npoc

24 ms·

271.
by npoc 2y ago
If we look simply at network growth in economic terms, Bitcoin is only going to attract larger and larger sums of money. This halving epoch we now have institutional investors (ETFs) and once it has proven itself at that level, the next sta
272.
by npoc 2y ago
back to the start we go :-) Bitcoin transactions are also "irreversible" providing the fee paid is reasonable, but ultimately the clearing time for both networks is down to the likelihood of a 51% attack for which bitcoin is far m
273.
by npoc 2y ago
Because it's not as liquid, it's not as easily verified, the supply doubles every 40 years, it's not as easily protected (compared to multi-sig bitcoin), I can't send it around the world in 10 minutes, and I can't t
274.
by npoc 2y ago
The comments to that article (especially the one from dooglus) make a decent rebuttal to the idea that full nodes are a "terrible idea". If you're convinced a block chain can scale to 50k transactions / sec and also rema
275.
by npoc 2y ago
Yes. It's network effect. Even if all of the miners simultaneously decided to go big block or some other controversial change that most people don't want, the majority of the population's nodes would then not accept the min
276.
by npoc 2y ago
Yes full non-mining nodes. I understand about pruned nodes, but that is a bonus for both networks - it means people can run a node on their mobile phone for example. The nodes have the real power in the network - they're are the people
277.
by npoc 2y ago
The increased block size increases the amount of storage required to run a full node (and also the bandwidth required to sync nodes). Even at just 100 tx/sec, you need 14x the storage of a bitcoin node (so around 10TB vs 700GB for bitc
278.
by npoc 2y ago
It's called the blockchain trilemma. Bitcoin cash pays the price through centralisation. It can still only manage 100 transactions/second so certainly isn't flawless. Far better to make the base layer slow but very robust, an
279.
by npoc 2y ago
Why don't you think it's possible?
280.
by npoc 2y ago
Nah, channel factories solve that problem. https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/67158/what-are-c...
281.
by npoc 2y ago
Yes, to understand bitcoin well enough to confidently ride the volatility at this early stage in its growth, not only does it help to be technically minded, but you also need an understanding of what money really is and how fiat money real
282.
by npoc 2y ago
> Volatility is minimal because the central bank actively tries to minimize it. Bitcoin or gold don't have this stabilizing mechanism, so they will always have worse volatility (assuming a responsible central bank). You've been
283.
by npoc 2y ago
Okay, I'll try. Why is bitcoin going to suck in all the stored value in the world? Because it's better money than fiat (or gold). Why is it better money, well to explain that we need to answer the question, "what is money?&qu
284.
by npoc 2y ago
I just don't have time unfortunately, it's a large subject. But if you're genuinely interested in learning why bitcoin is fundamentally much better money than gold or fiat, or in fact anything else then I highly recommend lis
285.
by npoc 2y ago
Fiat currency is the worst aspect about humans. Money is simply a natural and far more efficient progression from barter and the associated coincidence of wants problem. If you mined bitcoin from the start and then abandoned it, it proves
286.
by npoc 2y ago
You claim that gold has "fundamental value" and imply that bitcoin doesn't. If you don't understand why bitcoin has fundamental value, then I'd bet you don't understand why gold has either. If you understand wh
287.
by npoc 2y ago
You'd be the first person I've come across who understood bitcoin and then un-understood it.
288.
by npoc 2y ago
I'm interested in taking a look at your fees analysis on nostr if you have a link?
289.
by npoc 2y ago
Regardless, take my advice
290.
by npoc 2y ago
Except I have already been in your frame of mind. You have never been in mine.
291.
by npoc 2y ago
I assume you haven't read/seen "The Great Taking"?
292.
by npoc 2y ago
> The network has ongoing costs and only people that spend money contribute to, unless there's a tail emission. In that case, in addition, everyone holding contributes to maintenance of the network to the degree they benefit from it
293.
by npoc 2y ago
Well reality should know that someone can obtain any of your property via drugs and torture. But through multi-sig, time-locked contracts, multiple wallets, bitcoin is more difficult than most.
294.
by npoc 2y ago
Cool. This is what I've been looking for finally - a reasoned debate with someone who understands bitcoin. Okay, so the hard cap. >To start, let's commit blasphemy: the hard cap. It's a bad idea. So is a percentage debasem
295.
by npoc 2y ago
That's an issue with the concept of a "black budget", not the payment mechanism. The government corruption bitcoin stops is really bank corruption, but the central banks (including the fed) work hand in hand with the governme
296.
by npoc 2y ago
As the popularity of bitcoin and it's stored value increases, so will the demand for transactions against its fixed transaction rate, driving up fees. Mining never becomes uneconomic because the difficulty adjustment makes mining easie
297.
by npoc 2y ago
If you don't think bitcoin can even get close to gold, then you really don't understand bitcoin yet. Smashing golds market cap will happen in less than 6 years. And that's just the start.
298.
by npoc 2y ago
You might want to think outside the box a little more. Bitcoin can consume the entire value that's stored in the dollar. Does your model hold if it does 80% of that over the next, say 50 years? The S&P will be priced in bitcoin for
299.
by npoc 2y ago
The masking is obvious though.
300.
by npoc 2y ago
Then you give them the keys to your other wallet that contains enough for plausible deniability.

More ›