[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance


View post   

File: 1.44 MB, 1281x721, 0A713E37-A38D-42E5-80B5-0A7D22575AC1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12255030 No.12255030 [Reply] [Original]

>> No.12255053
File: 39 KB, 256x256, image.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12255053

DEROGOLD IS THE REAL DERO

>> No.12255060

>>12255030

>> No.12255063

>>12255030
maybe, i mean it has a possible application in retail.

>> No.12255079

>>12255030
It's a good name, I don't know what it does. What does it do? Tell me like you'd tell a child and I'll tell you if it will work.

>> No.12255167

>>12255079
It enables small to medium sized btc transactions in seconds at a cost of fractions of a cent, with the possibility of completing large transactions as the technology developes.

>> No.12255243

>>12255167
more like it's for instantaneous one click micro payments like donations and shopping. it's not good for anything else really. and this was what btc sucked at badly so far.

>> No.12255260

>>12255167
That literally already existed years before the blocks became full. It doesn't enable anything.

>> No.12255268

18 months and it will be ready

>> No.12255275

>>12255167
>>12255243
Got it. Sounds like a good idea, but something that should have been there all along. This will not bring the normies back into crypto.

>> No.12255299

>>12255167
>pay to use
>24/7 online otherwise forget it

It will never work.

>> No.12255301
File: 143 KB, 1043x740, 1545934067580.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12255301

>>12255030
It's only 1 years old. Still looks promising as a way to scale Bitcoin. This and Roostock/Smart Bitcoin will scale Bitcoin past anyone's expectations.

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/smart-bitcoin/

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/future-bitcoin-what-lightning-could-look/

>> No.12255336

>>12255260
>>12255299
Sorry retards this is a Vishnu-free zone.
>>12255275
>This will not bring the normies back
Normies only care about the price going up. If you want normies back go out and buy several million $ of crypto

>> No.12255354

>>12255275
>but something that should have been there all along
lol wtf are you smoking second and third layer solutions are built on top of an existing and functioning first layer. btw for btc the third layer is the legal layer where hubs can settle in the future freeing ln from the constraints of supply and simplify the topology and routing off chain. altho i can see now that it's possible to handle debt/futures with smart contracts and automated script which would be ideal.

>> No.12255372

>>12255299
>24/7 online otherwise forget it
what are you smoking?

>> No.12255386

>>12255372

The node has to be online for users to transact

>> No.12255402
File: 66 KB, 630x630, 1545551930405.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12255402

>>12255386
You mean the channel. The node doesn't have to be on, though this brings in the risk of losing your funds. Anyone can run a node and start a channel, hell I even have one running right now.

>> No.12255432

https://mobile.twitter.com/abrkn/status/1078193601190989829

Major hub owner closes his node as It's not worth the effort

>> No.12255444

>>12255079

The Lightning Network is a collection of two-person shared wallets called "Payment Channels"; the wallets requires two signatures to sign a payment; the wallet contains a balance based on who contributed funds to it.

The LN software then lets the two people share a wallet agree on who owns what balance in the wallet, and update it by passing a signed transaction that can empty the "payment channel" to the other persons wallet for the balance amount. These signed transactions have a time-out to prevent them lasting forever; they can be submitted to the Bitcoin settlement layer to "close" or empty part of the "payment channel".

The LN works on a large scale, because when there's enough of "payment channels" people can agree to route payments from one another, to pay anyone on the network. The LN ultimate goal is to have everyone's income and expenditures being routed as LN payments; this will re-balance all the active "payment channels" so that new ones never need to be created, or closed.

>> No.12255483

>>12255386
nope if you receive and want to make sure you get payed you should be online at settlement.
that's all, for 99% of the users they can be offline aside from setting up the channel.

>> No.12255496

>>12255432
>I would run an LN hub if the return was better than lending and arbitrage funds (10-20%/year)
>(10-20%/year)
This guy wants a guaranteed 20% a year.
He is a delusional fucking retard.

>> No.12255502
File: 92 KB, 1052x837, unfixable.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12255502

>>12255030

>> No.12255587

>>12255502
brave and poopilled

>> No.12255640
File: 154 KB, 1014x434, Screenshot_20181227-195254_Firefox.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12255640

It just werks

>>12255432
This was one guy who had something like 90% of all funds on the LN shortly after it got released on mainnet. Old news. The network has grown tenfold since then.

>> No.12255686

instant transactions existed already, it's called 0-conf. but corr disanled it because they are fucking pajeet-tier shitty codets. BSV is going to enable it, and put an end to bcore. fucking core cucks.

>> No.12255723

>>12255686
no 0-conf is not accepted it's not that it's not possible or it doesn't work it's just unreasonably unsafe for the seller.

if you allow 0-conf people are gonna get scammed or at least fucked over a lot.

>> No.12255776

>>12255030
Look up Actinium (ACM), a currency with an active lightning network and privacy through tor browser. Transactions are so fast, this shit will moon hard once LN becomes more widely adopted.

>> No.12255791

>>12255723
allow is not a good word really if you accept 0-conf payments for goods and services you gonna get fucked.

>> No.12256027

>>12255030
I think so. It's what will bring the normies to crypto for real this time. I mean, they will use it in their daily lives.
No they won't set up their own nodes, they'll go through thirdparty companies who will do that for them. I know this sounds scary, because the whole point of bitcoin is to create a completely decentralized system (as in every node is connected to every other node), but it really isn't as bad as it sounds.

Normies are not intelligent people. They're not going to take the time to set up a lightning wallet or bitcoin wallet. They don't care about decentralization. They want things to just work.

So if lightning is even more difficult to use than a bitcoin wallet, is it a failure?

No, because its intended to be used by centralized services and tech savy users, not normies. Normies will just have to use centralized lightning service, just as how they currently use centralized bitcoin services.
These centralized services will manage transactions for the normies using lightning.

Wait isn't that just a bank. Isn't that bad?

Not if the new "banks" (centralized services) are using the lightning network. These centralized services will be regulated by the lightning network. The lightning network will be regulated by the bitcoin protocol.

Lightning mimics the current banking-system's structural layout (which allows it to scale to billions of transactions), without the possibility of usury to occur. You still cannot issue credit on lightning. Since it is physically impossible for bitcoin to scale to the entire planet (even with a terabyte blocksize), it only makes sense to build layers on top of it that may be more centralized, but offer different advantages (like reduced fee sizes).

Lightning is more centralized, but it is more scalable. It still utalizes the security of the main bitcoin blockchain, without its problems.

It will create a usury-free banking-system 2.0, that will bring normies to the space without them even realizing it.

>> No.12256098

>>12256027
>It will create a usury-free banking-system 2.0
1 that's just a retarded notion for several reasons.
2 ln has transaction fees and the channels setup and settle will have onchain transaction fees so this system does take it's cut in contrast to credit cards with cash returns.

conclusion no normie is gonna use btc for a very very long time.

>> No.12256156

>>12255030
Look at LTC progress.. its bitcoins test net. Whatever works there moves to bitcoin

Id say about 8 months

>> No.12256157

>>12256098
look up channel factories in LN

also normies will use BTC when starbucks or fortnite starts using BTC with LN from their collaboration with bakkt

>> No.12256198

>>12256157
no they will use btc when it's faster cheaper easier and more secure than cash.

and when btc will also be a better store of value that's when crypto will explode.

>> No.12256221
File: 13 KB, 903x346, lightning.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12256221

>>12256098
No normie will ever use bitcoin directly.
They will use layers built on-top of it.

Everything in life is hierarchical, it only makes sense that bitcoin will become one too.
Hopefully we it will be a fair hierarchy.

>> No.12256225

>>12255030
Who cares if this shit will work or not. We have NANO, what else do you need?

>> No.12256238
File: 229 KB, 1280x1074, 1544560693984.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12256238

>>12256198
when the fiat currencies start collapsing, bitcoin will be the store of value causing the price to skyrocket, since it is limited in amount, contrary to their hyper inflating fiat currencies.

>>12256221
this

>> No.12256303

>>12256238
>when the fiat currencies start collapsing
that won't happen at the same time or won't happen at all. keep on waiting tho. in the foreseeable future fiat is going nowhere.

>>12256221
if you go by that pyramid the one that pays the most is on the top as every layer exacts a price. it's bullshit.

>> No.12256357

>>12255030
>will this work or not
It will be able to transfer bitcoins from point A to point B, so corecucks will claim this as a success.
But it won't be censorship resistant, KYC requirements are a very likely outcome, everyone will either have to settle for a 3% chance their transaction will succeed, or just connect to the biggest hub on the network, so decentralization will become a meme.
It will be less reliable and efficient than using an optimized blockchain. Also less user friendly. And just like today, no-one would use it unironically

>> No.12256369

>>12256303
No the pyramid is based on control of the currency. Obviously the bitcoin protocol is what defines the unit of account we know as bitcoin.

No not necessarily. The layers will compress many transactions into a single one on chain. You could make 1000s of transactions between centralized services or with lightning channels, and it could still be many times cheaper than making a single transaction onchain.

On chain transactions require more resources so they are more expensive, but of course are more secure.

>> No.12256402

>>12256238
when the fiat currencies start collapsing, GOLD will be the store of value, not your internet fiat crap, causing the price to skyrocket, since it is limited in amount, contrary to their hyper inflating fiat currencies.

>> No.12256441
File: 283 KB, 1500x850, gold.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12256441

>>12256402
When the 2020 halving occurs, Bitcoin will have a lower inflation rate than gold. Gold is gonna do great, don't get me wrong, but good luck trying to leave your country with 50 oz of gold on you. They will confiscate it since it's physical. With crypto, you can leave the country with only clothes on you, and still have your wealth wherever you go.

