/biz/ - Business & Finance

enjoy the gas prices
bitcoin would be perfect if you actually gave a fuck and used lighting network

>>24481069

>>24481123
looks likeyou havent been keeping up woth advances pertaining to gas fees. heres a start for ya, tsigs, arbitrum, etcetc. btc is great for storage of wealth tho, lighteninf network has failed to work so far and its been years.

>>24481069
Well if a guy on twitter said it, I guess I have no choice but to entrust my entire financial wellbeing in his hands and follow his directives without question. Thanks anon!

>>24481069
One is an alternative to a fiat debt-money system that eats away our savings and prosperity.

The other is an inefficient rube goldberg version of a relational database, just confusing enough to lure midwits in and keep regulators puzzled for a while.

>>24481069
>tyler.smith.eth
assassin contracts when

>>24481069
wow this is huge

>>24481069
Bitcoin is a store of value its not for payments

that's it suckers. If you don't want to sell now, you will sell when the shit will hit the fan

>>24481123
Lightning network failed. This was apparent in 2017.

Eth already has zk roll ups, plasma, and will soon have optimistic roll ups. People just need the incentive to start using them. My guess is within 6 months most traffic is on roll ups. Loopring, UNI and others are coming up with things to get most tx on layer 2.

There is more btc on eth than lightning network. Let that sink in brainlet.

>>24481903
1/ Bitcoin it´s slow, expensive, not private and easy to manipualte. It has too many potential pitfalls to fall down. For example;

>Miner regulation. The location of every bitcoin miner can be found and these miners will eventually be regulated by the government. There are articles on why this is likely.

>Coin distribution. Satoshi, his friends and early adopters hold a massive stack. More than 10% of the entire supply. If satoshi or any of the earliest adopters chose to sell, the market would panic and crash. Because of loss in confidence. Combine this with institutions holding more and more, further centralizing coin distribution.

>A lack of usecase. Bitcoin has too few usecases to rest on and fall back on. Speculation/gambling is by far the biggest usecase. When this usecase loses momentum and dies down, it has no attractive usecases to fall back on. A crypto should have as many usecases as possible. Broad usecases are a force against centralization and manipualtion. Almost every system trends towards centralization, and this will likely happen with bitcoin as well, because it doesn´t offer enough usecases.

>Undercutting and selfish mining problems when there is no block rewards. There is a good research paper written on this by Princeton university. Undercutting and selfish mining might become a big problem, and definitely more likely without block rewards.

>>24481903
2/ >Coins being lost forever. 4 million coins are alreadt estimated to be lost, and this number increases with thousands of bitcoin every week. In the end, there will be very few, if not any bitcoin left in circulation. This ties together with the lack of usecases problem. When eventually a large portion of the supply is lost or locked up in funds, liquidity will drastically decrease. Bad liquidity is very bad for speculation, which is the main usecase of bitcoin. Price will likely be even easier to manipulate and more volatile, not less, as some people like to claim. In the very long term, there is likely to be zero bitcoins left in circulation, rendering the network useless.

>Competitive cryptos offering more value: Other cryptos innovate at a much faster rate than bitcoin, so these other coins will grap more attention and hype in the future than bitcoin does. This will drive speculation and money into other cryptos, and drive money and speculation (BTC main usecase) away from bitcoin.

>Off chain transactions: More and more transactions will likely take place outside of the bitcoin blockchain, because of wrapped btc and such. The possibility to transact a wrapped bitcoin on another blockchain will drive traffic away from the bitcoin blockchain and miner revenue will decrease, and therefore the security of the network. Transaction fees will over time trend towards zero, which will lead to whoever uses the bitcoin blockchain is paying for the security for the rest of the network, leading to even more off chain transactions, and increasing the likelyness of undercutting.

>>24481903
3/
Bitcoin doesn´t have enough usecases to anchor a wide variety of different players using the coin for different things. This will lead to centralization and manipulation, and it will never become a robust currency. Other cryptos will grab the attention and the hype in the future, taking that away from bitcoin. Bitcoin has not proven to be a good store of value or a good currency. It needs more usecases, but other cryptos can offer much more value in the future. Conclusion; bitcoin will eventually go to zero given a long enough time frame. In 100 years, most of the supply will be lost forever, and liquidity wil be low. Each satoshi needs to be worth a lot of money, which proves that it´s not an robust currency if it relies on this factor to succeed. Lightning network also intoduces another mix of problems that I won´t delve into here.

On the Instability of Bitcoin Without the Block Reward

https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~arvindn/publications/mining_CCS.pdf

economics of “proof-of work” in cryptocurrencies

https://www.bis.org/publ/work765.pdf

https://medium.com/block-digest-mempool/things-bitcoiners-dont-want-to-hear-33823c2e984

https://bankless.substack.com/p/btcs-monetary-policy-is-overrated

>>24481811
All bitcoin does is waste wealth on mining. To make a profit on bitcoin you have to scam someone into buying it from you higher. That person is then in the same situation. Bitcoin doesn't generate any wealth, it destroys it. This means any individual profit must come from someone else's loss.
It's a financial trap for the masses on par with payday loans, just more obfuscated.

