All posts made by RenegadeMan in Bitcointalk.org's Wall Observer thread
1.
Post 12292557 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.25h):
It's bizzarre to me that anyone can claim that Bitcoin's PRIMARY utility is as a store of value. A store of value does not lose over 80% of it's market cap in less than 2 years.
Bitcoin needs to scale in order to survive. The people who sell bitcoin don't seem to think so. The people who buy Bitcoin absolutely do. Ever heard the saying "the customer is always right?"
I think eventually it will be seen as a store of value. Your "A store of value does not lose over
80% of it's market cap in less than 2 years" statement is taking a selective window of Bitcoin's total lifespan and highlighting its devaluation from the ATH. A similar selective view could be applied to many 'store of value' assets that went through booms and busts in their early days.
Of course it needs to scale and I don't think anyone is arguing it doesn't. You make some good points in many of your posts but I find your constant "scale or die" rhetoric to be a simplistic dumbing down of what is a relatively complex debate (you're displaying similar lines of 'intelligence' to President Bush's "You're either with us or against us" and "the axis of evil" chest beating after 911 and we all know how poorly much of that turned out).
Rather than just painting anyone that doesn't think XT has the right combination of attributes and backing as someone that's against Bitcoin moving forward, perhaps you could bring a little more clarity around the issues at hand to the discussion and dispense with such black and white judgement.
2.
Post 12292931 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.25h):
... so you felt the need to go ad hominem on him?
No, but I'm feeling the potential need to go ad hominem on you!
I mostly enjoy reading your and BJA's posts but some of the ways you're expressing yourselves are not helpful.
When are people going to wake up and realise that all this infighting and characterisation of people within bitcoin as "pussies" and "spineless people" is the internal bickering that just makes serious money on the outside of crypto look in (for 5 seconds tops) and shake their heads at the immaturity and self-defeating culture.
Honestly, we need unity and leadership to present a unified face. This stuff you're going on with is disastrous. Who exactly doesn't want Bitcoin to scale? Who? I honestly don't know who these people are. Of course there are a multitude of discussions around new developments like sidechains and the Lightning Network which may change some aspects of how the blockchain is used and what direction it takes, but I don't see any of these people arguing for a Bitcoin that doesn't scale.
This is just more of the "you're either with us or against us" black and white rhetoric I highlighted above.
It's absolutely not helpful to the cause.
3.
Post 12293552 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.25h):
Okay thanks for your replies Fatman and BJA. Good responses. Even if I don't agree with your individual takes on the situation there's always more to the story than appears at face value.
I'm coming to the conclusion that to save us we need a combo of
and
4.
Post 12296510 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.25h):
Gavin Andresen is on the latest Epicentre Bitcoin podcast with Brian Fabian Crain & Sébastien Couture talking about The Blocksize And Bitcoin's Governance. Well worth listening to regardless of your beliefs and views on what should be done. The guy is clearly intelligent, balanced and knowledgeable. He also comments on the sheer difficulty of trying to get any changes implemented with the current impasse.
Very glad I listened to this.
https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/epicenter-bitcoin-94-gavin-andresen-on-the-blocksize-and-bitcoins-governance
5.
Post 12296746 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.25h):
I'm as dubious as the next person as to people's intentions with this stuff.
I've already challenged billyjoelallen for what I think is rhetoric each time he signs off a post with "scale or die".
I think there's an inordinate amount of black and white thinking going on with these changes to Bitcoin. And responses like yours are also unhelpful as they're overly dismissive and just add to the dissension.
Did you listen to this podcast?
There's genuine concern and care being expressed by Gavin. There may be some over-reach too. And maybe he's gone too far....or maybe not. And I reject your assertion that I'm impressionable and am going to "blindly follow some dude". You know nothing about me, my life experience, skills and knowledge so it's completely and utterly banal of you in the extreme, to make such an assessment.
Either way to just write him off with "fork you Gavin!" summation is hardly fair, decent or helpful.
