
Wei Dai, who wrote Bmoney's paper before, Zhong Zhongcong and Wei Dai also had some emails, and mentioned to Wei Dai that he has implemented Bmoney's part of cryptoCurrency, but in the second part of Bmoney there is actually a tentative idea about the contract. We can refer to Wei Dai's thesis at http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt and Qtum's idea Wei Dai has had some simple email exchanges, but Wei Dai's interest is no longer in the circle of cryptocurrencies.
 
Q16: In all the coins, which one will live the longest?
Patrick Dai: simply look at cryptocurrencies, BTC completed a historic jump, but also a breakthrough from 0 to 1, followed by many cryptocurrencies are 1 to 1.1 and 1.1 to 1.2 changes, more than one billion US dollars in the amount of encrypted currency thoroughly It is unlikely that it will disappear because of the drive and governance of the community that the community will uphold even if the developer does not maintain it. However, there are indeed many crypto-currencies that will be eliminated and 95% of the projects should be gone after three years.
 
Q17: 18 years blockchain private market analysis, what kind of industry is better?
Patrick Dai: Currently the industry needs to find other applications in addition to the cryptocurrency killer app, from the technical development point of view, I personally trust the concept of trustless Platform constantly landing and provide the underlying technology research and development and application scenarios.
 
Q18: Which industry has the largest total of all the industries in the blockchain?
Patrick Dai: Cryptocurrency itself seems to be the biggest at this moment, and others feel that there are many opportunities for the gaming industry and for digital content (video and audio) and for financial services and the Internet of Things.
 
Q19: Want to hear the competition between the public chain and the public relations and cooperation, how to comment on the big brother?
Patrick Dai: last year's growth in the industry, in essence, we are still eating BTC created by the combination of technology and ideas, creating a human species in the history of a new species premium, BTC has its historic significance. The groundbreaking idea it brought, gradually attracted the public's attention, but from a technical point of view, what BTC can do is limited, but it does solve its positioning.
Technology is not good or bad, mainly to meet the needs. BTC technology to meet its point-to-point electronic cash system positioning and needs. We do not expect to build infinite applications in the BTC above, this is impossible. The public chain is indeed an open experimental field and a community-driven evolutionary community of interests. Its vitality is also very strong. However, at present, the problem is that we really need technological progress to further promote the scene. If only from the perspective of cryptocurrency, BTC LTC DogeCoin for a user, in essence, is the same experience, and the experience of Ethereum is not much different. The difference is, BTC and the US dollar experience is very different.
I personally feel that the blockchain industry is an ecology. Whether it is serving one of the areas in the blockchain and ultimately building a blockchain together, it is essentially a collaborative evolution that builds a stronger consensus mechanism. Diversity provides the basis for the choice of consensus, and if there is only one technical direction, then the evolution of technology has become slow. In addition this is only a technical factor, but the blockchain system is not only as simple as technology, there is community community of interests behind.
 
Q20: What dimensions are the most important when evaluating the value of a blockchain project? What factors can be rejected one vote?
The Beginning: The Essential Elements of the Encrypted Currency Valuation Model (I send some thoughts that I wrote before) As the first truly successful decentralized e-cash system, bitcoin became the anchor of value in the industry and By far the most centralized network, Bitcoin is designed as an electronic currency that is secure, secure, and has a very low threshold of participation in the early stages.
It is early everyone can participate, and become a full node without any threshold, anyone can download bitcoin client, early mining in his computer, so in fact the realization of the low threshold of the financial services system, everyone With the freedom to join and exit, bitcoin clients have been rapidly evolving early, and if the client is a game, the Bitcoin client's distribution is a borderless game.
In P2P network, a very important core element is full node. In a P2P network, the total number of nodes basically determines the technical value of this network.
 
Why do you say that?
In the traditional database domain and distributed system, we study the consistency of the data, there are already many, all major companies have their own solutions, but few companies have tens of thousands of distributed system distributed nodes, So most of the research results are more suitable for some enterprises to solve the solution. For example, the Paxos algorithm proposed by Leslie Lamport in 1990 can achieve highly fault-tolerant requirements based on message passing. The latter algorithm is also widely used in google Chubby lock, and Chubby lock behind is widely used in Google's core design Bigtable, bigtable is to support a lot of Google's core business.
 