Ethereum is going to be the global financial platform of the future and eth is a share in it. Staking is going to generate income, making it a positive yield allodial asset - the only one of its kind, as only governments are able to hold allodial titles to other positive yield assets today. You are free to stay away, it doesn't need you.

god this shit gets my dick hard. I hope 242 Ethereum is enough to make it in the future to come

>>24481917
>>24481985
>>24482017
>>24482041
Now this is glowing.

>>24482017

When bitcoin supply dries up like you say exchanges will just repackage bitcoin into satoshis. You wont be trading bitcoin on exchanges but satoshis. Obviously it is the same thing but instead of buying 0.00000000001 bitcoin you will buy 1 satoshi.

>>24481917
My hands are welded on btc. The marketplace of currency ideas only has room for 4 currencies in the current market; BTC, ETH, Gold, and Norweigan Krones. RNB and USD are dooooomping all the way to the bottom.

Thanks I just sold all of it

>>24481985
>>24482017
>>24482041
COPE more

>>24482229
The guy is utterly clueless. When it comes to a sound and secure store of value, less is more. We are still so so early early here.

>>24481069
*launches eth2 with no features*
baste scammers

USDC isn't only on ethereum

Iykyk ;;;)))

>>24482835
If this is cope then it is some of the most well thought out and articulated "cope" I've ever read Mr. Sneeder.

FUCKING SEND IT

>>24482278
What does norwegian pastries have to do with money

>>24481123
>perfect
>allowing literally every kike in the world to see every single satoshis movement since it was created
No.

>>24483007
If you arent all in bitcoin then you dont understand bitcoin

gonna buy some bitcoin on the dip soon, is this a good idea?

Chainlink bitches

>>24482041
muh not enough usecases.

https://coin.dance/#summary

thinking BTC will survive two more halvings...NGMI

>>24481123
is litecoin still good?it uses lighting network?

>>24481123
>enjoy the gas prices
tried sending any btc in the last week?

>>24481069
Wow this news really helped pump eth. Look at the 2 percent dump

>>24483115
Correct, I don't know much about losing all of my money or watching it evaporate from 20k down to 3k and then take 3 years to recover. Have fun

>>24481069
> https://decrypt.co/45751/solana-ethereum-usdc-stablecoin-defi
USDC will be used on Solana for maximum scalability and efficiency in cost

>>24482043
There is no other way, than to provably "waste" energy. Every system is proof of work. The only difference is that Bitcoin is the most formal one. Meaning, that the cost of the work performed to secure the system is almost 100% the cost of the value of the system (difficulty adjustment).

Prove of stake devolves into an informal, implicit prove of work. This can be proven logically.

The legacy fiat system is also prove of work, whereby the "miners" have to secure the system by maintaining military might and occasionally project its destructive power somewhere onto the globe. This is the most wasteful and least formal system.

>>24481917
>>24481985
>>24482017
>>24482041
go back to twitter, noob. ethereum is premined meaning you are trusting that everyone involved in the pre-sale was a good little communist and didn't anonymously buy 50% of the 70% supply that was premined. Eth is also inflationary at the moment (and the fact that the inflation rate can be changed on the whims of the devs is evidence of how centralized it is) btc is unironically digital gold. In the real world (not whatever corner of the internet you came crawling out of) nobody gives a fuck about smart contracts or web3 or whatever the fuck, they care about preserving their wealth in a time of rampant quantitative easing.

>>24483412
wrong, and it's trivial to prove: asymmetric cryptography requires exponentially more resources to break than it needs to work.
Proof of stake is like that, it's asymmetric in expenses, it requires enormous capital to attack but is cheap to defend.
Proof of work is very primitive, it's a digital reenaction of primitive warfare where cavemen just fucked each other with clubs and stones without any formations and fortifications

>>24481917
Any good invention will have fanatics swarming around it

>>24481123
LN is trash. Three years of promising and what we have is a unsafe network where any hacker can take your money away.

>>24481373
>Forbes
>a guy on crypto

>>24481373
retard

>>24483569
Wrong. The problem with prove of stake is a similar problem every mathematical system has: it cannot be from itself be proven to be correct (Gödel's Incompleteness theorem).

You have to rely on outside input (at the very least a random number) to determine the winner of the current stake run.

The question is, who provides this random number and how do you consent on what the random number was?

If it was possible to inter-subjectivley agree on the state of a system, for example who the winner of the curren stake run is, then we wouldn't even need a blockchain to begin with. We would use that magic method to simply agree on the current state.

But it's not possible. You have to take that outside input and the only way to guarantee that the outside input (the random number that decides who wins the stake) is actually random, is to make it so costly to fake, that you lose resources more likely than you win the stake. And that is called prove of work. The guarantee is not mathematical, it is economic. Because there cannot be a mathematical guarantee.

>>24483852
>to determine the winner of the current stake run.
what do you mean by the winner of the stake run? Every single validator signs every epoch in ethereum.

