6 ms·

Lightning has nothing to do with holding and transporting Bitcoin. Holding Bitcoin is literally free. Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what y

Lightning has nothing to do with holding and transporting Bitcoin. Holding Bitcoin is literally free. Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
VikingCoder 6y ago
> Holding Bitcoin is literally free. Interesting claim. How do you secure it, back it up, and bequeath it to people on your passing? Don't those things cost time and actual money?
- kyboren 6y ago
  > How do you secure it, back it up, and bequeath it to people on your passing? Keep the private key, mnemonic, seed phrase, etc. only in your brain and perhaps your will, potentially split into pieces that are kept in the physical control of independent trusted entities. > Don't those things cost time and actual money? Time: yes. Actual money: perhaps, but that is not fundamentally required. For example, oral traditions are a time-honored means of transferring information to heirs. Keep in mind we're talking about just 256 bits of information. You can scratch it on a rock and bury it in your back yard if you want.
  - VikingCoder 6y ago
    Grant Imahara just died of a brain aneurysm. You can't count on whispering a password on your deathbed. Do you think a carved rock is safe and secure? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Joplin_tornado https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Joplin_tornado
    - shard 6y ago
      Not sure what your reference to the tornado was trying to point out. I could not find any references on the page to the tornado abrading away carved rock.
      - VikingCoder 6y ago
        Doesn't need to abrade a rock, it merely needs to throw it through the air. Any time someone has "backups" that are all on one property, I think of large floods, fires, or tornadoes that can eradicate everything, or displace it all.
        shard 6y ago
        I suppose if you didn't bury it deep enough in your back yard, the tornado could pick it up and toss it. So then the question is what severity of events do you want to prepare for? Once-in-a-decade events? Once-in-a-century events? Or once-in-a-millenium events?
- colecut 6y ago
  It is both secure and backed up by writing down your private key somewhere safe. It is passed on by passing on that private key. I don't see how that process could be made to be "less expensive"
  - VikingCoder 6y ago
    If you choose to write it down on a sheet of paper, it's not safe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Joplin_tornado https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Joplin_tornado If you choose to write it down electronically, then you have to back up that system, and secure it. Neither of which is free.
    - deadbunny 6y ago
      If only you could store things in multiple locations.
      - VikingCoder 6y ago
        What's the cost of having multiple secure storage locations? Is it greater than zero? Then I win the point.
        kerkeslager 6y ago
        Well, you don't win the point. But the bigger question is, why would anyone want to talk to someone who just wants to win the conversation?
        VikingCoder 6y ago
        Is this statement true? "Holding Bitcoin is literally free." If we can't even start by correcting it, "Holding Bitcoin is inexpensive," then how can we have any kind of technical conversation about it? I think in technical conversations, we should avoid hyperbole, and try to be literal. Call it pedantic if you want to, but I don't know how to build logical arguments out of pleasant sounding falsehoods. It's up to you whom you talk to, people who exaggerate, or people who ask for simple concessions for correctness. And please note, I was responding to the sarcastic, "If only you could store things in multiple locations." If you enjoy talking to people who are sarcastic, that's also your choice.
- kerkeslager 6y ago
  Secure it on a piece of paper in a locked box. Back it up on a second piece of paper in a second locked box, kept in a second location. Put both locked boxes in your will. In response to the tornado link you've been spamming: obviously there are limitations to any security system. None of your proposed security systems particularly secure you against government agents beating you with a rubber hose until you hand over your wallet password, but I think we can agree that a reasonable level of security doesn't have to worry about that or two simultaneous tornadoes at different locations.