Perhaps you could consider debating key parts of what you consider to be wrong with his ideas rather than just putting up a blanket "I just don't like it...." wall.
6.
Post 12306711 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.25h):
Someone many pages back linked the Gavin interview,
https://youtu.be/B8l11q9hsJMPay special attention at roughly 1:14:40 , the first and maybe only interesting question, let me paraphrase:
Brian: "so, if this fork succeeds, how will decisions be made in the future?"
Gavin: "Mike Hearn will be the benevolent dictator, he will be the ultimate decision maker."
...
He goes on to explain how he does not want to be in complete control, nor do any of the devs that currently have commit ability, but he is completely happy and ok with Mike as the sole controller and decider. He even goes in to mention that future changes will be much easier and will happen much more quickly once this change is made.
I know XT is already dead, but I just wanted to point out to anyone that was still unconvinced that Gavin has been compromised... He is either completely brain dead, or he is deliberately trying to end bitcoin's function as a permissionless, censorship-proof means of storing and transmitting value.
Hearn would only be the dictator of XT development, not the protocol. XT is only one implementation of BIP101. Other implementations would be compatible, as XT is currently compatible with core. ANY change in the code that would make XT incompatible would orphan XT, not the other implementations. Anyone can write code using core or BIP101 components and run it on test net to see if it works and then release it into the wild. This is open source. XT will only succeed if people use it.
A certain amount of skepticism is healthy, but I think we all need to take off our tin foil hats. We just end up talking past each other and getting nowhere.
I read the BITfury white paper in support of BIP100. There are some good points in it, but it doesn't address the big problems that are holding up infrastructure development and mainstream adoption.
Entrepreneurs can't build business models around how miners may or may not vote. Issues such as node centralization are secondary. A fully validating node is and likely will always be many orders of magnitude cheaper and easier to setup and run than a profitable mining operation.
It seems that a major concern for BIP100 supporters is that miners with slow internet connections are disadvantaged by larger blocks. Assuming for the sake of argument that this is true, why should the rest of us subsidize these slow miners? They are mostly in China which means that if they have less of a competitive advantage then mining will likely become LESS centralized with large blocks rather than more.
Miners are producers. They are essential to the network but we know what happens when producers are in control of the economy. We saw it in the Soviet Union, North Korea, East Germany, Cuba, Venezuela, and Red China. Rent-seeking behavior kills growth. In the free market, the consumer is king which is actually more fair because we are all consumers.
If we want bitcoin to survive, it has to grow. If we want it to grow, it has to scale. If we want it to scale, then we have to make some trade-offs that will benefit various people and groups differently. This is unavoidable. What is also unavoidable is technology proliferation. If we don't fix this scaling problem, banksters are going to jack our tech, make their own coin(s), and wave at us as they leave us in the dust.
Scale or die.
Well said!
Yes I agree. You're slowly growing on me billyjoeallen. Well written post.
7.
Post 12406576 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
In fact, many of the problems that he describes are in fact features and NOT bugs
Since you are a holder and speculator, of course we disagree on that. In my view,
you are one of bitcoin's problems.
Little bit disingenuous of you to participate in a thread to judge others who are investing into something and to call them "problems" because they are investing. What are you investing in? naysaying the activities of others?
a claim that there needs to be a built in approximate 2% inflation (or devaluation) is preposterous because it supposedly addresses a non-existing problem, at least at this time.
so make it a bad investment?
Bitcoin was created to be a currency, not another speculative asset- and dividend-free investment fund (or pyramid scheme, its more honest name). There is no shortage of the latter, and (as I wrote earlier)
that use of bitcoin will not make the world better, create new wealth, or render some useful service; it will just move wealth from some people to other people.
You are full of shit!!!! Bitcoin was created for a variety of purposes, including the currency aspect. You seem to be oversimplifying matters in order to create strawmen arguments. and mislead others by oversimplification.
Economists have know for 500 years that a currency must have some inflation, otherwise people will hoard it and it will not be available for use as a currency.