>> No.12256490

>>12256369
all i'm saying is if the use of bitcoin will be just as expensive and cumbersome as banks it will not catch on. the finer points like you retain control over your funds will not matter until it's financially worth it to use the system to most. and also if you put centralized services on top of it that arguably makes the entire point moot. like you just made a bitcoin paypal...what's the fucking point of crypto then? at the very least you have to be able to hold the secrets that allow for spending your coins. i mean sure you don't have to directly connect to the network you can use spv wallets. but online wallets are not an option if it goes that way it's fucked.

also more and more innovation in the crypto sphere shows we can do a lot of shit automated in a publicly auditable way. but there are always risks. and the more complex these systems get the more complex the risks get. part of btcs success stems from the easy enough understanding of the risks involved for the average user (with some basic mathematical knowledge and understanding of magnitudes).

>> No.12256492
File: 25 KB, 903x690, lightning.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12256492

>>12256369
The more you go up, the pyramid the cheaper your transactions become at the expense of your security.

>> No.12256537

>>12256492
yeah i'm gonna make a 1000 transactions sure... no, i'm gonna make like 20 a month tops.

>> No.12256584

>>12256537
Who's saying that would be one person? A company like Starbucks could open one and people just come in and out as a channel factory.

The Channel Factories can act sort of like “sub-channels” for the Lightning Network. Participants within a Channel Factory can open and close a virtually unlimited number of Lightning channels with each other, without requiring any additional on-chain transactions. By doing so, they could, in theory, bring the number of required on-chain transactions for the Lightning Network down by a magnitude. But channel factories haven't been implemented yet, as this protocol is still in beta and came on mainnet only one year ago. Eventually it will be able to do a lot more than we thought.

>> No.12256613

>>12256490
They don't call them revolutions for nothing. It's circular. Eventually bitcoin will become the banking system we have today, and will be overthrown by a better one. Just like how the current banking system will be overthrown by a better system, bitcoin.

Even if bitcoin had theses to-be-created centralized layers I'm talking about, it would still be better than the current banking system because it would not be heavily influenced by usury. It will be scarce, sound money, not issued by a central bank, but by a decentralized network. The centralized layers obviously wont be decentralized, but they will be linked to the decentralized one, offering some sort of checks and balances.

Decentralization is an idea. I good idea. But Utopian. To suggest that hierarchies won't form is naive. The idea is to create these hierarchies in a way that prevents the centralized systems from plundering the normies, like how it is today with the current banking system.

Think about the current banking system.
>Deposit money
>90% loaned out without your knowledge
>money loses value because of the fed's inflation
>working class loses purchasing power, banker class gains purchasing power (not producing anything for the economy).

A good way to fix the current banking system
>Banks cannot loan out customer money
>Inflation does not exist
>The fed is controlled by the people

A bitcoin system would have those features.

>> No.12256640

>>12256584
>A company like Starbucks could open one and people just come in and out as a channel factory.
i know that, but there this issue of locking funds into it it's almost like prepaying tabs everywhere you go. mighty inconvenient.

i'm much more in favor of only opening a tab when you enter shopping to says a walmart or tesco. then as you shop your channel confirms and as you pay (instantly no confirmation) can request the release of your funds. however this means for a single purchase you need 3 onchain transactions at least maybe more. if your purchase was not a great amount that will cost you a lot. say you bought shit for $100 and it cost you like $1. as opposed to a $2% cashback on your cc which is touch and go.

>> No.12256652

>>12256613
>Eventually bitcoin will become the banking system we have today, and will be overthrown by a better one. Just like how the current banking system will be overthrown by a better system, bitcoin.
the banking system and bitcoin has almost nothing in common. it's like comparing dolphins to beavers.

>> No.12256678

>>12256640
>i know that, but there this issue of locking funds into it it's almost like prepaying tabs everywhere you go. mighty inconvenient.

But that's the thing it's a network. You can use your Walmart tab to pay for something in target if Walmart is connected to target. You don't need to open a tab with every node you want to do business with.

>> No.12256716

>>12256613
>Banks cannot loan out customer money
>Inflation does not exist
it's fucking hilarious some people think having money sit around and do nothing is an improvement of the system. the economy would grind to a screeching halt.

>The fed is controlled by the people
if banks can't loan out money there is no reason the fed exist at all.

>A bitcoin system would have those features.
nah, bitcoin is a hedge against the government turning on it's own people, kinda like gold only better in almost every way but most importantly it's unconfiscateable.

which will make bitcoin sort of a check against the power of the state and bankers. like a loaded gun held to their head that says "go on defect if you want to, try to fuck us over and we are out!" so they have to make the banking system more liveable cheaper and more convenient than crypto. and i love that.

but these dreams about bitcoin replacing fiat are retarded. it won't happen.

>> No.12256722

>>12256678
that's when expenses pile up with routing and hub monopoly can be abused. exactly.

>> No.12256725

>>12256652
They have a lot in common. Especially as bitcoin continues to build more layers on top of it.

The banking system, like bitcoin, is not a single layer. There are central banks, investment banks, commercial banks, insurance agencies, and governments. These can all be viewed as separate "layers" to the whole system.

Bitcoin is going to grow in a similar way, but hopefully a more technologically oriented way.

>> No.12256822

>>12256716
>it's fucking hilarious some people think having money sit around and do nothing is an improvement of the system. the economy would grind to a screeching halt.
Money is a measurement of wealth. Manipulating the value/definition of money to "stimulate" growth really just exchanges wealth from one class of people to another.
I'm sorry but banks do not produce any real world goods for the economy, yet they make up 40% of the USA's GDP. That is just them stealing from people who are actually producing things, by manipulating numbers.
>if banks can't loan out money there is no reason the fed exist at all.
I don't mind if banks loan money, if its money the get through user fees. Not from user funds. Either way the market should determine interest rates, not the fed.
>but these dreams about bitcoin replacing fiat are retarded. it won't happen.
I disagree.A new banking system will be created with bitcoin at the center. It will have lots of layers though, like the current system.

>> No.12256826

>>12256725
>They have a lot in common.
no they almost have none, the payments are not done by the banking system they are done by card companies. the loaning and investing is what is done by banks it's about 90% or their thing. btc nope it's all about transactions.

>> No.12256840

Gonna laugh when bitcoin ends up being no different than modern banking by the time they figure this shit out

>> No.12256867

What the fuck is wrong with you people? Just use nano lmao

>> No.12256875

>>12256822
no you don't understand, banks make it possible that money doesn't sit around idly but participates in the economy productively. that's what they do. despite all the memeing and shit. inflation is the natural incentive for thy system.

it's not manipulation it is the intended use.

>I don't mind if banks loan money, if its money the get through user fees. Not from user funds.
again a misunderstanding of the modern monetary system.

>I disagree.A new banking system will be created with bitcoin at the center.
let's just take step by step first we reach golds market cap and make bitcoin a proper hedge and escape vehicle. then maybe we can start thinking about shit like futures (smart) contracts making decentralized lending possible.

until that banks will stay where they are only they will be operating with less staff and offices and more online.

>> No.12256878

>>12256716
>hedge against government and standard banks
>they have to make the banking system more liveable cheaper and more convenient than crypto
This is the actual crypto blackpill.

>> No.12256881
File: 213 KB, 822x1071, 1545697681273.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12256881

>>12256716
this fucking guy

>> No.12256885

It already works you literal fucking mongoloids

>> No.12256898

>>12256826
I was more focused on how both systems have multiple layers, some more centralized than others. In theory government is the decentralized layer that is supposed to regulate the rules of how the centralized layers operate (decentralized as in controlled by the people through voting).
Just how bitcoin is the decentralized layer that regulates the rules of the centralized layers (like the lightning network, and the exchanges), and is controlled by the people through the running of full nodes.
Yes they are very different systems, but they are both hierarchical.

>> No.12256902
File: 280 KB, 1200x900, 1543262031771.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12256902

>>12256875

>> No.12256915

>>12256027
this whole post makes no fucking sense whatsoever

>> No.12256916

>>12256881
i'm just a realist sorry. bankers will not roll over for your meme internet money. i'm 100% a btc fan, and i do appreciate it and personally don't like this fuckery that's going on with fiat the bailouts qes and debt bubble. but i also see this system works and can work indefinitely.

>> No.12256936
File: 477 KB, 1138x598, a5f449be78ee9d00dad1b87540017ec5.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12256936

>>12256916
>but i also see this system works and can work indefinitely.
That's where you're wrong. This system is on the verge of collapse.

>> No.12256944

>>12256822
>I'm sorry but banks do not produce any real world goods for the economy, yet they make up 40% of the USA's GDP. That is just them stealing from people who are actually producing things, by manipulating numbers.
Newsflash, most people don't produce anything, they just deliver services using products that already exist. Banks are no different.
>I don't mind if banks loan money, if its money the get through user fees. Not from user funds. Either way the market should determine interest rates, not the fed.
The market does determine interest rates. However the fed can also keep interest rates low to encourage borrowing and stimulate growth.
>I disagree.A new banking system will be created with bitcoin at the center. It will have lots of layers though, like the current system.
The whole point of bitcoin is to not have those systems, that's why it uses a block chain. Once you create a banking system around it, you lose all the benefits of crypto and are left with a currency more limited than fiat.

>> No.12256946

>>12256902
modern economy in a nutshell yeah
that is why we need contractions not just expansions to get rid of literal bullshit eating businesses. because they don't survive deflations. but with que and the new line of keynsian full retard economics we just keep rolling the shit forward.

>> No.12256975

>>12256936
>This system is on the verge of collapse.
see i disagree, there is nothing in this system that spells failure. it can and will go on indefinitely. only thing that can end it is the end of consumerism a crisis so severe that the most basic things like food and water and stuff will actually be scarce and only real tangible things will be valued. it takes a war or worse for it to collapse.

>> No.12256977
File: 56 KB, 746x541, 1DBDC842-99F0-4424-AD98-DB167DEAFA33.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12256977

>>12255030
No

>> No.12256997

>>12256936
The debt is a political problem, not a monetary one. Even if the fed could not print money, nothing would stop it from borrowing money in other currencies to pay for goods and services. You would need to ban borrowing altogether.