  - VikingCoder 6y ago
    How much does it cost you to have a locked box in two secure locations? And I don't need to go to government agents, I'm just talking about simple robbers. Say for instance family members who figure out you have Bitcoin and want to take it from you.
    - kerkeslager 6y ago
      > How much does it cost you to have a locked box in two secure locations? Well, I live in a home, already have the boxes for all my papers (Social Security Card, Passports, Birth Cert, etc.) and I have at least one person I trust who lives in a separate home, so nothing. > And I don't need to go to government agents, I'm just talking about simple robbers. Say for instance family members who figure out you have Bitcoin and want to take it from you. ...which my system protects against just fine.
      - VikingCoder 6y ago
        There is a greater than zero percent chance the person you trust will very you.
        kerkeslager 6y ago
        We've already been over that. There is no security system which exists which has a zero percent chance of failure. It's clear you're more interested in winning an argument here than in discussing real-world security, so I won't be responding further.
Melting_Harps 6y ago
> Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting. On-chain? No, that may have been true in the early days (pre 2013?) but a tx fee has to be included unless you want your money held in the mempool. You may get lucky if it has high days destroyed, but that's not really a risk you want to take unless you care about the funds and want to eventually have to resort to a CPFP tx. I did a 18 satoshi/byte tx and it took a few hours to confirm, which for my purposes was entirely fine as it was a low sum. But as we get more people onboard On-chain should only really be used for important, secure, and therefore commanding a higher fee, transactions than would/could be done as a LN tx. And actually LN has everything to do with how bitcoin is transported, note the lower-case here, LN makes it instant and near no cost tx fees. Holding, as you said, can be done for free. Many old schoolers never really opted for hardware wallets, as the paper-wallet method can be just as secure, despite it requiring far more planning and contingencies. I liked Yanis when he was lambasting the Merkle/Rumpy governed EU and telling them they'd prefer to default and exit the EU and take Cyprus and the PIIGS with them. However, ever since the party he helped create (Syriza) failed to do anything different in Greece than the Trokia before it I completely tuned out to him and his tired rhetoric has lost any of its appeal. And he is right, Bitcoin is completely agnostic to Political Ideology or its proposed factions, in fact I'd say if you understand what it really is: that is entirely the point! I'm not going to read his article, but if that is his only contention, then he is right. Socialists need not apply, and if the Petro is any indication of what happens when Socialists create their own cryptocurrency (only to see it fail, in value or utility and then have to accept Bitcoin anyway for their services) it doesn't really matter, and proves the above.
- kerkeslager 6y ago
  > > Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting. > On-chain? Nope. > I'm not going to read his article Which makes you willfully unqualified to hold an opinion on his article.
  - Melting_Harps 6y ago
    > Which makes you willfully unqualified to hold an opinion on his article. That may be, but I bet I have better understanding of what his character is better than you as I was in Europe in that time helping understand what was occurring with the Euro crises, and if that is his premise for why Bitcoin shouldn't be used by Socialists, he is right and should stop exploring it as an avenue. I'll just point at Maduro's failed plan to show why it doesn't matter anyway. > > Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting. > On-chain? > Nope. I'll indulge you, go on explain...