Yeah.. appeal to authority... 500 years OMG... you really are saying something here........ NOT. You are just making up facts out of your ass.
The use of bitcoin for investment and speculation had two other bad consequences. First, it lifted the price to 100 times what it should have been, given its current level of usage. The price is floating in the air, high up, anchored to itself through the hopes of traders and holders. It could crash from there at any moment. No company in its right mind would want to hold it, even temporarily. Imagine a manager accepting a payment of 1000 BTC today, and the price crashing tomorrow, before he can spend or sell those coins. How could he explain that to the company owners? (You can find out there an audio of Overstock's CEO trying to explain something like that to the other shareholders; but AFAIK he is the majority holder, so he won't get fired for that...)
YES.... what if, what if... You know better than that. if you are using bitcoin as a payment system, then you have the option to cash out right away or to hold them for a specific cash out time. With anything new, there may be a learning curve concerning decisions regarding when to cash out, if cashing out is part of the plan.
Second, but tied to the first: bitcoin's use as instrument of speculative trade made its price extremely volatile. Even in times of "stability", like the past 7 months, the price has changed by ±10% in a few hours, several times. Volatility is bad for a currency: the user who buys BTC to pay for something will lose money if the BTC price drops between the two actions, and will not really win if it goes up -- because he will be left with a small amount of BTC that he may not find a good use for.
That is why a good cryptocurrency must be designed to NOT be a good investment.
Yes, if an asset is volatile, then that needs to be taken into account, but that volatility does NOT mean that it is a bad thing because, as I already mentioned, BTC is much more than a currency. You again are attempting to frame facts in an incomplete way in order to engage in scare tactics....
All of these months in bitcoin, and you still have NOT learned how to be more comprehensive in your analysis rather than simplified and selective extrapolations?
From what I have read, I am satisfied that Satoshi intended bitcoin to be what he wrote in the whitepaper: a system for peer to peer payments through the internet that did not require a trusted third party. He believed that the world needed such a thing, but no one knew how to build it, and thought that he had found a way. That seems to have been his motivation to design the bitcoin protocol; and he then implemented it to see whether the idea worked out in practice.
But Satoshi was a computer scientist, not an economist. He thought that it would be nice if the currency had no inflation. For "everybody" knows that inflation is bad, right? I thought so too.
His he pleased about what bitcoin turned out to be? Well, on one hand it is always satisfying to do something big, even if it is a big nuclear accident or the sinking of the Titanic. But I doubt that he is happy about what his creature has become...
Your further explanation supports that you are engaged in a BIG ASS guessing game regarding what Satoshi thought or what he would think. It does little to no good for you to engage in this kind of speculation to go back to "original intent" or to attempt to attribute the direction of bitcoin to the "founder," because in fact, Satoshi either removed himself or fell out of the bitcoin scene.... Accordingly, bitcoin became a dynamic phenomenon that is influenced by a variety of players (rather than by any one player). in other words, bitcoin has become a sort of community asset, and there is some freedom for anyone to buy into it or to refrain from such. Even though you are fairly informed about bitcoin, you seem to be someone who has knowingly chosen NOT to financially invest into bitcoin, but instead chosen to invest into denigrating bitcoin.... I'm fairly certain that some anti-bitcoin entities would be willing to pay you to continue in such supposedly voluntary and unpaid conduct. So, are you being paid for all of the time that you spend in the various bitcoin forums? You must be receiving some payments for your work and/or your publications and/or your attempts to build your reputation as some kind of anti-bitcoin "expert."
Sorry to some of you for using the term "expert" in the same sentence in which I am referring to Stolfi.....
Why so much agro and upset about Jorge's posts? He's not threatening you (or perhaps he is somehow?). He has a view and he expresses and articulates that view pretty well. I don't agree with much of what he says either but I appreciate that his posts are coherent, quite well written and free from personal attacks or vitriol. In fact, he's very gracious in his responses to many of you that get all so incensed that he's expressing the views that he is; and this is indicative that some of what he's saying has seriously hooked your innards and is tearing at you in some manner. That you're responding in such an affronted way says to me you're not 100% sure and his line of thought on this stuff causes internal conflict.