>> No.12257016

>>12256997
by it, I mean't the US government, not the fed

>> No.12257024
File: 1009 KB, 1200x1394, Ben Bernanke.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257024

>>12256975
If this system of fiat currency is so secure, why do all central banks keep most of their reserves in gold? Why not just sell it all and keep it in fiat if they are so confident in the system? Do you not understand that the prices are raising constantly due to the expansion of the monetary supply and that our currencies are literally backed by debt. Every generation, or 35 years, the purchasing power of their currency is halved.

>> No.12257063

>>12255030
It's a scam like Bitcoin itself.

>> No.12257066

>>12257024
>Every generation, or 35 years, the purchasing power of their currency is halved.
Because encouraging people to sit on their money is dangerous for the economy. A consistent depreciation encourages investment and spending, which prevents deflation.

>> No.12257077

>>12256944
>Once you create a banking system around it, you lose all the benefits of crypto and are left with a currency more limited than fiat.
well yes and no we will probably try everything just lie there are a thousand shitcoins there will be hundreds of layers competing with each other some will be trustful centralized permissioned, some will try to keep true to crypto long term but they will have a hard time to catch on. but most importantly... there is no way to interact between the traditional fiat systems and a crypto in a decentralized way. defection pays too well for the first to defect the first one that separates the asset from the token and sells both will drag the system down but also get paid handsomely.

this is why maker and dai is so interesting to me. it just shows you that some things are possible that a few years ago we thought can only exist in a centralized way. scaling however is an eternal issue.

>> No.12257087

>>12256875
>no you don't understand, banks make it possible that money doesn't sit around idly but participates in the economy productively. that's what they do. despite all the memeing and shit. inflation is the natural incentive for thy system. it's not manipulation it is the intended use
That's the propaganda they spew in order to justify their thievery. In reality a small banker elite class of less than 1% of the population owns most of the assets on the planet. These assets allow them to escape theft by inflation, while the working class who hold most of their wealth in cash have their purchasing power stolen from them. Naturally, the assets the 1% own will appreciate equal to inflation, while the poor will be robbed. That's why there's an ever growing wealth gap between the middle class and the elite. The wealth gap correlates with us leaving the gold standard in 1970.
>again a misunderstanding of the modern monetary system.
no I understand the deception of the modern banking system. It allows for millions of people to be stolen from without even noticing. I would much rather pay a fee for the security and convenience of the bank, if the bank actually was focused on continence and security. Instead, they loan out and gamble my hard earned money without my knowledge.
>let's just take step by step first we reach golds market cap and make bitcoin a proper hedge and escape vehicle
agreed. But once it is, a new banking system with multiple layers will be formed on top of it. Hopefully it will be the gold standard for the modern era.

>> No.12257097
File: 51 KB, 600x335, FUCK FED.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257097

>>12257066
Exactly, but under a sound monetary system, people can save their money and invest in large scales of work such as art, like in the Renaissance, or in innovations. All of the innovations we use today were invented during the gold standard of the 1800s. How many innovations have been created in the 20th century? Remember, innovation as in nothing to a telephone, not from a telephone to a cellphone. The only way we can progress is to get off of unsound money.

>> No.12257099

>>12257024
>why do all central banks keep most of their reserves in gold
that's not a thing where did you get this bullshit? the modern monetary system doesn't need gold. some banks hold some gold as par of their forex reserve when it makes no sense to hold any other currency, like the usd is basically a reserve currency so...

>> No.12257118
File: 21 KB, 600x339, central-bank-gold-reserves-chart-tonnes.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257118

>>12257099

>> No.12257144

>>12257087
>That's the propaganda they spew in order to justify their thievery.
no that's how it works really.
>In reality a small banker elite class of less than 1% of the population owns most of the assets on the planet.
1% of the population is much larger than the entire banker clans altogether. it's also a very different issue unrelated to the monetary system. i would argue under any other system the same thing would eventually happen.
>no I understand the deception of the modern banking system
you apparently don't sorry

>> No.12257166

>>12257118
yeah the forex reserves are a tiny portion of all reserves. 70% of 2% kinda like that. and again what the fuck would the us hold as forex reserve? everything is backed by dollars pretty much.

>> No.12257179

>>12257097
>All of the innovations we use today were invented during the gold standard of the 1800s.
You couldn't even troll on biz with 1800s technology brah. Let alone computers, air planes, satellites, wireless communication, nuclear fission, innumerable advances in medicine, materials, food, and automation. It's hard to find things that haven't changed in the last 100 years.

>> No.12257181
File: 19 KB, 225x224, moneybags.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257181

>>12257166
Good luck when fiat crashes

>> No.12257186

>>12257066
I am so sick of reading this nonsense spouted everywhere. We have thousands of years of evidence where economies grew using a stable, non-inflationary currency. Yet here you are, equating all growth with fractional reserve banking and inflationary currency like a good little peasant.

>> No.12257199

>>12257179
>omputers, air planes, satellites, wireless communication, nuclear fission, innumerable advances in medicine, materials, food, and automation
All of those things you listed were invented in the 1800s. The technologies were than expanded from those inventions in the 20th century, that doesn't mean they were created from thin air.

I'll repeat it again: going from NOTHING to a telephone is a lot HARDER than going from a telephone to a cellphone.

>> No.12257214

>>12257181
i'm just saying don't misread statistics. banks don't actually hold significant gold reserves compared to the money supply any more. that era is gone.

>> No.12257230
File: 18 KB, 427x427, WGC-gold-sq.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257230

>>12257214
>banks don't actually hold significant gold reserves compared to the money supply any more. that era is gone.

>> No.12257263

>>12257066
I produce something for the economy and I get paid 10 dollars.
Oh shit it's the next day and my 10 dollars is now worth 1 dollar.
Guess I have to keep working until I die.

If you think that is a good system, then you have a slave mentality. If you produce something, you should be able to exchange the value given to you to whoever you want WHENEVER you want.

Saving is good.

>> No.12257274

>>12257230
8000 tons of gold is only like $300 billion. A fraction of US military spending.

>> No.12257278

>>12257097
>Exactly, but under a sound monetary system, people can save their money and invest in large scales
see you just don't get it. saving removes the money from circulation it decreases the velocity of money it divides gdp restraints growth and investments and progress.

there is two kinds of loans and they work very differently. 1 loan to increase productivity. it's part of an investment strategy you want the productivity increase now instead of 5 years in the future because you can pay for it in a year and got 4 years of increased productivity.

consumer loans are a shit thing but completely opt-in nobody is forcing you to spend money you don't have that won't even increase your productivity. like buying a car on a loan to be able to get a much better paying job in the next town can be a good sound investment. while getting a loan out to replace your old car because you like shiny new things is the worst.

it's not the banks job to make you take good loans ad good decisions. they only care about risks and returns. as they should.

>> No.12257280
File: 589 KB, 620x708, 1514685567912.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257280

>>12257263
This. If you don't understand this, then you are just a debt slave serving your (((masters)))

>> No.12257297
File: 630 KB, 1392x1063, 1545683867911.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257297

>>12257274
You're talking about national spending. The federal reserve is a private entity despite its misleading name.

>>12257278
t. Keynesian

>> No.12257298

>>12257186
Thousands of years of kings debasing their coins, or it being melted down for its raw materials after its issuer was ousted.

>> No.12257316

>>12257298
you added nothing of value to this conversation

>> No.12257342

>>12257186
>We have thousands of years of evidence where economies grew using a stable, non-inflationary currency
actually they were inflationary currencies there was always more mined and minted.

>> No.12257384

>>12257199
They literally weren't though? This isn't even up for debate.
As an electrical engineer, I can tell you that the technology involved in Bell's telephone is nothing compared to what is necessary for cellphone communication. The difference is that far more people have worked on the latter than the former, which has allowed rapid advances in technology.

>> No.12257387
File: 174 KB, 1886x1238, 1545319152401.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257387

>>12257342
>there was always more mined and minted
because more gold was mined, but it was kept at a certain rate since it's very difficult to mine gold. On the other hand, printing money backed by nothing is extremely easy and so there is nothing to keep it at a certain rate. So of course even things like Bitcoin and gold have an inflation rate, but it's nothing compared to something like fiat currency which can be produced at a whim.

>> No.12257399

>>12257384
Of course, but without that first telephone, where would modern telecommunications be?

zero to one > one to many

>> No.12257403

>>12257263
>Saving is good.
no it's retarded and hurts the economy and our way of life.
the only acceptable form of savings is the one that has risk and thus have interest. it's called investment.

>> No.12257407

>>12255030

Yes.

>> No.12257417

>>12257144
No. That's how they say it works. In reality it has the opposite effect.
Oh sHit We DoN't WaNt tHeSe rIcH pEoPle sAvInG mOnEy, tHat's WhY wE'Re GoInG tO sTeAl 2% oF yOuR wEaLtH eVeRy YeAr.

>> No.12257420

>>12257387
>but it's nothing compared to something like fiat currency which can be produced at a whim
oh boy you still don't get what money is... that's your problem.

>> No.12257428

>>12257403
The only way to invest in something is to save. If you're constantly spending money how can you possibly have enough capital to invest in something?

>> No.12257443
File: 80 KB, 645x729, 1545436463973.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257443

>>12257420
No I don't think you do. Do you not realize that money nowadays can be printed out of thin air backed by absolutely nothing? This is the way the world has worked since 1971, so maybe you should read some books about monetary history and freshen up your memory. Got some cobwebs up there.

>> No.12257446

>>12257387
>because more gold was mined, but it was kept at a certain rate since it's very difficult to mine gold.
What about the Spanish? The huge influx of gold and silver from the new world caused huge problems for Spain because it became cheaper to just buy everything from elsewhere than manufacture it domestically. Which hampered Spain in the long term.
And is it really better to leave your monetary system up to the whim of miners and mineral hoarders? Its actually worse than basing your economy on bitcoin.

>> No.12257449

>>12257403
Savings is bad in a Keynesian economics system because a Keynesian economic system is a ponzi scheme and requires constant spending.