The realization of Bitcoin network is a fusion of technology and humanity.
In a traditional distributed network, in a large company's network, each node in many cases is due to network reasons, dropping or sending wrong messages, instead of deliberately forging information for the sake of profit.
 
The realization of bitcoin is facing a more complicated network environment, not only a more complex network environment, but also a more complicated game of humanity. In the traditional distributed network, no one will consider the introduction of incentives to allow nodes to maintain data consistency, Nakamoto was the first person to do so, and through a resource that can not be monopolized (hash function computing power ) To ensure the effective allocation of accounting rights to avoid single-point ddos ​​attacks on specific accounting nodes.
 
Bitcoin network to each distributed node in the network, the consistency of each time slice into a time interval consistency, if you look at the global currency bitcoin network, you will find each time slice and time, different The miners in calculating the different chains, in fact, is a bifurcated network, but in a 10-minute time interval, the probability that the data is modified is a Poisson distribution. The probability of the attacker's success is q, The growth of the block is exponentially declining. When the blockchain has six acknowledgments, the attacker's probability of success tends to be essentially zero.
 
If you are the full node in a Bitcoin network, then you have the largest and equal rights to the network, and you no longer have to trust third parties or give up your rights to others. At present, many other cryptocurrencies tend to be centralized. Many consensus mechanisms realize a fast transaction processing speed. In essence, they deprive participants of their equal rights and allow the network to return to a centralized network. But if we really need to hand over our rights in the blockchain network, banks may be a better choice than a lot of centralized blockchain systems.
 
At present there are about 13,000 full nodes in the bitcoin network. Due to the characteristics of the p2p network, it is very difficult to accurately count the total number of nodes in the network. These 13000 full nodes bear the accounting of the distribution and transaction of currency, and are also bits The foundation of the currency. Bitcoin is definitely a more distributed clearing network than Alipay, and unlike Alipay, Alipay is just a payment instrument that serves the renminbi system. Bitcoin's global clearing network also has its own currency system --- Bitcoin Compared to a bank, opening a bitcoin "dot" actually requires only one computer to run a full node. Therefore, the final service boundary of Bitcoin is borderless, and the service objects of banks and Alipay have boundaries.
 
Bitcoin achieved a breakthrough from 0 to 1 and completed the carriage-to-car transition (steam engine). In fact, crypto-currencies appeared behind us. In fact, we made some improvements on the basis of Nakamoto. Indeed, we have not Take the carriage again, essentially all the cryptocurrencies are in the car.
 
If we look at bitcoin from a software science perspective rather than a currency perspective, the various cryptocurrencies that appear later are essentially improvements and enhancements based on bitcoin's open-source software, which many teams make And upgrading, and not much difference, whether it is to change a mining algorithm, or add some total, a lot of bifurcation is done from 1 to 1.001 experiment, bitcoin from paper currency to electronic currency from 0 To 1 transition and fission.
 
Today, Bitcoin has the strongest network effect and the loudest brand effect. Although the technology iteration is very, very slow, some progress has been made one after another, but it can not be surpassed from the aspect of things development. , But no matter whether it will be surpassed, the emergence of bitcoin has its historical inevitability and it will certainly accomplish its historic mission. As the world's largest distributed clearing network and built-in monetary system in the future, as well as the anchor of the value in the parallel financial world in the blockchain and the boost of crazy humanity, we predict where its future highs will be Speaking of other factors aside, cryptocurrency has opened up a new era in which its market value should surpass that of the previous wave of the Internet.
 
Question 21: Blockchain whether the future is required to apply for a license to do?
Patrick Dai: From the future development of cryptocurrency, this is an inevitable.
 
Question 22: The future of blockchain in the IP field?
Patrick Dai: This still need to solve the chain and chain problems, as well as integration with the existing legal system. But purely virtual assets may not be needed, such as audio and video saved in the art and electronic formats of game props and electronic designs. But no matter what kind of industry, we have to think about, in addition to the token premium liquidity brought us by the blockchain, the blockchain really helped solve what problems?
 
Q23: Now the real consumption of blockchain project is not much, why do not wait for the project landing, re-vote? Tencent like buying now is not too late. Estimated seed round billion reasonable?
Patrick Dai: revolutionary ideas and new technology has brought endless imagination mixed with human speculation and greed.
 