If you don't agree with his take on Bitcoin (and crypto in general), just point out calmly and unemotionally where his logic, assumptions or beliefs are flawed. I think it's very good to have someone like him putting the ideas up he does as it makes for interesting consideration of his views versus alternatives.
Isn't this what a thread like this is about?
8.
Post 12406876 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Why so much agro and upset about Jorge's posts? He's not threatening you (or perhaps he is somehow?). He has a view and he expresses and articulates that view pretty well. I don't agree with much of what he says either but I appreciate that his posts are coherent, quite well written and free from personal attacks or vitriol. In fact, he's very gracious in his responses to many of you that get all so incensed that he's expressing the views that he is; and this is indicative that some of what he's saying has seriously hooked your innards and is tearing at you in some manner. That you're responding in such an affronted way says to me you're not 100% sure and his line of thought on this stuff causes internal conflict.
If you don't agree with his take on Bitcoin (and crypto in general), just point out calmly and unemotionally where his logic, assumptions or beliefs are flawed. I think it's very good to have someone like him putting the ideas up he does as it makes for interesting consideration of his views versus alternatives.
Isn't this what a thread like this is about?
Your gracious friend has been trolling this forum for years now. I agree that there is no need to get all fired up about it, but to
"point out calmly and unemotionally where his logic, assumptions or beliefs are flawed" is even more of a waste.
He has some ideas that (I think) are the very antithesis of what crypto is all about. Suggesting that there'll inevitably have to be a rethink on the 21 million cap and that an increase will eventually happen is the slippery slope to Bitcoin being just another manipulated disaster like we're seeing with almost all fiat currencies (and, obviously to get it to be manipulatable like that, will require some dramatic action and reallocation of mining resources away from the current Bitcoin community). In fact he basically seems to have a line of thought that takes the current monetary system's "features" and attributes and retrospectively applies them to Bitcoin like "it's just how money works and if Bitcoin doesn't hold these properties it will fail". That I find to be backward thinking as it's failing to see the paradigm of how central bankers and Wall Street "run" the monetary system is THE problem and to use it as a framework of sorts for how crypto needs to operate is everything crypto isn't and should never be (but any conversation about 'money' is by nature controversial and complex).
My point though is he appears to have many people quite riled up and that's unfortunate. His points simply need to be deconstructed and the flaws pointed out. But if it's a waste of time doing that (and I haven't been in this thread for more than a few months) then probably best to just let him post and not respond.
Either way I don't find his posts to be trollish in their nature (but maybe his "graciousness" is hiding a whole other agenda I'm not aware of) and I appreciate he's expressing his view and that's perfectly okay.
9.
Post 12409280 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Why so much agro and upset about Jorge's posts? He's not threatening you (or perhaps he is somehow?). He has a view and he expresses and articulates that view pretty well. I don't agree with much of what he says either but I appreciate that his posts are coherent, quite well written and free from personal attacks or vitriol. In fact, he's very gracious in his responses to many of you that get all so incensed that he's expressing the views that he is; and this is indicative that some of what he's saying has seriously hooked your innards and is tearing at you in some manner. That you're responding in such an affronted way says to me you're not 100% sure and his line of thought on this stuff causes internal conflict.
If you don't agree with his take on Bitcoin (and crypto in general), just point out calmly and unemotionally where his logic, assumptions or beliefs are flawed. I think it's very good to have someone like him putting the ideas up he does as it makes for interesting consideration of his views versus alternatives.
Isn't this what a thread like this is about?
Your gracious friend has been trolling this forum for years now. I agree that there is no need to get all fired up about it, but to
"point out calmly and unemotionally where his logic, assumptions or beliefs are flawed" is even more of a waste.