In an Austrian system, if someone saves their hard earned money, the system doesn't collapse because the system is not a ponzi scheme.

>> No.12257463

>>12257230
not % of reserves nigga % of forex reserves
look up the difference!

>> No.12257470

>>12257399
By that logic, the first cave man who figured 1+1 = 2 contributed more to technology than everything after him.

>> No.12257477

>>12257449
wait you think austria has a different monetary system than the rest of the world? hehehehe

>if someone saves their hard earned money, the system doesn't collapse because the system is not a ponzi scheme
the system does not collapse either way but it will perform significantly worse and carry more risks.

>> No.12257482

>>12256027

Cope: the post

>> No.12257490
File: 70 KB, 1170x742, 1545861008836.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257490

>>12257446
When did this happen? In the 16th century? Look how far we've come since then. Gold is bound by our current technology of mining it, meaning it is difficult. But in the distant future we will mine it on asteroids or something, and that will make the supply much greater, making the price go down. Bitcoin's supply on the other hand is MATHEMATICALLY set, which means there is nothing that could possibly change it.

>>12257470
Without that first man, none of our technology would be here.

>>12257477
>he doesn't know about Austrian economics
no wonder. go read up on it before you pollute this thread more

>> No.12257520

>>12257420
money is the measurement of wealth.
just how meters measure distance, and grams measure weight.

Imagine if you had to build a house, and your schematic is from 2010, using a Keynesian measurement system. You would have to convert 2010 meters to 2018 meters to make sure you adjusted for meter inflation. Idk about you, but that sounds pretty retarded.

>> No.12257555

>>12257520
Even if your money held the same value, the cost of the materials probably wouldn't, so you would need to make that conversion anyway.

>> No.12257590

>>12257555
The cost of everything would relatively be the same (except for minor market fluctuations), unless certain materials became more or less scarce. Then there would be a difference due to the difference in scarcity, not due to inflation.

>> No.12257609

>>12257520
>money is the measurement of wealth
yes it's a unit of account first and foremost but it's also a universal fungible form of debt. nobody would accept money for goods and services unless they knew with enough certainty they will be able to get goods and services in return. money is like a fungible generalized iou.

and behind this iou the backing in the end is the future performance. thus when banks make number appear on your account in return of the promise of future performance they are basically accepting one non fungible non generalized iou with interest to a generalized iou with no interest and almost no risk. they are swapping debt. they don't make this shit out off nothing, money always was debt.

that's what i meant you don't know that money is. money today is no fundamentally different than as it was always we got rid a lot of unnecessary baggage made it more simple and useful. it's evolution fiat money is a natural step in financial evolution. it was a vast improvement in many ways.

you do realize that the only real difference between austrians and keynesian is the tinkering from the top right? austrians (like myself) believe in the self adjusting ability of the market.

>> No.12257619

>>12257555
no one is trying to say that the prices of goods and services need to be frozen, just that money saved should not be invisibly taxed through debasement of currency. All the "wealth" created through debasement goes straight to the elites anyway because they own most of the elastic goods and services. the little consumer peasants and their inelastic goods/services don't change very much.

>> No.12257633

>>12257609
>you do realize that the only real difference between austrians and keynesian is the tinkering from the top right? austrians (like myself) believe in the self adjusting ability of the market.
sorry that was meant for >>12257490
also austria is not run buy austrian school also they can't even enact monetary policy because they are part of the eu and use euros.

>> No.12257657

>>12257316
I'm just saying that stable currencies are largely a myth. When a kingdom ran out of funds, it would start diluting the content of its coins. This happened like clockwork for hundreds of years.

>> No.12257686

>>12257619
This is preferable to a system where deflation is a constant risk. No better way to tank an economy than to have money appreciate in value by sitting on it. That actually benefits the elites more than an inflationary system does.

>> No.12257786

>>12257657
and now currencies can be created digitally, so they can't be devalued. It was a myth. Now it's not.

>>12257686
Disagree. Everyone has money. Only the elite (and upper middle class) have assets. Hyper deflation is good. It makes it so people only by inelastic goods. We're already destroying the planet with our over consumption and greed. Since there are so many of us, people should only buy what they need to survive.

>> No.12257816

>>12257609
Yeah exactly. Money is a store of value, that allows one person to exchange one good for another. The VALUE is STORED over TIME so they can exchange it for another good equal to the value they created.

The future is irrelevant to determining the price of past actions.

>> No.12257843

>>12256441
> wherever you go.
except that there is nowhere left to go. apart from iran, cuba and north korea, everything is basically one system now. with bitcoin being 100% transparent, they will be able to implement any rate of tax from 0 to full 100% confiscation - whatever they see fit. what are you going to do? cash out via honeypot dark web exchanges?

>> No.12257852

>>12257816
yeah but for money to function as money it doesn't have to store value forever that's the fun part it only has to remain stable for a reasonable amount of time which is a few weeks to a year.

longer term you want to store value not in money but assets and stocks and bonds ie productive debt.

only retards hoard money like a hamster. it's not viable and no reason for it to be.

>> No.12257861

>>12257786
Disagree. Everyone has money. Only the elite (and upper middle class) have assets. Hyper deflation is good. It makes it so people only by inelastic goods. We're already destroying the planet with our over consumption and greed. Since there are so many of us, people should only buy what they need to survive.
Your essentially advocating for the upheaval of not only the entire economy, but of social expectations. Hyper deflation would leave most of the population in subsistence slavery and would not be politically sustainable.

>> No.12257869
File: 19 KB, 361x408, 1545853332687.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257869

>>12257633

>> No.12257892

>>12257869
don't worry if you fail to understand the big words take your time!

>> No.12257905
File: 9 KB, 184x184, 4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12257905

The amount of poor and autistic people in this thread is fucking off the charts

>> No.12257920

bitcoin + lightning network + rsk is the future op

>> No.12257965

>>12257920
Don't forget the chainlinks sir

>> No.12257997

>>12257852
It should store value forever. If I invent the telephone, should the value of my invention become worth less overtime? No. It was an important invention. Why should the money I made 30 years ago be worth less. I produced a valuable product, and sold it for what it was worth. Why is my effort from 30 years ago worth less today?

There's nothing wrong with hoarding money. It's stupid to do in the current economic system, but in a system revolved around saving and fiscal responsibility, it would be no different than opening a retirement fund, only it would be way less complicated for the working class.

>>12257861
yeah pretty much. The current system needs to change in the following ways:
1) use a scarce unit of account.
The world is scarce. Nothing is infinite. We have limited resources. We shouldn't pretend we have unlimited of anything. We need a fixed measurement to measure our resources. Inflation is a lie.
2) make usury ineffective, by making interest rates determined by the market.
If interest rates are determined by the market, they would be much higher. This would disincentivize people from taking out loans to buy assets, and instead have them purchase assets outright with their savings. A good example of debtslavery is college loans. Produces nothing for the economy, yet banks and the government will loan thousands of dollars to retarded 18 year olds so they can purchase an intangable degree. Complete inefficiency and waste of money.

Subsistence slavery is better than debt slavery. At least with subsistence slavery you have a chance to save your wealth. You can buy elastic goods if you work enough, or you can live a minimalist lifestyle and give away the money you don't need, or plan for the future. Better than living paycheck to paycheck.

>> No.12258054

>>12257997
>should the value of my invention become worth less overtime?

Yes you fucking moron that's how inflation works.

I have a BBA in Finance. You sound like the typical late 20s fucking loser that has absolutely no financial accomplishments. You read random shit on the internet and think you have a clue

>> No.12258069

>>12257997
>It should store value forever.
there is no reason for that, it doesn't actually help anyone. would be convenient to some people but the world easily deals with inflating currencies. it's almost like inflation is a tax on stupid.
>There's nothing wrong with hoarding money.
of course there is it increases risk in the system.
when you remove money from circulation then you create a systematic inflation risk, when that money returns to the market suddenly by some news event or whatever. you remove money they got to print/issue more and more for it to be present in useful amounts, and when it all returns to the market you got inflation even hyperinflation. you also remove wealth from participating in the economy and suppress the price of goods. which is a funny thing because your problem was that money is not stable in value. well savings cause it to be extremely unstable. especially with a fixed non-elastic supply.

just fucking forget this useless notion! seriously.

the way this system works and it's actually a decent idea is that zero risk debt has negative interest over time. thus if you want to keep up the purchasing power you must take some moderate risks. and if you want to earn money over inflation you got to take some actual risks. because this is what gets the economy going at peak efficiency. this is how you make the most gdp out of the least amount of money.

>> No.12258076

>>12257997
>Why is my effort from 30 years ago worth less today?
There is a finite amount of labor or value that exists now. If the tokens representing your work from 30 years ago didn't lose value all the currently existing value and labor would be assigned to tokens hoarded long ago.

>> No.12258097

>>12258076
Can I guess you are unsuccessful? No one with a normal brain could spew such garbage

>> No.12258126

>>12257997
>A good example of debtslavery is college loans. Produces nothing for the economy, yet banks and the government will loan thousands of dollars to retarded 18 year olds so they can purchase an intangable degree. Complete inefficiency and waste of money.
that's one way to look at it, it's also kind of retarded, however that much is true that when you give too good conditions for this type of loans it swamps the market (in this case universities) with money and they will increase the price of their scarce produce. so all you did is kinda made things worse for everyone.

even tho investing into a degree so you can earn more through your life is the prime example of the good loan the positive kind that drives the economy and increases the productivity, it can all go very wrong by a few maladjusted metrics and bad choices.

that doesn't mean student loans as a thing must go away. that's moronic. i had student loans it was the best fucking loan i will ever get in my life. best terms best interest.

>> No.12258129

You don't need this crap because there's Nano.

>> No.12258168
File: 164 KB, 1136x591, nano_pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12258168

>>12258129
A million times this.
Dpos works, and the network is fully functional right now.

