• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Bitcoin - Part 3

psionl0 said:
Not as impressive as their record with bitcoin. They have predicted 1000 out of the last 0 end of bitcoin forevers.
Click to expand...

Here is another 0 prediction soundly argued.

"If Bitcoin were to be adopted as a global reserve currency," he speculates, "the Bitcoin price will probably be in the millions, and those miners will have more money than the entire [US] Federal budget to spend on electricity."

"We'd have to double our global energy production," he says with a laugh. "For Bitcoin."

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-56215787

Elon Musk busted.
 
psionl0 said:
I doubt that bitcoin could handle the volume of transactions that fedwire does. (The Ripple network might be an alternative though).
Click to expand...

Ripple isn't a cryptocurrency. It's a centralized block chain that could be taken over or controlled by a single entity.

IMO decentralization is a must to qualify as a cryptocurrency. Otherwise, you may as well continue to use Paypal.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Ripple isn't a cryptocurrency. It's a centralized block chain that could be taken over or controlled by a single entity.
Click to expand...
That isn't my understanding.

Ripple and Stellar are both decentralized networks that require consensus instead of competition to add new transactions to the chain. Although they have their own crypto currencies, their primary purpose is to transfer IOUs across the network. They rely on individuals having access to a "trusted gateway" on the network to work.
 
The software requires exponential power demand.
Winkelvoss bros would be selling now.
I bet they are not dumb.
 
Last edited:
Except quantum computing can mend this unforeseen glitch in the tree that grows to the sky.
Maybe Jack understands.
 
psionl0 said:
That isn't my understanding.

Ripple and Stellar are both decentralized networks that require consensus instead of competition to add new transactions to the chain. Although they have their own crypto currencies, their primary purpose is to transfer IOUs across the network. They rely on individuals having access to a "trusted gateway" on the network to work.
Click to expand...

Their fancy way of putting it is that Ripple uses a distributed consensus ledger using a network of validating servers.

In English it simply means it's a centralized blockchain. Instead of validations across a decentralized network they rely on validations from "their" servers. Like Paypal, a closed system. Which effectively means they can create as many tokens as they want at anytime they wish to sell when they wish.

It's why I never bought into XRP.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Their fancy way of putting it is that Ripple uses a distributed consensus ledger using a network of validating servers.

In English it simply means it's a centralized blockchain. Instead of validations across a decentralized network they rely on validations from "their" servers. Like Paypal, a closed system. Which effectively means they can create as many tokens as they want at anytime they wish to sell when they wish.

It's why I never bought into XRP.
Click to expand...
Don't conflate the crypto with the transfer mechanism (this is the same mistake that many make with bitcoin vs bitcoin exchanges).

It is true that the validating nodes in Ripple form a "private club" which requires a 51% consensus before new nodes can be admitted. OTOH each node in Stellar can take part in the transaction validation process and anyone can run a Stellar node.

The real question is whether transactions can be controlled or blocked. This seems unlikely with Stellar but there was an incident in Ripple where the funds of one of the founders, Jeff McCaleb, were frozen after he left Ripple in 2015.
 
psionl0 said:
Don't conflate the crypto with the transfer mechanism (this is the same mistake that many make with bitcoin vs bitcoin exchanges).

It is true that the validating nodes in Ripple form a "private club" which requires a 51% consensus before new nodes can be admitted. OTOH each node in Stellar can take part in the transaction validation process and anyone can run a Stellar node.

The real question is whether transactions can be controlled or blocked. This seems unlikely with Stellar but there was an incident in Ripple where the funds of one of the founders, Jeff McCaleb, were frozen after he left Ripple in 2015.
Click to expand...

This. To me it has to be decentralized to be a cryptocurrency. I'm well aware others may disagree but in a nutshell, that's my take on it. A centralized blockchain/server group could be taken over by a government agency. Game over for that coin.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
This.
Click to expand...
It is worth noting that Ripple Labs promised that for every new node that was admitted into their validation network, they would remove one. (I don't know how far they have gotten with this).

ChrisBFRPKY said:
A centralized blockchain/server group could be taken over by a government agency. Game over for that coin.
Click to expand...
That's silly. Why would the Ripple nodes vote to give government owned nodes a majority say in the consensus process? (And don't forget that this can't happen with Stellar).

You might as well speculate on the possibility that a government might gain 51% of the bitcoin mining power.
 
Last edited:
psionl0 said:
That's silly. Why would the Ripple nodes vote to give government owned nodes a majority say in the consensus process? (And don't forget that this can't happen with Stellar).

You might as well speculate on the possibility that a government might gain 51% of the bitcoin mining power.
Click to expand...

Because there's only around 835 of them and going against the Federal Government always ends in the same result. "I fought the law and the law won."
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Because there's only around 835 of them and going against the Federal Government always ends in the same result. "I fought the law and the law won."
Click to expand...
The idea that the government would seek to destroy the Ripple network (even if it was constitutional) is pure CT.
 
psionl0 said:
The idea that the government would seek to destroy the Ripple network (even if it was constitutional) is pure CT.
Click to expand...

It's not so much a fear that the government or some other entity will shut down the Ripple network, it's the knowledge that it could be shut down or taken over/edited. For instance, as you already noted above, someone could decide whether your coins/assets would be frozen, without any attack on the network.....That's why I compared it to Paypal, it's just numbers in a centralized ledger. This means individual control. Not something cryptocurrencies are known for.