Q24: Want to know how to treat EOS Q1 beta?
Patrick Dai: the specific progress did not pay attention to too many details, each project has its own position, as long as the solution to a certain area or the general needs, I personally feel that are very valuable. But we also look at the duration of the project is also to our own positioning, if the measurement of time is one day, it is trader, if it is a month, it is a short-term speculators, if it is one year, in the block chain industry is long-term investors If it is three to five years or ten years, it's the value discoverer and the leader in technological change.
 
Q25: What kind of impact can blockchain have on the economic vitality of the third and fourth tier cities today? When will have an impact?
Patrick Dai: I do not know this.
 
 
Credit.Wang Jiehui
submitted by thisthingismud to Qtum [link] [comments]

HOW TO BUY BITCOINS with a paysafecard Bjork Uses AudioCoin For Her Latest Album, Utopia Antminers, Bitcoin Utopia via Boinc and Cgminer Bitcoin Mining. BITCOIN LATERALIZADO - E AGORA O QUE FAZER? Bitcoin Utopia ou Realidade?

Didn't know where to put this, but Bitcoin Utopia (a BOINC poject) is giving users 5 milion - 500 million BOINC credits a day. In two months the project has given 500 billion!!! credits. This has to stop! The credits have always been a little different between projects, but this is just insane. The whole BOINC credit system is now entirely meaningless. It's not even real science that they are ... Bitcoin Utopia Mitglied seit 13 Jun 2013 und 65 Mio. Credits wird heute mit ein/zwei ASIC-USB-Sticks an einem Tag erledigt . Zuletzt bearbeitet: 28.06.2014. Landjunge Commodore Special. Mitglied seit 29.10.2008 Beiträge 490 Renomée 38 Standort bei Uelzen, NDS. Mein DC . BOINC-Statistiken [email protected] System. Mein Laptop keins Details zu meinem Desktop Prozessor Intel Xeon E3 ... Quite the learning experience that thread, so turns out the fee structure of Bitcoin Utopia has changed. New campaigns will have 0% fees, and there's one campaign with 100% fees dedicated to funding the Bitcoin Utopia webite (and for profit on top of expenses). The campaign to fund BU is enabled by default but can be manually de-activated, so no need to panic. ID: 69510 · zombie67. Send ... Wenn ich meinen Aufwand nun mit dem Projekt Bitcoin Utopia vergleiche und hochrechne, dann bekomme ich für 10B credits grob geschätzt 8-10 Euro beim aktuellen BTC-Kurs, der mit knapp 1000 Euro je bitcoin schon sehr hoch steht. Dem stehen 15 Tage Bitcoinmining mit ca. 450 Watt je Stunde Verbrauch gegenüber und sind rund 162 Kilowatt Gesamtleistung. Bei ca. 25 Cent je Kilowatstunde ist das ... BOINC credits shouldn't be awarded especially in exchange of money donations, as every project has a special place for their money donors on their homepages, still none of them gives BOINC credits for money. I my opinion that would be a shame if they would. Now the BitCoin Utopia project made that shame routine. Would it be okay, if the GPUGrid ...

[index] [39249] [2832] [1131] [13485] [37587] [20514] [42359] [36183] [39926] [26674]

HOW TO BUY BITCOINS with a paysafecard

Here is the reason for the confusion by many when dealing with Ants and Bitcoin Utopia. The first part of the video is what it looks like when Bitcoin Utopia is running via Boinc. When REAL mining ... Formação em Programação Neuro-Financeiro: http://bit.ly/PNF_2019 Baixe nosso Guia Completo sobre Bitcoins para Iniciantes: http://bit.ly/Bitcoin_Guia_Completo Se ... seja bem vindo a universidade do bitcoin. o melhor portal da amÉrica latina sobre trading de bitcoin! aqui vocÊ aprenderÁ dicas e tÉcnicas que me ajudaram a ... Treinamento Sobre Bitcoin https://goo.gl/c5y3m2 Como Investir em Ações http://investimentosinteligente.com/03 E-Book Guia Definitivo Para Transformar S... A company is planning an experimental city- Bitcointopia outside the Elko that will run on Bitcoin Per Nevada local news outlet Bitcointopia, Inc. had purcha...

#