>> No.12258185

>>12258097
>>12258054
So you produce nothing for the economy other than pushing numbers around in a computer.
Cool

>> No.12258191

>>12257892
What an utter brainlet. I've read all your posts and you just kept getting BTFO. Gtfo off this board you braindead monkey.

>> No.12258210

>>12258191
>you just kept getting BTFO
not really, the retarded memeing and misrepresentations of facts about the usual shit is not btfo when you can actually point out something that i said is wrong then i will gladly discuss it.

>> No.12258236

>>12258210
Then let me ask you what do you think BTC price will be within 5 years?

>> No.12258255

>>12258054
So you paid to learn keynesian economics and we're supposed to ignore the fact that you have a stake in its continued use when you say that 'inflation is good.'
wewlad

>> No.12258263

>>12258097
I may be wrong but can you address the point then? I made 300k in passive income this year, self made and self educated in high demand but don't need to work.

>> No.12258303

>>12258236
i hope it will be above $100k in 3 years. 5 years is kinda hard because i'm expecting a longer bear market shitshow at that period. anywhere between $20k and $350k i guess.

>> No.12258305

>>12258185
Understanding how the economy works with numbers instead of autism usually works better

>>12258255
Keynesian economics is in one chapter maybe in first year you fucking neet

> ignore the fact that you have a stake in its continued use when you say that 'inflation is good.'

Everyone has a fucking stake in it, that's reality. I never said inflation is good.. it's needed you brainlet, it's the only way modern economics works

>> No.12258317

>>12258263
Keep dreaming you fucking neet

>> No.12258318

>>12256881

This fucking meme is full of shit. The Fed Reserve didn’t exist until 1913 and the reason we have it is because Andrew Jackson killed off the central bank of the United States as President in the 1820s..

>> No.12258387

>>12258305
>I never said inflation is good
well it's not bad at least, inflation was around 35% ever since i started working, and my salary went up 400% roughly in the same period my savings are mostly in real estate stocks and a little bit in btc but i also hold about 10% cash like i can go on for years without work on this emergency stash.
inflation played absolutely no effect on my finances or wealth. the numbers i pay get bigger and bigger my paycheck gets bigger and bigger, now hyperinflation is a problem. when it hits it will already be too late to go after assets. and there is always a risk of that with my retarded government. i do hold some meme metals bit of gold and silver they couldn't even keep their purchasing power i regretted buying them a dozen times over. originally wanted to keep 5% of my net in metals but it's an awful idea. i can't wait for them to have a little bounce and get rid of the shits.

i always say what makes you gain or lose money is the ability to identify and assess risks properly. that's the secret of the 1% i'm trying to belong to. and that is why most people are poor. because they are shit at calculating their risks.

>> No.12258418

>>12258387
Read the Bitcoin Standard book and research Austrian economic school.

>> No.12258423

>>12258305
It's only 'needed' in order that people stay faithful to an economy that operates on an inflationary debt-backed monetary system. Commerce tends toward equilibrium regardless (sometimes in spite of) the rate of money issuance.

>> No.12258480

>>12258418
i researched these things over the past years to boredom. i went all over the spectrum that's why i know all these arguments are all flawed. all these ideas are not realistic. the current system not only works it's actually a decent system. the only problem it has is how it's governed. politicians always always want to spend more than what the economy can back up. they never want to let it unwind. that's the problem it's like a car driver that is addicted to speeding. doesn't mean cars are bad. it means we should lock that asshole up before he causes a crash.

>> No.12258498

>>12258317
Does it really hurt that much knowing that the power of autism beats your meme degree every time? What part of my post was garbage? Is there not finite amount of labor and resources? Even if productivity doubles every generation it can't maintain the value of your tokens since demand keeps rising for every finite resource. If you set up the system around maintaining the token price it serves the process of capital holders gaining more and more capital in an infinite loop.

>> No.12258505

>>12258480
So you are in favor of a sound monetary system? Which then means the government would limited in spending to what it can tax its people instead of the current system where they spend by printing more money and debasing the currency into oblivion which also raises prices.

>> No.12258521

>>12255275
>thinks the normies are gonna be brought back in by tech lmfao

the normies will be brought back in when the shit is bought up by wealth pricks who drive the price up until the average joe buys in at 100k/btc

>> No.12258763

>>12258505
You ignore the fact that they don't just print, they also borrow. To prevent this spending you would also need to prevent borrowing; which will never happen.
Assuming we are talking about Burgerland, its politically suicide to make any reforms necessary to balance the budget. Can't raise taxes, donors won't fund you. Can't cut entitlements, electors won't vote for you. Can't cut military, or you sacrifice global influence.

>> No.12258786

>>12256238
Its the other way around. Cryptocurrencies will keep collapsing in 2019 (stocks too) and only hard American Dollars will be the real store of value for the upcoming year.

>> No.12258802
File: 1.23 MB, 716x1280, ln.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12258802

Yes. Now get ready for $1,000,000 a coin in 2030.

Meanwhile, have a coke:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Fb6Xww2P7c

>> No.12258819
File: 2.57 MB, 288x360, altcoins.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12258819

>>12256402
Your dumb ass will get gold confiscated while Bitcoin masterrrace moves $trillions seamlessly. By then you dumb boomers may grasp why intangibleness is a positive.

>> No.12258836
File: 195 KB, 1500x910, fiat insanity.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12258836

>>12258480
>"the current system not only works it's actually a decent system. the only problem it has is how it's governed."
>the system works but doesn't

>> No.12258854

>>12258505
i'm in favor of an elastic money supply adjusted to keep inflation in check just at the sweet spot of 2%. also in favor of limiting the spending and vote buying insanity. raising prices is not the problem. unsustainable over leveraging and not letting the economy unwind is the problem.

>> No.12258876

>>12258836
it works but like most systems operated by humans it can be abused. crypto is harder to abuse because it's code up for public review. doesn't mean it's impossible it's just harder. but a deflationary currency is not the answer to the troubles of the economy and btc would never be accepted as reserve currency. it would need to be worth millions per coin or maybe more and there are some pretty shaky characters holding large amounts of it. central banks would never touch it.

>> No.12258887
File: 35 KB, 605x558, 1475844106433.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12258887

>>12257278
>t. 102 IQ that thinks he's an expert economist by regurgitating some keynsian bullshit he was fed.

Guess why you need loans, goy? Fractional reserve banking artificially raises prices as people are forced to compete with each other in how much debt they can take on in order to have their own home/car etc. Under a system of sound money you would be able to afford your own home outright simply by saving for a few months. You would own all the equity instead of the bank owning it and you working to pay interest to the bank.

Try and understand the supply/demand dynamics at play here if people are offered credit at low rates due to rampant money printing.

This means that goys will instead be able to take out a much larger mortgage, which pushes prices up in the housing market. Congratulations, you are now a debt slave.

>> No.12258920

>>12255444
Checked LN 1k eoy

>> No.12258922
File: 14 KB, 256x256, 1517525526253.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12258922

>>12258836
>these numbers are really big that means theyre bad

>> No.12258934
File: 131 KB, 400x266, nashkamoto.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12258934

>>12258876
Yeah and guess who satoshi is dummy.
Also guess who is holding massive ass amounts of dollars: protip: druglords, etc. That's a non-argument.

There’s only one international reserve cryptocurrency coming and that is Bitcoin. The altcoins are fractional reserve claims on Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the only form of asset or money which meets famous mathematician and game theorist (and recently deceased in a fiery car crash) John Nash’s model of Ideal Money. Nash’s whitepaper on Ideal Money explained why other assets can’t qualify as Ideal Money. The tail doesn’t wag the dog and so non-ideal money assets can’t be cardinal to the one Ideal Money.
You probably don't have the IQ required to understand what Bitcoin really means, so please do sell.

>> No.12258955
File: 53 KB, 645x729, brain.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12258955

>>12258922
>big number good not bad

>> No.12258969

>>12258887
>Guess why you need loans
because it's part of a sound investment strategy
>Fractional reserve banking artificially raises prices as people are forced to compete with each other in how much debt they can take on in order to have their own home/car etc
yeah consumer loans i already told my opinion about that crap
>Under a system of sound money you would be able to afford your own home outright simply by saving for a few months
conjecture
>You would own all the equity instead of the bank owning it and you working to pay interest to the bank
i own all my real estate and pay no interest to the bank it's not like anyone forcing you to take out loans
>Try and understand the supply/demand dynamics
preaching to the choir
>This means that goys will instead be able to take out a much larger mortgage, which pushes prices up in the housing market.
these things are pretty simple, look at price/rent ratio! if it's worth it to buy buy if not rent. i rent because my ratio is about 0.35% and under 0.6% it's insanity to buy just as it's pretty stupid not to buy above 1%.
>Congratulations, you are now a debt slave.
well i don't have any debt at the moment thank you.

>> No.12258978

>>12258934
>There’s only one international reserve cryptocurrency coming and that is Bitcoin.
it will never happen. metals are not coming back either. sorry.

if history shows anything when a fiat currency fails an other takes it's place the next day. rinse and repeat.

>> No.12259047

>>12258934
i don't know everything about the guy as an economist but only a retard views the gold standard in positive light. the gold standard deprives most countries from issuing their own sovereign money as their economy and thus natural demand grows. for this reason alone it's a system that only benefits gold mining countries if even them.

he also said bitcoin is not his ideal money he is all about icpi.

>> No.12259097

>>12257843
And now I realize why monero will be worth 100k usd

>> No.12259147
File: 215 KB, 608x593, 1543214743125.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12259147

>>12259097

>> No.12259160
File: 19 KB, 549x380, 1524085202764.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12259160

>>12258934
this is the truth

>> No.12259169

>>12259097
The black pill is Monero just needs to exist to pressure governments and banking into not being oppressive. People don't actually have to use it unless governments and banks misjudge the situation.

>> No.12259195

>>12256225
this this this. or Eos. There are alternatives to BTC that are soooooo much better now.

>> No.12259206

>>12257843
>with bitcoin being 100% transparent, they will be able to implement any rate of tax from 0 to full 100% confiscation
u wat m8? you think the cryptographic ownership of bitcoin can be legally linked to your person? i mean they can suspect, but proving it... they can't prove you having knowledge. basically that is what it comes down to. make a few transactions like you sent/spent it! there, gone! best if you use an other offline wallet for this so you can even show your empty wallet to them.

>> No.12259217

>>12255030
It might work eventually, right now there's still too many risks involved.

>> No.12259218

>>12259169
yeah it's a way to remind governments that they actually like bitcoin cause it could be a hell of a lot worse.

>> No.12259238

>>12256640
Realistically you will use a professional wallet service like Exodus. Exodus will have its own payment channel with everybody, plus all its users. So you dont actually connect directly to anyone but exodus and your money is only locked up with exodus, because that makes sense because your money is stored in the exodus wallet anyway. Exodus then swaps via their channel with walmart or target or whoever when you go shopping.

>> No.12259286
File: 8 KB, 390x470, e4c6a202efb6bb4b48e1bff276abbb43.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12259286

>>12255030
>send money across network of shady hubs that can be easily hacked
>need to deposit BTC at hub escrow account first (to give the illusion that the transfer is instant)
>small amounts only because trustless and no-confirmation

>> No.12259304

>>12259238
yeah large centralized hubs we know that can work. what we don't know if we will like it. how much these nodes can abuse their position? how hard it will be for anyone to enter the market in competition? that's what ln depends on for success or failure.

>> No.12259310

>>12259286
>shady hubs
They're extremely robust smartcontracts on the bitcoin chain you utter fucking minibrain scum. Go ahead and fucking "hack" one if you're so smart.
Ill wait.
Idiot.

>> No.12259320

>>12259310
You seem to know your shit. What’s your BTC and ETH price predictions within 5 years?

>> No.12259324

>>12259286
well the hubs can all be in somalia run by scammers you don't risk anything. either an ln transaction goes through as is or not. a node acting in bad faith can only lose it's own funds or keep yours locked up for unreasonably long.

>> No.12259366
File: 123 KB, 750x1024, 1543445496132.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12259366

>>12255030
LN will work

checkem

>> No.12259397

>>12259366
Checked. But they're one of the devil's numbers so unchecked.

>> No.12259411
File: 60 KB, 934x625, UZKYQWX.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12259411

>>12259397
BTC unironically going to 1 mil each

>> No.12259445

>>12259320
No idea.

>> No.12259560
File: 120 KB, 400x333, 15312391235123.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12259560

>>12259411
>>12259366
my god...

>> No.12259590

imagine actually being a late adopter trying to argue against lighting on fucking 4chan of all places. cringe

>> No.12259668

>>12259411
maybe but first we see 1k

>> No.12259970
File: 99 KB, 300x301, 1532890318715.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12259970

the absolute state of the LIGHTNING NETWORK
https://twitter.com/abrkn/status/1078193601190989829

>> No.12259977

>>12259970
>>12255640

>> No.12260674

>>12259590
Imagine posting this. Kek.

>> No.12260719

>>12255776
The fact this coin is rarely shilled here tells me it's probably legit.

>> No.12261587

Nope. LN is shit.
Major node was taken down.
https://twitter.com/abrkn/status/1078193601190989829

>> No.12261632
File: 55 KB, 640x602, 1528981367368.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12261632

>>12256221
this looks legit

>> No.12262127
File: 2.71 MB, 319x220, 1543726107157.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12262127

The LN was nothing but a way for the banks to gain time and develop competing services and I'm absolutely flabbergasted it worked on millions of gullible "investors" who took for granted the devs' words and didn't understand what was really going on.

>> No.12262445

>>12256402
no zoomer is ever going to buy your gold
make the switch while you still can

>> No.12262459

>>12256652
>the banking system and bitcoin has almost nothing in common
you can see your balance in both
both are a secure storage
are you retarded?

>> No.12262467

>>12256916
you're a kike defending banks

>> No.12262494
File: 25 KB, 400x386, 1238545673.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12262494

>>12255030
Most proponents of LN. By this I mean the biggest shills on biz. Each and every one of them says that LN is not meant for large transactions because of the chance the money can vanish.

>> No.12262554

Lightning network is by far, without a shadow of doubt, the biggest scam in the history of crypto. Not only are layer 2 solutions to shore up weaknesses of layer 1 completely shit, its far better to use another coin. But LN is based on completely fucking terrible design on every front making it absolute garbage.

DO NOT LISTEN TO FAGS ON HERE. Pay attention to what I said because the moment you think about having a super complex bullshit layer 2 solution that poofs transactions randomly vs just using another coin its OBVIOUSLY fucking true that another coin that is just better is a superior. Bitcoin right now has more value being left alone than it does with some garbage fucking layer 2 nightmare that has a 20% failure rate.

Anyone who says otherwise IS A FUCKING LIAR. No debates, no fucking arguments, they fucking suck at life and need to self murder for the betterment of man fucking kind. The lightning network is a UX design DISASTER. It takes some already hard to get outsiders involved and raises complexity exponentially.

I don't even fucking give a shit what shills on here are going to try and say to this post either. They are worthless humans with zero fucking IQs desperately hoping to convince people that LN is a good idea. These are the same people who think Raiden is the only way for ETH to ever scale properly and completely ignore Serenity. Or that coins like NEO somehow fucking need the LN even in spite of the coin already having super fast transactions HAHAHAHA

LN is fucking trash. Its bad from technical standpoint and its bad for UX design. This is not a discussion I am just fucking telling you how it is.

>> No.12262565

Lightning network is by far, without a shadow of doubt, the biggest scam in the history of crypto. Not only are layer 2 solutions to shore up weaknesses of layer 1 completely shit, its far better to use another coin. But LN is based on completely fucking terrible design on every front making it absolute garbage.

DO NOT LISTEN TO FAGS ON HERE. Pay attention to what I said because the moment you think about having a super complex bullshit layer 2 solution that poofs transactions randomly vs just using another coin its OBVIOUSLY fucking true that another coin that is just better is a superior. Bitcoin right now has more value being left alone than it does with some garbage fucking layer 2 nightmare that has a 20% failure rate.

Anyone who says otherwise IS A FUCKING LIAR. No debates, no fucking arguments, they fucking suck at life and need to self murder for the betterment of man fucking kind. The lightning network is a UX design DISASTER. It takes some already hard to get outsiders involved and raises complexity exponentially.

I don't even fucking give a shit what shills on here are going to try and say to this post either. They are worthless humans with zero fucking IQs desperately hoping to convince people that LN is a good idea. These are the same people who think Raiden is the only way for ETH to ever scale properly and completely ignore Serenity. Or that coins like NEO somehow fucking need the LN even in spite of the coin already having super fast transactions HAHAHAHA

LN is fucking trash. Its bad from technical standpoint and its bad for UX design. This is not a discussion I am just fucking telling you how it is.

>> No.12262578

>>12255030
Not a chance

>> No.12263046

>>12259668
anon, you seem to know your shit. can you recommend some good reading for economics brainlet?

>> No.12263161

>>12262554

>Caps lock
>Billion swear words cause they nowdays make your argument sound more convincing
>0 Actual arguments

0/5 pasta.

>> No.12263168

>>12263161
Lightning network is by far, without a shadow of doubt, the biggest scam in the history of crypto. Not only are layer 2 solutions to shore up weaknesses of layer 1 completely shit, its far better to use another coin. But LN is based on completely fucking terrible design on every front making it absolute garbage.

DO NOT LISTEN TO FAGS ON HERE. Pay attention to what I said because the moment you think about having a super complex bullshit layer 2 solution that poofs transactions randomly vs just using another coin its OBVIOUSLY fucking true that another coin that is just better is a superior. Bitcoin right now has more value being left alone than it does with some garbage fucking layer 2 nightmare that has a 20% failure rate.

Anyone who says otherwise IS A FUCKING LIAR. No debates, no fucking arguments, they fucking suck at life and need to self murder for the betterment of man fucking kind. The lightning network is a UX design DISASTER. It takes some already hard to get outsiders involved and raises complexity exponentially.

I don't even fucking give a shit what shills on here are going to try and say to this post either. They are worthless humans with zero fucking IQs desperately hoping to convince people that LN is a good idea. These are the same people who think Raiden is the only way for ETH to ever scale properly and completely ignore Serenity. Or that coins like NEO somehow fucking need the LN even in spite of the coin already having super fast transactions HAHAHAHA

LN is fucking trash. Its bad from technical standpoint and its bad for UX design. This is not a discussion I am just fucking telling you how it is.

>> No.12263182

Lightning network is by far, without a shadow of doubt, the biggest scam in the history of crypto. Not only are layer 2 solutions to shore up weaknesses of layer 1 completely shit, its far better to use another coin. But LN is based on completely fucking terrible design on every front making it absolute garbage.

DO NOT LISTEN TO FAGS ON HERE. Pay attention to what I said because the moment you think about having a super complex bullshit layer 2 solution that poofs transactions randomly vs just using another coin its OBVIOUSLY fucking true that another coin that is just better is a superior. Bitcoin right now has more value being left alone than it does with some garbage fucking layer 2 nightmare that has a 20% failure rate.

Anyone who says otherwise IS A FUCKING LIAR. No debates, no fucking arguments, they fucking suck at life and need to self murder for the betterment of man fucking kind. The lightning network is a UX design DISASTER. It takes some already hard to get outsiders involved and raises complexity exponentially.

I don't even fucking give a shit what shills on here are going to try and say to this post either. They are worthless humans with zero fucking IQs desperately hoping to convince people that LN is a good idea. These are the same people who think Raiden is the only way for ETH to ever scale properly and completely ignore Serenity. Or that coins like NEO somehow fucking need the LN even in spite of the coin already having super fast transactions HAHAHAHA

LN is fucking trash. Its bad from technical standpoint and its bad for UX design. This is not a discussion I am just fucking telling you how it is.

>> No.12263250

>>12262554
>>12262565
>>12263168
The power of Vishnu

>> No.12263316

>>12263161
>>0 Actual arguments

1. Bad UX design
2. More complex and less reliable than using another coin.

Come at me bro or fucking KYS,

>> No.12263507

>>12258480
where do i start such a research?

>> No.12263540

>>12263168
> DO NOT LISTEN TO FAGS ON HERE.
Stopt here. Thx fag.

>> No.12263760

>>12263316
you dont have to thats the point

>> No.12263801

Would the 'disappearing funds' problem be dealt with using chainlink?

>> No.12263816

>>12263801
what disappearing funds?

>> No.12264270

>>12263760
>you dont have to thats the point

There it is guys, its "optional" when the block sized is cucked to a point where transaction fees are 80 bucks a pop. Listen this is bullshit, there are no arguments that actually support even the idea of LN. A coin that doesnt suck always wins.

Take ETH get sharding and casper in play and its fast and decentralized and its layer one. End of story drop the mic. Eat dirt.

>>12263801
>Would the 'disappearing funds' problem be dealt with using chainlink?

Chainlink would be used to hot swap BTC between different blockchains for a single transaction. So for example you sign a transaction, it uses a permission less system to swap it to a faster cheaper coin. You would still have a big transaction fee though. But even that is better because at least it would potentially be able to be 100% reliable and faster.

>>12263816
>what disappearing funds?

LN has a failure rate where the transaction can fail. I cannot fucking believe anyone takes this shit even kind of seriously.

>> No.12264351
File: 57 KB, 612x612, 1541371475731.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12264351

>>12263182
>>12263168
>>12262565
>>12262554


so what is the answer?? Bcash? BSV? what is going to happen to bitcoin if lightning does indeed get rolled out like it is being are we really ruining our only chance of having a pure decentralized currency with layer two bullshit from (((blockstream))) or is this what was always going to happen anyway? There is so much talk in this thread but never any fucking answers, everybody is so biased and one sided that it is impossible to find the truth. And Even the truth is never straightforward and let me give you an example; say i show you a glass of water and fill it up with water and then tip half of it out, you would say it is half full, well i would say it is half empty, somebody else would say because it was full before it originally was full so nothing else matters from then on, somebody else might say that technically you will never have a glass that is either half full or half empty exactly it is too specific to measure in milimeters so what is the point of being so specific? I can literally go on and on. Imagine this for something like BTC lighting network which is like 100x more complicated to understand, so then you have the average 20 something joe like me who simply wants to believe in something bigger than himself because his life is so utter pointless in the sceme of things, the economy is going to shit, cant buy a house, cant get a date because fear of getting metoo'd, cant enjoy a comedy show or a film or video game because even that is ruined, all that is left is crypto and bitcoin and if bitcoin is fucked then what hope do we have?


Our generation knows too much now. Everybody here knows too much i know this is all autistic talk but none of our parents or grandparents knew what we knew at their age what we do now. There is literally no going back. I just dont know how we can go forward

>> No.12264377

>>12264270
you don't have to use an alt that's the point

>> No.12264382

>>12264270
>LN has a failure rate where the transaction can fail. I cannot fucking believe anyone takes this shit even kind of seriously.
what disappearing funds?

>> No.12264401

>>12255030
dyor

>> No.12264413

>>12255483
>nope if you receive and want to make sure you get payed you should be online at settlement.
>that's all
>that's all
reminder that bitcoin maximalists think this is a minor non-issue
so fucking deluded holy fuck.

>> No.12264436

>>12264413
well 99% of the people will pay with ln but not receive micro payments over it. those that do will be businesses that will be online at the time.
guess what when you accept credit cards with a pos terminal you have to be online too or it will not work.

>> No.12264461

>>12264270
>disappearing funds
Vishnu will punish you for your lies.

>> No.12264464

>>12264436
also as a second point if you are offline when receiving a crypto transaction how the fuck do you know you got it? like say he client is willing to wait for confirmation and you want to clear his payment so what do you do if you are not online?

it's not a problem. anyone can still receive funds to their bitcoin address from their employer or pals while they are offline that will keep on working it's just not useful for commerce.

>> No.12264790

>>12264351
>so what is the answer?

Something else. LN is the wrong answer barking up the wrong tree by the wrong people for the wrong reasons with the wrong solution. I dont care what is the answer but BUT THIS AINT FUCKING IT.

ETH gets serenity maybe long term. Otherwise Coins like EOS ADA NEO TRX STEEM XRP get all of the use case action. Then ETH takes over long term if it gets serenity. ETH is already superior to BTC anyway. The solutions to solve scaling on ETH at least make sense even if it is a long shot.

There are layer one solutions that can work pretty well at least on paper and are not horrible as fuck layer 2 garbage with a percentage failure rate. FUCK THAT!!!

Proof of stake at least has room to grow so its likely that is the direction of all cryptos. Honestly BTC should stay how it is right now and just accept it will never be anything more. It has more value in its current form and that in a way makes it more dependable long term. LN cucks the fucking coin so hard. If ETH can get scaling solved then it will be the main coin unless EOS or XRP cuck it too hard with some kind of dapp that gains mass adoption.

If you are 100% hardline decentralization and wont like coins like EOS or XRP then ETH is the best you got. Period.

>>12264377
>you don't have to use an alt that's the point

Kill yourself. Nobody is ever going to listen to this shit ever. I'm absolutely sick of these half baked pro LN arguments.

> Its ok to be total shit because its optional!
> 1mb block size means 80 dollar transactions but its still optional!
> The whole point is you don't have to use an alt coin!

Murder yourself in your sleep you absolute fuck tard. I have zero respect for obvious scam artists.

>> No.12264831

>>12264790
they won't keep the block size at 1mb you nignog. they can't not even ln would support adoption with 1mb blocks.

>> No.12264842

>>12264790
yeah go ahead make eth a pos shitcoin!

>> No.12264850

>>12264790
>with a percentage failure rate
so try again? you know like swiping a card twice.
also the network is in it's infancy you triple negro. we will see about failure rates in a few years.

>> No.12264883

>>12264831
They will do whatever the fuck they want to force you to use LN so they can profit from it. There is no reason for the block size to be 1mb now there wont be in the future. But it is.

>>12264842
>yeah go ahead make eth a pos shitcoin!

Lets see how it plays out. POS is fully capable of being decentralized enough to get the job done which is all you need.

>> No.12264912

>>12264850
>so try again? you know like swiping a card twice.

Your money poofs if it fails otherwise I would agree with this point. I would flip my shit even if there was a 1% chance it might fail sending my 100 dollars to Vishnu.

> also the network is in it's infancy you triple negro. we will see about failure rates in a few years.

haha sure man. Sure!

>> No.12264925

>>12264883
the 1mb block limit was ill conceived but it had reasons they tried to shake illicit spam transactions and incentivize faster adoption of segwit and wanted to avoid a hard fork. these three reasons are arguably legit altho i disagree with all three most people apparently didn't. big disappointment. but whatever. doesn't mean the 1mb block is set in stone or anything. that's just cashie bullshit.

poos has no memory the moment a group gains 51% there is no going back. they have complete control over the entire history of the coin. they can alter it as they will. unless eth tethers to btc for reorg safety like komodo. in which case it accepts an inferior position and forever will remain a shitcoin.

i don't really think there should be more than 1 pow chain btw. especially not more than 1 sha256 pow.

>> No.12264941

>>12264912
>Your money poofs if it fails
nope this never happened so far and can't relly happen where did you get this bullcrap?

>haha sure man
yeah it's pretty obvious it's just trying to find it's hape ever since those statistics came out of transaction failures in july the node and channel capacities multipled. the network probably has to shrink long term it's too big now, too many hops. let it work itself out around financial incentives and user habits!

>> No.12265004

>>12264790

>If you are 100% hardline decentralization and wont like coins like EOS or XRP then ETH is the best you got. Period.

Sure for now it is ETH, but what about in 10 years or 5 or 2 years time if there is a coin that is BETTER than eth more decentralized which comes out. Hell, almost every smart contract platform out now trumps eth in not just tech, but also the sheer fact that they havent had to roll back the entire blockchain for the DAO hack. And POS is not as good as POW simply because SN knew that pow was true brute capitalism and that is how he wanted his currency to be based around, do you think he probably considered POS for bitcoin but no he chose POW, why? because it is the best thing we could possibly use.

>your thinking
technology is always going to outstrip Btc in the end, there is no point trying to beat it or stay ahead of the competition because none of that matters. I agree with you there so ergo there needs to be another currency which we can throw to the masses which we arnt too scared to play around with and solve scalibility that is well established (eth)

i just dont see this being a long term solution. Especially since Vitamin B is literally the only thing holding eth together at this point. Can you imagine if he suddenly left eth tomorrow? No, that coin has too much riding on that one individual and while i am a bit vitalik believer i dont know if his leadership of that coin is necessarily a good thing.

>> No.12265013
File: 444 KB, 1129x1611, boots.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12265013

Fucking LULZ you can't even receive payments with Lightning Network wallets without jumping through hoops.

https://old.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/8q9wco/is_it_really_true_that_there_is_no_consumer/

>Nothing can be received immediately after creating a new payment channel, as ‘room’ for incoming funds has to be made by spending some funds first. A payment channel can be thought of as a full bottle of water: in order to pour something in one first has to pour something out.
>Each channel implicitly contains a reserve which is unspendable and typically takes about 2% of the channel’s capacity. You must spend that reserve before receiving is allowed. Unspendable channel reserve is the reason you see a negative receive limit when a new channel is full. It indicates how much you need to spend before anything can be received through the channel.
>Every payment request is disposable, they can’t be fulfilled twice. So you will need to issue a new individual payment request for every incoming payment you wish to receive.
>Wallet needs to be online in order to receive off-chain funds.

This is a big step backwards in crypto, why is ANYONE hyped about it?