To a smaller degree there exists some of the same fear about decentralized coins being 51% attacked, but that need not be the case with Ripple. There is no attack required.

Ripple is not for me for the reasons outlined. I know people have certain favorites and to each his own. I suppose Jeff McCaleb could probably explain it better, but there it is.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
It's not so much a fear that the government or some other entity will shut down the Ripple network, it's the knowledge that it could be shut down or taken over/edited.
Click to expand...
By the same token, you could have exactly the same fear about bitcoin. Its ownership is concentrated in relatively few hands so no attack is necessary to mess up its prices (though it's in the interests of the whales not to do so). If there was the motivation to do so, governments around the world could certainly cooperate to shut down bitcoin (at least temporarily). They could commandeer major mining computers and force them to stop adding transactions to the block chain. Of course, that won't happen because cryptocurrency is more useful than brown paper bags for politicians as well as criminals.

Similarly, Ripple Labs isn't going to sabotage Ripple either. Major banks are using Ripple as a cheaper and faster alternative to SWIFT and they wouldn't do that if they had any concerns about the transactions on the Ripple network. Ripple Labs complies fully with KYC laws so there is no problem there either.

The most important technical aspect of Stellar (if you are still scared of Ripple) is that it uses consensus rather than competition to add transactions to the block chain. This uses far less energy than bitcoin and points the way forward for decentralized transactions.
 
Last edited:
psionl0 said:
By the same token, you could have exactly the same fear about bitcoin. Its ownership is concentrated in relatively few hands so no attack is necessary to mess up its prices (though it's in the interests of the whales not to do so). If there was the motivation to do so, governments around the world could certainly cooperate to shut down bitcoin (at least temporarily). They could commandeer major mining computers and force them to stop adding transactions to the block chain. Of course, that won't happen because cryptocurrency is more useful than brown paper bags for politicians as well as criminals.

Similarly, Ripple Labs isn't going to sabotage Ripple either. Major banks are using Ripple as a cheaper and faster alternative to SWIFT and they wouldn't do that if they had any concerns about the transactions on the Ripple network. Ripple Labs complies fully with KYC laws so there is no problem there either.

The most important technical aspect of Stellar (if you are still scared of Ripple) is that it uses consensus rather than competition to add transactions to the block chain. This uses far less energy than bitcoin and points the way forward for decentralized transactions.
Click to expand...

I've traded Stellar. I moved out of it after the first major move up, I think it was from the .08 to the .15 cent range. Likely as with ADA, I missed out on further profits. I don't mind so much as I achieved my set goal with the ADA, but FIVE-MILLION-DOLLARS in lost gains has bothered me a bit.

Sometimes my stubborn trade rules kinda suck, but they have kept me winning as long as I don't break them.
 
Another new high for Bitcoin. Currently trading at $60,218.00

Psionl0, is your trigger finger itching yet? Or will you continue to hold all BTC?


added info: Well that didn't last long. An hour or so later Bitcoin blew past $61K and now testing $62K, currently trading at $61,778
 
Last edited:
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Ripple isn't a cryptocurrency. It's a centralized block chain that could be taken over or controlled by a single entity.

IMO decentralization is a must to qualify as a cryptocurrency. Otherwise, you may as well continue to use Paypal.
Click to expand...

Wikipedia refers to xrp as a cryptocurrency, for whatever that's worth. As does Investopedia.
 
Last edited:
psionl0 on 20th December 2020 said:
If you can afford to gamble then "buy and hold" is a reasonable consideration. Also, buy and sell at 2 or 3 times your purchase price has a reasonable chance of succeeding.
Click to expand...
psionl0 on 8th January 2021 said:
First hurdle: check. Conservative speculators (including those who bought 3 years ago) may sell here.
Click to expand...
Second hurdle: check. Greedy people have been rewarded for their patience. If you bought in at $20K then you can now triple your money.

I was going to suggest $100K as a final mile stone for the truly reckless but this bubble isn't as steep as the previous one so the legendary peak bubble price to pre-bubble price ratio of 20:1 will probably not hold.

Hodling is still the sound investment strategy it always has been but you could cash out now and wait for the crash then buy back in if you wish.
 
psionl0 said:
Second hurdle: check. Greedy people have been rewarded for their patience. If you bought in at $20K then you can now triple your money.

I was going to suggest $100K as a final mile stone for the truly reckless but this bubble isn't as steep as the previous one so the legendary peak bubble price to pre-bubble price ratio of 20:1 will probably not hold.

Hodling is still the sound investment strategy it always has been but you could cash out now and wait for the crash then buy back in if you wish.
Click to expand...
You were right.

50% rule. When it hit my pie in the sky magic number, I sold 50% and still held the other 50% in case my number was conservative. In this case it was.

We're in uncharted waters. I've rescinded my 2nd magic number. I now think $100K is conservative.

If I'm wrong and the bubble bursts early I'll buy back my sold coins at a discount. To me the best plan is to make money whether BTC goes up or down. By holding all, one is limited to only profit from a sustained increase. At some point taking some profit is not only smart but a sound investment/trading strategy considering past bubbles.

Likewise, I will never sell all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom