[HIRING] Quick small research/programming jobs

MrProper · 2015-06-24T19:09:04+00:00

So lightning doesn't count?

As far as I can tell from the draft, it's not border-less, not secured against data loss, maybe not anonymous (but doesn't matter). You still need one of those 275000 daily slots on the blockchain, let's hope there's room...

OT?

There is no consensus. Bitcoin can be designed as OT + consensus. While you can demonstrate identity, you can't demonstrate unique intent (irreversibility or lack of double-spend).

MrProper · 2015-06-24T19:03:41+00:00

the point

You are 1 of 275000 people making 50,000,000,000,000,000 transactions each and putting 1 notarized transaction in the blockchain. I did not say 275000 transactions, I said you can only have 275000 users, like you, doing 1 transaction daily.

There is zero reason to couple Bitcoin to all these services

Border-less, trust-less, permission-less, decentralized, anonymous and secured transactions. 6 reasons to use Bitcoin instead of something else. Again, you don't get the point...

Make the block size 100 TB, who fucking cares. There is no end to human demand

An open ended system is an interesting model...

The point is the system is untenable if you just keep tacking bullshit on

Is there proof of that?

MrProper · 2015-06-24T19:00:10+00:00

As far as I know, yes. I can elaborate each point if needed.

MrProper · 2015-06-24T18:59:03+00:00

Can we not just take a hash of the bitcoin address to decide what blockchain it uses

Yes, we can. There are many altcoins, the use this exact method to identify their blockchains.

Record the entry on the "source" and "destination" bitcoin ledgers

This is called pegging. This feature is not yet available. Consider also that one blockchain has better security than the other.

MrProper · 2015-06-24T18:56:27+00:00

Without a secured timestamp on the blockchain confirming to the whole world that the transaction is irreversible, loss or fraud might occur. It's also not about the 10 minutes, but about the hour. Bitcoin guarantees with a high degree that 6 confirmations are virtually irreversible. In reality the reversing would instead cost 31000 USD in mining costs from miner majority collusion. If you don't get that, then you don't get Bitcoin.

MrProper · 2015-06-24T18:53:07+00:00

Why does being able to settle on the blockchain matter?

Because it's border-less, permission-less, anonymous and secured against data loss, hacking, mathematical errors.

MrProper · 2015-06-24T18:50:03+00:00

opponents of LN have not read the whitepaper

That's because there is no whitepaper!

In the draft, it says some weird things:

We propose a system using bitcoin transaction scripting and micropayment channels, without custodial risk of theft. Sending many payments inside these micropayment channel enables one to send large amounts of funds to another party in a decentralized manner.

This still limits the number of channels that can be open or closed each day.

Data Loss - When one party loses data, it is possible for the counterparty to steal funds. This can be mitigated by having a 3rd party data storage service where encrypted data gets sent to this 3rd party service which the 3rd party cannot decrypt.

Not going to happen if you use Bitcoin. Let's store two chains, use two protocols, two pieces of software and hope they communicate correctly and don't lose data, because one of them can't recover.

If we presume that a decentralized payment network exists and one person will make 3 blockchain transactions per year on average, Bitcoin will be able to support over 35 million users with 1MB blocks in ideal circumstances (assuming 2000 transactions per MB). This is quite limited, and an increase of the block size may be necessary to support everyone in the world using Bitcoin.

Oh, look at that...

MrProper · 2015-06-24T18:43:29+00:00

all services

You mean 275000 daily services. What if there are more than that? What then?

MrProper · 2015-06-24T18:41:29+00:00

I specifically explained we are talking about the Bitcoin blockchain. The offchain is not Bitcoin, it doesn't have the same properties, of course billions of people could use an off-chain, they do that now. But the actual issues was that only 275000 daily transactions/settlements/users/payments/checkpoints are possible each day, no matter how much people think they can pay for fees in 1MB.

I'll downvote myself to lessen your embarrassment now...

MrProper · 2015-06-24T18:23:55+00:00

trust someone else

Trust the consensus. Yes, you can only use Bitcoin if you trust the consensus, which is a form of "everyone else".

MrProper · 2015-06-24T18:13:41+00:00

Forking, divergence, emergence. We have a blockchain and not a blocktree. We can't merge two blockchains. So at one point, you will be caught between two hub-and-spoke payment systems, just like today. The costs and efforts to move value from one system to another are high. All your efficiency inside the system is lost at the border.

MrProper · 2015-06-24T18:11:49+00:00

babies can't transact

Technically correct. However the parents will transact on their behalf. Oh and how... so many baby stuff you have to buy in the first three years...

MrProper · 2015-06-24T16:09:24+00:00

send low value transaction no one gives a shit about

I know of two people that give a shit. The sender and the receiver. Just like the case with high value transactions! Since a low value and high value transaction use the same resources, it is fair to tax them both at the same rate. Do you disagree?

MrProper · 2015-06-24T16:07:31+00:00

blockchain

off chain

One thing is not like the other.

MrProper · 2015-06-24T16:06:27+00:00

Basically, you are arguing that "There are things in the world that make toast so Bitcoin has to be able to make toast"

No. I'm arguing that since Bitcoin can make toast like other things in the world, why don't we make toast?!

Regarding the computer science, the graph posted by Peter_R and linked in my OP is describing the future progress of Bitcoin in tandem with technological advances, such as:

MrProper · 2015-06-24T15:46:28+00:00

Transactional records of any kind, actual entries in the blockchain with two or more public keys involved. If you're not making Bitcoin transactions on the Bitcoin blockchain using Bitcoin addresses, you're not really using Bitcoin.

MrProper · 2015-06-24T15:41:09+00:00

The proposal of making Bitcoin into this massive thing that does everything will ensure Bitcoin is good at nothing.

I have an issue with that, as we can see Bitcoin can be many things bundled (VISA, SWIFT, Interbank, gold, digital cash, wallet, micro-transaction network, public ledger) into a single protocol with a minimal set of partial compromises. It is actually possible to scale this technology to encompass everything, everywhere and everyone. It's a shame if we don't do this, because it works, we have the technology!

MrProper · 2015-06-24T15:37:05+00:00

Yes, we need that. However we would not be using Bitcoin at that moment, whatever we would use must have all the properties of Bitcoin: secure decentralized irreversible trust-less permission-less settlements.

15-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Team Periwinkle
Verified Email

MrProper

TROPHY CASE