He has some ideas that (I think) are the very antithesis of what crypto is all about. Suggesting that there'll inevitably have to be a rethink on the 21 million cap and that an increase will eventually happen is the slippery slope to Bitcoin being just another manipulated disaster like we're seeing with almost all fiat currencies (and, obviously to get it to be manipulatable like that, will require some dramatic action and reallocation of mining resources away from the current Bitcoin community). In fact he basically seems to have a line of thought that takes the current monetary system's "features" and attributes and retrospectively applies them to Bitcoin like "it's just how money works and if Bitcoin doesn't hold these properties it will fail". That I find to be backward thinking as it's failing to see the paradigm of how central bankers and Wall Street "run" the monetary system is THE problem and to use it as a framework of sorts for how crypto needs to operate is everything crypto isn't and should never be (but any conversation about 'money' is by nature controversial and complex).
My point though is he appears to have many people quite riled up and that's unfortunate. His points simply need to be deconstructed and the flaws pointed out. But if it's a waste of time doing that (and I haven't been in this thread for more than a few months) then probably best to just let him post and not respond.
Either way I don't find his posts to be trollish in their nature (but maybe his "graciousness" is hiding a whole other agenda I'm not aware of) and I appreciate he's expressing his view and that's perfectly okay.
People are riled up, somewhat, with Stofl because his posts are generally deceptive and misleading and accordingly disingenuous...
Many times, he has actually admitted to being a troll of these forms...
In other words, trolls deal in disingenuous arguments and distractions and really attempt to incite others with their ridiculous points... surely from time to time Stofli makes decent points, but that generally is the exception rather than the rule... most of the time he is misleading and spinning... ..
surely we can ignore him or communicate rationally with him, but sometimes he needs to be called out because otherwise some people, including what appears to be yourself, will begin to believe some of his several stupid ass misleading posts.
Okay. Perhaps I haven't experienced enough of him yet to see the dis-ingenuity in full flight. As always with people on these forums, there's their face-value appearance and then their deeper hidden agenda which may take longer to pick up on. But one always has to ask what the driver for someone's modus operandi is. If he's so down on Bitcoin and thinks it's so likely to fail, why is he here? I think this is the same question we all need to ask ourselves. I'd expect that he has doubts about his views too, hence can't stay away because he's inevitably drawn to a debate like this to challenge the parts of his thinking that don't quite believe the outward position he's stated.
I'm here because I'm fascinated by Bitcoin (and crypto in general) and I believe my investment in it may bring a good return. The "fascinated" part extends out from my awareness that this technology just might be the one thing that saves humanity from the greed and stupefying madness of a world population that, not only has no real understanding of money, doesn't even know that it's completely lacking that understanding and consequently is being seriously worked over by some very dark forces. The average person from a westernised nation today walks this planet completely and utterly clueless as to what the fundamental attributes of money are and why the manipulation via the Fed's QE and ZIRP is just putting off for another day the inevitable financial reckoning that's going to catch the masses out. I think Greenspan, Bernanke and Yellen and their Wall Street banking cronies will one day be recast as criminals that led us all on this merry dance into disaster. And just maybe, the existence of Bitcoin (and it's potential to travel through this coming mess relatively unscathed....and I said "potential"; many trials and tribulations for it yet) will alter the course of history and create a surging discourse amongst the public as to what the true nature of 'money' is.
But there are soooo many differing views on this subject. I for one pretty much listen to them all as the potential to be caught by confirmation bias within groups like this and not even realise you're on a pathway with other lemmings on the way to the cliff's edge is ever present. For that reason I welcome the Stolfis and others with extreme views adverse to what the bulk of us in cryptoland hold (even if they are "trolling"....take what's useful; leave the rest) because they help me check my reasoning and assumptions, and I believe that's a good thing.
10.
Post 12412787 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Okay. Perhaps I haven't experienced enough of him yet to see the dis-ingenuity in full flight. As always with people on these forums, there's their face-value appearance and then their deeper hidden agenda which may take longer to pick up on.