>> No.12265018

>>12264941
well actually it happened but it's kinda like the case where a malicious actor can only lose his funds scenario but the guy had a corrupted database and his client tried to commit fraud unwittingly, and yeah in this case you can lose funds. it's a malfunction on your end. like if your client sent btc to a wrong address out of a corruption in the code or memory you would never get it back. same shit.
https://www.trustnodes.com/2018/03/26/lightning-network-user-loses-funds

>> No.12265026
File: 545 KB, 2560x1440, dj.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12265026

Why lightning network is a bad idea even if all its issues were solved:

1. you have to set up your payment channel with on-chain transaction. if you have to deal with on-chain transactions anyway you might as well just scale up on-chain instead. if i go to a coffee shop that only have depleted lightning channels i have to make an on-chain transaction. a depleted customer channel will be that way forever unless the store decides to pay someone else through a customer's channel.

2. if someone else use your payment channel they can deplete your funds to a merchant. if there are no other channels, which is likely since otherwise your channel wouldn't be depleted, you now need another on-chain transaction to make a new channel or refund your old one. if you think this is wrong, check: https://youtu.be/pOZaLbUUZUs

3. if you have 1 BTC and open up four channels with 0.25 BTC on each channel it's impossible to send more than the unspent amount of BTC on that channel even though you own more than 0.25. likewise nobody can receive more BTC than the sum of all their channels (assuming all channels could find a path to the sender and that the right amount of BTC is available at the correct end of each channel).

4. the network will inevitably develop backbone nodes that nearly all transactions pass through (most likely just trusting each other to have the required funds to save time). this "solves" the routing problem but makes the whole thing completely centralized, just like internet is today with master backbone nodes.

5. once you put your crypto into a channel you're basically trapped in the system. it's designed so that you would never want to take it out. eventually there would be almost no in/out on the bitcoin blockchain and at that point bitcoin is essentially dead and you can be sure that there will be talks to just drop it completely in favor of some kind of issued lightning network token.

>> No.12265035
File: 1.77 MB, 960x1280, doorway.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12265035

>>12265026
6. it's possible to make solutions for micropayment channels on-chain instead. someone just needs to figure out a way for the sender to be able to construct a transaction but he cannot broadcast it, the reciver on the other hand can't change the transaction but he is allowed to broadcast it. the payment channel is then either closed by the receiver with the latest state or it is closed by a timeout with a full refund to the sender.

7. bitcoin (cash) works for payments of all sizes today. there's no reason to reinvent the wheel. we don't live forever and every year we delay crypto adaption is another year the banks will adapt to instant online global payments. you think it's hard to on-board people with crypto today? good luck if banks offer the exact same user experience as crypto. when that happens the only perk crypto has is censorship resistance and most people just don't care if banks are convenient enough.

TL;DR i wouldn't want to use lightning even if it already worked flawlessly with BCH, BTC, ETH, LTC and whatever else.

>> No.12265036

>>12264941
>nope this never happened so far and can't relly happen where did you get this bullcrap?

Use google bro its your friend : Lightning network failure rate

> let it work itself out around financial incentives and user habits!

How about I don't. That's a fucking much better solution! Its the solution the free market is going with too. And yes your fucking money can vanish into thin air with LN. Power goes out and your node goes down good bye!

>> No.12265090

>>12265026
>if you have to deal with on-chain transactions anyway you might as well just scale up on-chain instead
fallacy
>if someone else use your payment channel they can deplete your funds to a merchant
come now end users will not route payments hubs will most channels will be assymetric
>3., 4.
yeah that's a given locking in funds is a problem with ln which will inevitably result in great level of centralization to large regional hubs (kinda like banking today) so long there is competition this is not a big problem but we will see
>the whole thing completely centralized
yes but as opposed to modern banking you remain in complete control (well not control more like ownership) of your funds the whole time until a payment completes.
>once you put your crypto into a channel you're basically trapped in the system.
bullshit conjecture, btc will be the backbone and will keep on functioning.

>> No.12265131

>>12265035
>someone just needs to figure out a way for the sender to be able to construct a transaction but he cannot broadcast it, the reciver on the other hand can't change the transaction but he is allowed to broadcast it
you don't need to figure that out it's entirely possible it just doesn't solve shit.
>bitcoin (cash) works for payments of all sizes today
bch has huge security issues if i was a merchant i would want at least 10 blocks (possibly more when hashrates fluctuate) confirmation accepting bch for goods. the fact that they are minority sha256 chains removes the fundamental security of btc, and 0-conf is delusional it will never be secure. ln at least is fraud proof even if it's overly complex.

>> No.12265210

>>12265004
>Sure for now it is ETH, but what about in 10 years or 5 or 2 years time if there is a coin that is BETTER than eth more decentralized which comes out.

ETH long term is going to end up being just another face in the crowd of POS coins.

> because it is the best thing we could possibly use.

In some respects maybe its better if ETH stays almost exactly how it is right now. Its security is quite high, overkill actually. Its the best store of value on the market with native stable coins. Honestly it can be argued that if ETH stays how it is right now it gives itself some identity and side steps the rat race. I don't know. All I do know is that maximalists are fucked long term because coins are going to get sucked into niche roles and there will never be a "one coin to rule them all" as far as use cases go.

> i just dont see this being a long term solution. Especially since Vitamin B is literally the only thing holding eth together at this point. Can you imagine if he suddenly left eth tomorrow? No, that coin has too much riding on that one individual and while i am a bit vitalik believer i dont know if his leadership of that coin is necessarily a good thing.

That same degree of centralization exists for all coins. Its just harder to notice if the person or people in charge of the coin do not have a social media presence. Dan Larimer vanishing would be pretty brutal for EOS. You can make a similar argument for any coin honestly. As long as there are incentives there will always be chance for someone to step in to get shit done.

>> No.12265296

>>12265090
>bullshit conjecture, btc will be the backbone and will keep on functioning.

You are better off coming up with some new slogan or cool name and then funding research into a layer one solution. Otherwise BTC is better off not changing at all.

>> No.12265389

>>12265296
btc is not changing really, there is no fundamental difference to btc as it was or between any forks. segwit didn't change how btc works ln will not change how btc works that's why they are called layers. they build on top.

>> No.12265440

>>12265389
>segwit didn't change how btc works

Yeah it does. You don't remember all of the shit that went on when segwit was being forced on to BTC? It was the first time when BTC wasn't really even Bitcoin anymore.

>> No.12265491

>>12265440
i know btc didn't change bitcoin for two reasons, 1 it's opt-in soft fork if you don't like it then don't use it! i never had a segwit address, and probably wont have one for a good while. yet i'm transacting in btc just fine. so no segwit didn't change anything. it did not ruin bitcoin and yes i was siding with unlimited in the fork debate, increasing the block size was a better short term solution ln may be a medium term solution to micro payments and commerce but that's so far away... fucked up their priorities badly.

however btc is btc and cashies and shitcoiners are deluded cucks.

>> No.12265845

>>12265210
>there will never be a "one coin to rule them all" as far as use cases go
Bitcoin will be valuable because it’s immutable and extremely scarce. The hardest most sound money to ever exist. Bitcoin will have a premium because of these features. There will be a winner takes all for a SoV, MoE, UoA. Now for smart contracts you have a complete different use case and there’s more potential for a platform such as ETH/LINK to flourish. Monero is also solid and great hedge against a black swan event seeing it has a completely different code base.

>> No.12266227

>>12255030
Unironically, nope, it won't work. But I certainly don't begrudge you throwing your money at whatever stupid shit you think works for you. Eventually, someone ends up with the money who actually has the sense to deserve it, small payback for the fact that you then will want to tax the shit out of them as "muh evil 1%" and pay for all the shit you don't have because you were a retard.

>> No.12266564

>>12265440
>Yeah it does.
no segwit changes how incentives work if you use segwit. and that's a problem. i mean i seriously hope someone finds a solution to that, but the fact is you can keep most of your btc on non segwit addresses. and only what you wish to spend via ln has to be on a segwit balance.

i'm still not a 100% sold on segwit being a good idea but the argument it changes bitcoin is bullshit.

>> No.12267423

>>12265845
>Bitcoin will be valuable because it’s immutable and extremely scarce.

Bullshit. Its name is the only reason it has value. Any coin is immutable and scarce. Stop giving me these copy paste explanations.

> however btc is btc and cashies and shitcoiners are deluded cucks.

I'm talking about the Lightning network being a massive pile of shit. I never said anything about BTC not having value. I even said its better as it is right now if LN is not added to it because LN is that cancer.

>> No.12267664

>>12267423
>Any coin
Not every coin is distributed as well as bitcoin is
that's a big sell for btc and why it's secure

>> No.12267743

>>12255496
The point here is that there is no real incentive for people to invest, unlike btc mining.

>> No.12267817

>>12267664
>Not every coin is distributed as well as bitcoin is
>that's a big sell for btc and why it's secure

ok top 5. Stop playing stupid. A huge aspect of BTC that ruins its security as that LN might get shoehorned on to it in a fucked up half baked state one day with no fucking warning.

>> No.12268119

>>12267817
>LN might get shoehorned on to it
wat? dude if you don't like ln ddon't use it! i'm serious it's like if you don't like ketchup on pizza don't put ketchup on pizza!

>> No.12268252

>>12268119
>wat? dude if you don't like ln ddon't use it! i'm serious it's like if you don't like ketchup on pizza don't put ketchup on pizza!

Pizza is made with tomato sauce you brainlet.

>> No.12269022

>>12267423
Are you an actual retard? Bitcoin is hard to change. That is called immutable. This means some devs can’t just change the total supply like some shitcoin enigma or all of the other alt coins that have centralized dictatorships. Fucking retard this board is even worse in a bear market go figure.

>> No.12269037

>>12267817
Fucking idiot. Why do you think it’s taking so long. I’m convinced you’re a Muslim/nigger

>> No.12269109

>>12268252
yeah but i have seen motherfuckers putting ketchup on it.

>> No.12269169

Buy chainlink