4 ms·

I was always dispirited by how conservative in sentiment Bitcoin and most altcoins were. It always felt to me that Bitcoin was mostly redundant to gold, neglect

I was always dispirited by how conservative in sentiment Bitcoin and most altcoins were. It always felt to me that Bitcoin was mostly redundant to gold, neglecting the inherent advantages of ecurrency. Something more ambitious deserves to be implemented. That endorsement aside, the inhibition transaction does disturb me. It would seem to encourage mob-like behavior in the culture of early adopters, as heretics of whatever sort were forcibly ejected from the system. I don't trust the dynamics of groups enough to think this will be a good form of self government.

olalonde 13y ago
> I was always dispirited by how conservative in sentiment Bitcoin and most altcoins were. It always felt to me that Bitcoin was mostly redundant to gold, neglecting the inherent advantages of ecurrency. Something more ambitious deserves to be implemented. There is a good reason Bitcoin is conservative: it has to be, by design. It's also what makes it attractive. Also, you are completely wrong if you think that lack of ambition is the reason we don't have a cryptocurrency that doesn't neglect "the inherent advantages of ecurrency" by now. Lots of smart people, including esteemed computer scientists, have been thinking really hard about the subject for years and I find your comment a bit insulting towards them (I'll pass it off as ignorance on your part). I too really hope we can eventually come up with a better cryptocurrency but please don't assume people are not trying.
yale 13y ago
Inhibition is a two-sided transaction, requiring the consent of both sides.
djestrada 13y ago
In the transactions I describe, inhibition is a two-sided transaction, meaning it requires approval from both parties. Presumably parties won't enter into such transactions without good reason for consent.
- mst 13y ago
  Given the number of people confused by it, I think perhaps it needs a different name ... my mind is blank when I attempt to come up with a better one, though.

olalonde 13y ago

> I was always dispirited by how conservative in sentiment Bitcoin and most altcoins were. It always felt to me that Bitcoin was mostly redundant to gold, neglecting the inherent advantages of ecurrency. Something more ambitious deserves to be implemented. There is a good reason Bitcoin is conservative: it has to be, by design. It's also what makes it attractive. Also, you are completely wrong if you think that lack of ambition is the reason we don't have a cryptocurrency that doesn't neglect "the inherent advantages of ecurrency" by now. Lots of smart people, including esteemed computer scientists, have been thinking really hard about the subject for years and I find your comment a bit insulting towards them (I'll pass it off as ignorance on your part). I too really hope we can eventually come up with a better cryptocurrency but please don't assume people are not trying.

yale 13y ago

Inhibition is a two-sided transaction, requiring the consent of both sides.

djestrada 13y ago

In the transactions I describe, inhibition is a two-sided transaction, meaning it requires approval from both parties. Presumably parties won't enter into such transactions without good reason for consent.

mst 13y ago
Given the number of people confused by it, I think perhaps it needs a different name ... my mind is blank when I attempt to come up with a better one, though.