Yes, his (Stolfi's) mostly courteous front can be very misleading concerning his credibility - and likely causes people to give much more credit to him than he deserves. Surely, sometimes he makes some decent points or brings up some interesting topics, but frequently, his points are skewed in a level of unrealism that any real supposed academic who is acting with honesty would give more validity to points that are contrary to his own agenda.
...snip
I don't have a problem hearing various negative views or even sorting the various arguments etc; however, trolling by definition is a problem because it is distracting and aims to incite rather than to really engage in meaningful discussion. There are ways to present counter evidence and make arguments against bitcoin without being disingenuous and without putting out false arguments and even misstating relevant facts. Some of the trolls, including Stolfi has a pattern and tendency to mislead.... .. and frequently the bullshit should be pointed out for what it is, rather than accepted as if he is contributing to the dialogue in some kind of positive way. Again, NOT every post of Stolfi can be characterized as such, because in fact he attempts to build his credibility by being a more sophisticated troll.. and when he does actually put out FUD, sometimes very genuine and intellectually honest people, including yourself, are mislead by some of his FUD spreading.
Thanks for your very detailed response JayJuanGee. I do appreciate your summation. I've had similar experiences in other forums.
Meanwhile I'll continue to read Jorge's posts and make my own assessment. Obviously it will take sometime before I've worked him out (and even then, this communication medium is about as thorough for "working someone out" as is reading a book about how to tango and then declaring yourself an accomplished dancer when you've never set foot on a dance floor let alone held a rose between your teeth. Ha!)
11.
Post 12426668 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
I think it's a good sign that we are still holding at 230 knowing all the economic turmoil happening lately with many countries. Lets see where things will lead in the next 4 months.
there are currently no economic turmoil... We currently just have concerns because the growth especially of china is slowing down. They always had double digits growth and is now slowing down to 5-7%.. Once their GDP starts going negative, then we can start talking about economic turmoil..
Looks like bitcoin has had its prime time as it seems...
One hopes that your post has hidden /sarcasm BBCodes on each end of statements like these "there are currently no economic turmoil"?
12.
Post 12440156 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
I forgot about bitcoin for a few days, it was really nice
we all need a holiday from time to time! a nice beach with crystal clear waters or a lake in the mountains...
speaking of which, took my dad & daughter to the beach for a bit of a paddle, ended up surrounded by 'lots' of different fish(es) we all giggled like it was magic - it kinda was.
bought 12 more coins when we got home, and ate calimari.
Nice to see someone expressing their common humanity and decency. Little moments with dear loved ones like you just described are all important for remembering the really important things in life. Thanks for sharing.
13.
Post 12476971 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
^---------< Seems to be a very large build-up of bids on Finex. A lot of people are waiting for the inevitable drop that may turn out to be 'uninevitable'.
Also it's interesting that for the past 12 or so hours BTC-e has often been higher than Bitstamp. That doesn't happen much and I wonder if it's indicating anything (either that everything's just gone dead & will stay that way for a while or it's some sort of rubber band being pulled that's about to snap
).
14.
Post 12477241 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Ok guyz!
What should be my target for the oct-jan bull run?
$1800 or $2500?
Just remove a zero from each number and you won't be disappointed.
I think everyone needs to think very carefully before making assumptions about continued lacklustre price movement. When bitcoin went from ~$25 to more than ~250 within a couple of months leading up to April 2013 many would have thought they would never see anything like that again. Those who sold out and didn't buy back in again when it went back below $100 would have been kicking themselves when the big boom happened that following November. Well we're in the same situation right now. If things start seriously unravelling with fiat (and indications are that this is going to happen; it's only a matter of when) there will be a race into PMs and crypto. It's entirely likely we could see another run up that will make the ~$1200 from Nov 2013 look like the $250 from April 2013 (i.e if it follows a typical logarithmic trajectory, a $10,000 ATH is not out of the question).