Lightning has nothing to do with holding and transporting Bitcoin. Holding Bitcoin is literally free. Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

VikingCoder 6y ago

> Holding Bitcoin is literally free. Interesting claim. How do you secure it, back it up, and bequeath it to people on your passing? Don't those things cost time and actual money?

kyboren 6y ago
> How do you secure it, back it up, and bequeath it to people on your passing? Keep the private key, mnemonic, seed phrase, etc. only in your brain and perhaps your will, potentially split into pieces that are kept in the physical control of independent trusted entities. > Don't those things cost time and actual money? Time: yes. Actual money: perhaps, but that is not fundamentally required. For example, oral traditions are a time-honored means of transferring information to heirs. Keep in mind we're talking about just 256 bits of information. You can scratch it on a rock and bury it in your back yard if you want.
- VikingCoder 6y ago
  Grant Imahara just died of a brain aneurysm. You can't count on whispering a password on your deathbed. Do you think a carved rock is safe and secure? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Joplin_tornado https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Joplin_tornado
  - shard 6y ago
    Not sure what your reference to the tornado was trying to point out. I could not find any references on the page to the tornado abrading away carved rock.
    - VikingCoder 6y ago
      Doesn't need to abrade a rock, it merely needs to throw it through the air. Any time someone has "backups" that are all on one property, I think of large floods, fires, or tornadoes that can eradicate everything, or displace it all.
      - shard 6y ago
        I suppose if you didn't bury it deep enough in your back yard, the tornado could pick it up and toss it. So then the question is what severity of events do you want to prepare for? Once-in-a-decade events? Once-in-a-century events? Or once-in-a-millenium events?
colecut 6y ago
It is both secure and backed up by writing down your private key somewhere safe. It is passed on by passing on that private key. I don't see how that process could be made to be "less expensive"
- VikingCoder 6y ago
  If you choose to write it down on a sheet of paper, it's not safe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Joplin_tornado https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Joplin_tornado If you choose to write it down electronically, then you have to back up that system, and secure it. Neither of which is free.
  - deadbunny 6y ago
    If only you could store things in multiple locations.
    - VikingCoder 6y ago
      What's the cost of having multiple secure storage locations? Is it greater than zero? Then I win the point.
      - kerkeslager 6y ago
        Well, you don't win the point. But the bigger question is, why would anyone want to talk to someone who just wants to win the conversation?
        VikingCoder 6y ago
        Is this statement true? "Holding Bitcoin is literally free." If we can't even start by correcting it, "Holding Bitcoin is inexpensive," then how can we have any kind of technical conversation about it? I think in technical conversations, we should avoid hyperbole, and try to be literal. Call it pedantic if you want to, but I don't know how to build logical arguments out of pleasant sounding falsehoods. It's up to you whom you talk to, people who exaggerate, or people who ask for simple concessions for correctness. And please note, I was responding to the sarcastic, "If only you could store things in multiple locations." If you enjoy talking to people who are sarcastic, that's also your choice.
kerkeslager 6y ago
Secure it on a piece of paper in a locked box. Back it up on a second piece of paper in a second locked box, kept in a second location. Put both locked boxes in your will. In response to the tornado link you've been spamming: obviously there are limitations to any security system. None of your proposed security systems particularly secure you against government agents beating you with a rubber hose until you hand over your wallet password, but I think we can agree that a reasonable level of security doesn't have to worry about that or two simultaneous tornadoes at different locations.
- VikingCoder 6y ago
  How much does it cost you to have a locked box in two secure locations? And I don't need to go to government agents, I'm just talking about simple robbers. Say for instance family members who figure out you have Bitcoin and want to take it from you.
  - kerkeslager 6y ago
    > How much does it cost you to have a locked box in two secure locations? Well, I live in a home, already have the boxes for all my papers (Social Security Card, Passports, Birth Cert, etc.) and I have at least one person I trust who lives in a separate home, so nothing. > And I don't need to go to government agents, I'm just talking about simple robbers. Say for instance family members who figure out you have Bitcoin and want to take it from you. ...which my system protects against just fine.
    - VikingCoder 6y ago
      There is a greater than zero percent chance the person you trust will very you.
      - kerkeslager 6y ago
        We've already been over that. There is no security system which exists which has a zero percent chance of failure. It's clear you're more interested in winning an argument here than in discussing real-world security, so I won't be responding further.

Melting_Harps 6y ago

> Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting. On-chain? No, that may have been true in the early days (pre 2013?) but a tx fee has to be included unless you want your money held in the mempool. You may get lucky if it has high days destroyed, but that's not really a risk you want to take unless you care about the funds and want to eventually have to resort to a CPFP tx. I did a 18 satoshi/byte tx and it took a few hours to confirm, which for my purposes was entirely fine as it was a low sum. But as we get more people onboard On-chain should only really be used for important, secure, and therefore commanding a higher fee, transactions than would/could be done as a LN tx. And actually LN has everything to do with how bitcoin is transported, note the lower-case here, LN makes it instant and near no cost tx fees. Holding, as you said, can be done for free. Many old schoolers never really opted for hardware wallets, as the paper-wallet method can be just as secure, despite it requiring far more planning and contingencies. I liked Yanis when he was lambasting the Merkle/Rumpy governed EU and telling them they'd prefer to default and exit the EU and take Cyprus and the PIIGS with them. However, ever since the party he helped create (Syriza) failed to do anything different in Greece than the Trokia before it I completely tuned out to him and his tired rhetoric has lost any of its appeal. And he is right, Bitcoin is completely agnostic to Political Ideology or its proposed factions, in fact I'd say if you understand what it really is: that is entirely the point! I'm not going to read his article, but if that is his only contention, then he is right. Socialists need not apply, and if the Petro is any indication of what happens when Socialists create their own cryptocurrency (only to see it fail, in value or utility and then have to accept Bitcoin anyway for their services) it doesn't really matter, and proves the above.

kerkeslager 6y ago
> > Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting. > On-chain? Nope. > I'm not going to read his article Which makes you willfully unqualified to hold an opinion on his article.
- Melting_Harps 6y ago
  > Which makes you willfully unqualified to hold an opinion on his article. That may be, but I bet I have better understanding of what his character is better than you as I was in Europe in that time helping understand what was occurring with the Euro crises, and if that is his premise for why Bitcoin shouldn't be used by Socialists, he is right and should stop exploring it as an avenue. I'll just point at Maduro's failed plan to show why it doesn't matter anyway. > > Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting. > On-chain? > Nope. I'll indulge you, go on explain...