pull down to refresh
150 sats \ 2 replies \ @CruncherDefi 7 Nov \ on: Fake L2 scams like Ark, Spark, Citrea, Drivechains, and others are Shitcoins 2.0 bitcoin
The same as with lightning. In lightning you don't open/close channel every transaction.
I don't get you FUD on ARK. It's a legitimate method of scaling that complements LN very elegantly.
Imagine social graph of users transacting. LN is good for creating highways in this graph - ideally between huge clusters/cliques of users. ARK is good for connecting users in those cliques. LN/Ark are scaling in different dimension and we need both for proper bitcoin scaling.
Every money is a bubble. And what 'normies' consider money is just a biggest bubble that doesn't burst.
and they contract the supply in response to purchasing power being too low
Yeaaah, not so sure about that one. Why contract the supply if instead you could try some creative bookkeeping?
Yes, but only if robot work in offline mode. Ideally with open source software that I can play with myself.
I could point at the the flaws in your thinking here and there but it would probably result in back and forth discussion that I don't want to waste my time on.
So here is different take - how good are your 'rationalizations' when each individual is better off choosing fixed-supply money like bitcoin over inflating-supply money like dollar? System that requires most/all individuals to act against their own interest is bound to not be stable.
Your whining here won't change the fact that increasing amount of individuals each year is choosing fixed-supply money over inflating-supply-money. There is nothing you can do about it.
Or just they optimized their model for 'user engagement' too much.
Their models always had different hooks for further conversation. Perhaps this objective was optimized too heavily in the training.
I noticed this pattern recently a lot
Me: Solve problem X
ChatGPT: I did Y, would you me to also do Z (which Z is obviously the reasonable thing to do in the first place as part of solution to X)
Me: Don't ask me. Just do complete the task and Z is part of solution.
What does it mean that 'water is consumed'? Is it getting vented into space? Or do they use fusion reactor for AI that converts water particles into other particles?
Water cycles in the ecosystem. And its okay. When water evaporates in the process of cooling it goes back into ecosystem.
While reading a bible is a powerful think that could help us (as it was long-developed over thousands of years and it encapsulates a lot of cultural knowledge/archetypes in it), why would you claim that some human-invented idea like God is a refuge and strength? What does it even mean?
0 seconds. Time lock strictly decrease security.
If there is security slip-up at any time, with timelock I cannot immediately migrate my UTXOs. So adversaries have some guaranteed time window to figure out and exploit the security slip-up.
The only (afaik) reasonable use-case for timelocking is having additional time-locked spend-condition for inheritance/recovery. But still main spend-condition is not time-locked in that scenario.
what incentive do (major) governments have to adapt Bitcoin as their currency
Related question would be "What incentive do (major) governments have to obey the democratic decisions?".
Assuming that most individuals chose bitcoin, the answer to both is "Because that's what individuals want, and if you go against their choice, you are out."
Why does the Dust limit filter work so well?
Because this filters is aligned with the actual logic the miners use to decide "What to include in the block".
Are you fucking kidding me? The most important commodity that takes part in the all the transactions (money) is centrally planned. How could you possibly call the market 'free' in that scenario?
It could be good for humanity to popularize some kind of sovereign kill-switch software. Something you install on your PC (so you don't need to trust some 3rd party) that would send an email to press/friends/social_media (with secret data you held because of threats) after few days inactivity.
If Kirk knew his at a risk of assassination, he could put all the threats/proofs in the kill-switch-message effectively punishing the assassinators post-mortem.
If every high-profile person did that, every government would think twice before taking down someone.
The question in the title is incorrect. It should have been "Why are so many young people getting diagnosed cancer?"
We don't have access to underlying true data. We only have access to proxy observable data.
From utilitarian perspective priority pass is easily worth it. If you calculate how much does it cost to spend one hour in the park, and then calculate how many hours you spent in lines, it easily pays off to take priority pass.
I agree that fiat-denominated fees have are not as low as btc-denominated fees. See the second chart in the OP.
When it comes to miners who have fiat-denominated expenses, this argument may make sense (...)
(...) affected by the change in exchange rates, and so it seems to me that they are moot.
That's why I explicitly mentioned 'value' and differentiated it from 'price'. Your points seem to focus on 'price'. My whole reasoning focuses on 'value'.
A metaphor could be Mass vs Weight. Mass is inherent property of a body. Weight is a measurement you get using something else. And on different planet you will get different weights, while mass stays the same. Similarly, if you use different denominating assets (like dollar, euro, eggs or 1 kg of beef) you will also get different prices.
Value is like mass - it's an inherent property of an asset. Price is like a weight - it's a relative measurement when you express value of an asset denominated in a value of other asset (UsdBitcoinPrice == ValueOfBitcoinUnit / ValueOfDollarUnit).
My claim is that not only 'price' of bitcoin increased, but also 'value' of bitcoin increased. And it's obvious why is that the case - adoption is bigger, there are more use-cases, the track record is longer - those increase the inherent value of bitcoin unit.
Hope that clear things up. Todays sats have more value than 2011 sats, so we need to pay less of them for the same thing.
AAAAAAA it annoys me so much: why anyone in those discussion ignores that fact that bitcoin gets more valuable with time? It makes those discussion so intellectually dishonest.
"Average mining fees per day have dropped to lowest levels since 2011"
NO! Bitcoin get over 100x more valuable since 2011. So NO, the average mining fees are NOT the lowest when you consider value. It makes sense that mining fee go down when denominated in bitcoin.
Note that I am not talking about fiat price of bitcoin (price != value). I am talking about value (so value accrued by network regardless of any denominator you might use to measure it). When talking about FIAT everyone here remembers that 'fiat gets less valueable over time' in their reasoning. But when it comes to bitcoin everyone seems to forget that 'bitcoin gets more valuable over time'.
My question is: if the fee market settles around 0.4 sats/vB, might that imply that for some of the last few years, Bitcoiners were paying artificially inflated prices to get their transactions confirmed?
No. The more adoption bitcoin have and the more value is being stored in the network, the more each sat is worth. Therefore todays 0.4 sat/vb is like 40 sat/vb in 2011.
Literally no reason to ever do that.
If Bitcoin reaches $1M
Bitcoin network doesnt know its dollar price. So it means you are trusting some oracle.
Also timelocking for "I don't want access my bitcoin for a time" is really dump. If you security gets compromised you cant immediately migrate your UTXOs. Hackers have all the time to figure out your keys/passwords and will be ready for the time timelock is off.