Bottom line: I would be very careful jumping in and out of BTC at the moment as it could suddenly take off and will catch many out.
15.
Post 12482403 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
is crypto done??
Perhaps. Or someone just hit the snooze.
Are we still here?
The concept of existence is impossible. Because in order to be we have to transgress the boundaries of not being. For matter, space and time, this is called "The Big Bang", however the further we move towards the beginning of inflation the closer we get to the point of impossibility. We would like to think that that is not the case. That our rapid and unrelenting expansion of our knowledge of the universe will somehow break through this barrier, but it is an illusion. So what is this experience of being we all share then? It is a play played out on the back of The Great Turtle who constitutes the physical boundaries of this imagined world. Such a concept is of course laughable. But since there is no such thing as being, it is without consequence.
Or were you just thinking about this forum?
At a quantum level it gets even more insane. Everything is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. And atoms are practically nothing, with a nucleus the size of a tennis ball in a huge cathedral of emptiness and space.
What if the physical universe doesn't actually exist at all? What if every single thing we think is a real thing - the screen you're reading this text on, the chair you're sitting on, the floor the chair you're occupying is resting on, the building you're in that the floor you're standing on is part of, the shoes you're wearing, your feet that are in the shoes you're wearing, your legs connected to those feet.....in fact your whole body - what if none of it is real but it's all a million ideas that exist independently of what all these things appear to be made of?
As Globb0 says above, at a quantum level everything is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. So how can we be sure all these things are real? Well most will say, "Well of course they're real, I can touch them, feel them, see, them. I can bang things together and they make a sound. If it's food or drink I can taste them. Of course they're real!" but if we're using our physical senses to confirm everything we can see, hear, feel, taste and smell is real isn't there a minor governance issue in that we're using faculties that are also made of "everything is everywhere and nowhere at the same time" hence there's only a single source of confirmation therefore it's highly likely it's not accurate?
Just maybe, just maybe, this is all a mockup and the great spiritual sages throughout the millenniums were trying to tell us that. Maybe what we're experiencing in this realm is but a shadow of what's actually real.
Something to think about.
16.
Post 12496524 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Nobody here sees the potential of 21 Inc's platform? What Google did for making money with websites (generate revenue with ads), 21 Inc may do for making money with web-services (generate revenue with pay-per-use). I.e. 21 Inc might be the next Google. Guess what that will do for Bitcoin...
I don't see the potential. You don't need special chips or computers to do micro payments. As a charity node, a standard Raspberry Pi 2 is cheaper. And the mining part of it is really lame. To me, it just sounds like a clusterfuck of bitcoin buzzwords. Either the VCs have been fooled, or there is a dimension to this that is still a secret.
Based on the story of 21 Inc so far my guess is your line...
To me, it just sounds like a clusterfuck of bitcoin buzzwords. Either the VCs have been fooled....
...is the reality of the situation. I think these guys are riding a bitcoin VC feeding frenzy but lack clear strategy or understanding.
If you haven't already heard this podcast from 13th Sep, have a listen to Chris Derose and Joshua Unseth's take on what 21 Inc are doing; I think it's very very funny. Go to time 15:05 in episode #16 of the Counterparty weekly update for a hilarious take on the whole thing.
https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/xcp-weekly-update-16-joel-and-thomas-from-swarm
17.
Post 12496832 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Nobody here sees the potential of 21 Inc's platform? What Google did for making money with websites (generate revenue with ads), 21 Inc may do for making money with web-services (generate revenue with pay-per-use). I.e. 21 Inc might be the next Google. Guess what that will do for Bitcoin...
I don't see the potential. You don't need special chips or computers to do micro payments. As a charity node, a standard Raspberry Pi 2 is cheaper. And the mining part of it is really lame. To me, it just sounds like a clusterfuck of bitcoin buzzwords. Either the VCs have been fooled, or there is a dimension to this that is still a secret.
