Quote:
Originally Posted by vikthunder
Can you elaborate on this point?
I'm not an ethereum expert by any means, but the concept is similar to bitcoin except, instead of only transmitting transactional data with each block, ethereum also transmits the "state" of the blockchain or the equivalent to the UXTO in bitcoin.
This would mean both systems are distributed, trustless systems because in both cases you could theoretically run full node that validates every TX back to the genesis block.
Ethereum has no centralized database, and there is no trust needed to rebuild the blockchain. The biggest difference, is that you can "fast sync" because every block has the state attached. So if you select a block buried under enough POW, you can grab that state of the network, re-validate all TX between that state and today's state and you are off and running. Or more realistically, do that process backwards: start with today's state and work your way back through the blockchain until you are convinced that you are following a valid chain.
Ethereum Foundation Coin is controlled by the Ethereum Foundation. If they want to roll back a transaction to protect an insider who made a bad investment, they can (and have). Sorry, it's centralized. There is a choke point. What Vitalik says is law, not the code.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cafepoker
Does this all make any sense? I dont even know if I asked this right, I am very confused myself. Just do your best someone! I am trying not to throw money down the drain, and I am not sure I can buy some Alt. Coin low if Bitcoin is high/ vice versa.
Say I want to buy with my Bitcoin 1 Litecoin. The current price of Bitcoin is $2700 per coin.
One Litecoin is currently .02 bitcoin.
------
Next trade on Poloniex; I want to buy 1 Litecoin with my Bitcoin when Bitcoins value is $3000
One litecoin is .05 bitcoin
What if Bitcoin goes up to $3500 and Litecoin is .05?
Is litecoin always ~.50 cents? What if Bitcoin goes up or down?
Prices can always change relative to each other. You would use a unit of account to measure what you consider being up or down. If you use dollars as your unit of account as many do, then you just need to compare how you are doing against the dollar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PNHH
This article is about the (exponentially) increasing amount of energy required to send transactions and keep the infrastructure running:
https://blockgeeks.com/bitcoins-energy-consumption/
What is the counter-argument to the argument that the energy required long term will be completely insane due to the PoW getting harder and harder? Will stuff like SegWit help in this regard?
I'm bullish on btc overall btw. And the question above isn't related to the environmental, but more the economical implications.
Transactions themselves are not expensive for miners. It's including them that is. The PoW gets harder whenever the fees people are willing to pay support them (and the value of Bitcoin does this).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSayer
Yeah except it's total nonsense. Most Bitcoin is minted in China, which is one the worst coal-fired polluters in the world.
Also, neither hydroelectricity or natural gas have excess except in Iceland, which mint a small fraction of all coins. Hydroelectricity is nearly always on demand, as is gas. They tend to be spare capacity that offsets baseload; using them for Bitcoin is just like burning coal.
"Very low footprint" is pure bull****. Bitcoin is the highest energy and CO2 footprint of any payment system/currency by many orders of magnitude.
Most Bitcoin mining in China is done with hydro plants that have no real good use right now. They literally will just pump water up to the top with the excess electricity they otherwise would be using to mine Bitcoin, or just let the water run off and the potential energy go to waste.
The fact that China has a lot of Coal means nothing since that's not where they are mining. Mining companies are contracting with hydro plants to give them an extra revenue source from their powerplants built in distant regions not well connected. Now the hydro plants are doing it themselves and cutting out the middlemen.
Bitcoin's environmental cost only seems high when you completely omit the cost of the legacy system as well. All those bankers and buildings need to exist and have people driving to and from work to support them, etc... Buildings have electricity, etc...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pokerlogist
An encouraging view on Bitcoin improvement coming soon:
"Mike Belshe @mikebelshe Jun 22
Segwit2x's 91% miner support is strongest consensus signal ever for blocksz growth. Hard work is just beginning. https://coin.dance/blocks"
https://twitter.com/mikebelshe/statu...18988616966145
SegWit2x is a cancer, but hopefully it just activates BIP148 and we can ignore it again.