Indeed, this HW doesn't do anything that isn't already possible. Just like the first webserver didn't do anything that wasn't already possible (publish some text over the Internet -- you could also just download files instead). But it did make it very easy.
Google turned website into something that you can make money with on a per-use basis. The revenue model of 21 Inc may turn webservices also into something you can make money with on a per-use basis. It may take some time to convince developers to start creating services using their platform/API, but nothing similar exists, yet.
A webserver (Apache) is software, not hardware. I made a micro payment solution for web content via sms payments in 2001. Micropayments is not a new revenue model. Bitcoin can make this happen in a big way. ChangeTip is leading the way right now.
I first wanted to write an elaborate answer. Then I saw this blog.
https://elux.svbtle.com/the-21-inc-computer-is-the-new-altair-8800I have nothing more to add.
I find that article to be as ambiguous as 12 Inc's strategy! It seems to criss-cross itself and I don't know whether it's positive towards what 21 Inc are doing or negative (or it's just sidelined their device altogether and gone on to talk about how this concept of using bitcoin in ecommerce to remove the need for identity is the real innovation).
As the previous poster just noted, this opening...
So, 21 Inc. finally unveiled their first product yesterday.
A $400 glorified Raspberry Pi with a shitty mining chip glued on top.
...seems to be very negative.
Then this bit...
Today, content on the internet is powered by advertising. Because we lack microtransactions. Google & Facebook & Twitter are advertising companies. 21 aims to change that. The internet runs on advertising. 21 aims to change that.
Now, link unforgeable bitcoin private keys with biometric identification.
You just killed:
Passwords…
sign-ups…
e-mail confirmation…
login screens
This would remove a ton of hassle and frustration from the whole online experience.
...seems to be giving them the thumbs up.
Then this bit at the end...
Why can’t you preload the 21 device? Because you don’t kill identity-theft if you bought the micro-bitcoins from someone else, instead of generating them yourself.
....is the epitome of ambiguity!
That's what I find so often with hyperbole of a major "release" of products like this; a following that's just as confused and unclear.
18.
Post 12496946 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Good morning Bitcoinland.
I see we had a little action last night but we seem to be coming back to $230 pretty consistently lately.
Must be driving the daytraders crazy. Long-term holders yawn.
What is actually our (long term hodling cult, inc.) target? 10 000? 100 000?? 1 000 000???
Putting a dollar value on it is difficult. I hope to never sell any bitcoins for fiat currency but rather spend them for goods and services. Who knows what the dollar will be worth?
That said, I'd hope to see at least $10k within a few years, in today's dollars. If the dollar tanks, multiply accordingly.
It's virtually impossible to forecast this
teasing investment called bitcoin! But one thing everyone needs to remember, just when it looks like the thing's going nowhere fast and "nothing is happening" it could take off. When BTC first jumped into the $ hundreds it didn't stay there too long before dropping back into double digits again. But then meandered along for six months between ~$70 and ~$130 seemingly like the ATH had been reached and "those glory days are now over". Well, I believe we're in the same situation with the next massive pump not too far away. Considering the diabolical situation with fiat across the world and the Fed having backed themselves into such an inextricable corner, it could come at any moment. The trick will be to have enough patience that you don't miss it.
How silly would you have felt selling all your BTC in early Oct 2013 to then see it go through that miraculous rise? The next rise is likely to make that previous ATH look tame so be ready for it.
19.
Post 12497032 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Nah, I think he had his tongue-firmly-planted-in-cheek while he typed this and was rolling his eyes....
20.
Post 12497226 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
No.
Maybe I had MY tongue-firmly-planted-in-cheek and was rolling MY his eyes when I made that comment.
21.
Post 12500944 (copy this link) (by RenegadeMan) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Does anyone actually use the 3D presentation of these chart images? I just tried putting some red/green glasses on and what I saw was fairly uninspiring. Seeing them in 3D certainly doesn't make them suddenly mean a whole lot more or convey more comparison data. I think it's a gimmick.