>>24483852
>who provides this random number and how do you consent on what the random number was?
Chainlink.

>>24483898
Ignore him. He's an actual retard.

>>24483439
This is the ETH/BTC ratio. don't forget to look at it from time to time and think about the fact that you could have saved your savings if you had spent some time informing yourself.
BTC is not gold. PoW is flawed. ETH is a better store of value it's only a matter of time before Bitcoin collapses and Ethereum acquires its market cap.

>>24483439
This is the issuance of Bitcoin and Ethereum compared. Your gold meme is going to end soon. After EIP1559 and phase 1.5 the issuance of Ether will be even lower, it will be negative

>>24484002
Applying the same thinking, ETH is a cripple coin that has a need for constant upgrades in order to work.

A coin like AVAX will eventually acquire both BTC and ETH marketcaps

>>24483898
>what do you mean by the winner of the stake run? Every single validator signs every epoch in ethereum.

You have the system at state 0. People make transactions which might be in conflict with each other (for example someone tries to doublespend).

Now it has to be decided on which new state becomes state 1.

A validator might try to sign a state that allows the double spend (for example, because it benefits him).

Now you say, but that is costly to him. Violation of the consenus rules makes him lose his stake-collateral.

Okay, cool. But he also can sign state 2, in which state 1 is valid AND he still has the stake-collateral.

Not so fast, because the rest of the validators wouldn't allow that. They would sign the "correct" state 1 AND state 2 with the appropriate punishment for the dishonest validator.

But, of course, the dishonest validator has a plan for that. He also signs state 3, which validates state 1 with the double spend, state 2 with his collateral intact and state 3 again with the double spend and his collateral intact.

Then the rest sign state 4.. etc. You get the idea.

In the end, the game is the same as before: who can perform more cryptographic functions the fastest. Except, now you introduced a whole bunch of complexity and also network-latency dependency. Both very centralizing factors. There is a reason why sha256 is so simple and the bitcoin blocktime is 10 minutes.

>>24484002
yea the ratio will continue to perpetually bleed from its ATH, nice line chart though noob. PoS will make eth even more centralized, and the security of PoS is not comparable to PoW whatsoever.

>>24484177

>>24484145
You quoted me but responded ignoring it.
Finalization requires at least 2/3 of active stakers to sign that state. One validator can't do anything. 2/3+ of validators would sign a state that slashes him and that would be it.
>who can perform more cryptographic functions the fastest
maybe it's time to realize that things changed a lot since peercoin huh

>>24484145
Not fooling anyone, retard

Only fooling yourself into thinking you're smart

>>24484295
>Finalization requires at least 2/3 of active stakers to sign that state. One validator can't do anything. 2/3+ of validators would sign a state that slashes him and that would be it.
Who guarantees that the different stakers are actually different entities? A 2/3rd majority means nothing, if 4/5ths of the stakers are actually the same entity.

>>24484177
Your brain is totally flipped. If you want to know what centralization is, look at this graph that shows that more than 80% of hashing power is from a cartel of chinese miners

>>24484177
Now look at this and look how this is decentralized. ETH 2.0 will be glorious and you will lose the ship

>>24484450

>>24484369
Nothing, but in the case of a 2/3+ attack the solution is to coordinate a fork that would then slash the attacker, which means the cost of any attack would be orders of magnitude higher than any PoW attack.
There are plans to make censorship detection automatic based on online consensus algorithms (ie. it's assumed that nodes can see all messages send). As a result, ethereum would have standard 2/3 asynchronous bft consensus security (that allows for network fragmentation, nodes going offline) and over 99% online security, which in practical terms would make any attack an impossibility

https://vitalik.ca/general/2018/08/07/99_fault_tolerant.html

>>24484498
Which is all totally not obfuscated proof of work.

>>24481123
>putting your money into a third party nostro vostro account

>>24484542
lmao yes I'm sure all those raspberry pis used for staking eth are really asics in disguise

>>24484842
An asic in this context would be a big ass server running thousands of virtual machines posing as individual stakers.

>>24484897
there's no 'posing' one validator = 32 eth. As long as 100% of staked eth isn't owned by one person the system works assuming profit maximizing actors

>>24484450
people can make more than one address, this doesn't prove anything, and those are btc mining pools, not individual miners. Since eth was premined distribution is most likely far more centralized than btc, I'm not really talking about mining centralization, but PoS will further centralize distribution.

>>24484954
>As long as 100% of staked eth isn't owned by one person the system works assuming profit maximizing actors
Doubt. Any maths paper on this one? It's for sure also not secure, if it's 99:1. Dealing with these probability is tricky and unintuitive. You might be surprised how low the concentration would have to be, to overtake the network. Same goes for Bitcoin, btw. For a "51%" attack, you need much less than 51% of the hash-rate.

>>24483439
>resorting to old DAO and cryptokitties FUD
kek
if the BTC community spent more time on L2 solutions instead of circlejerking maybe ETH wouldn't have gotten so big

DIDNT READ NOT SELLING

>>24485082
>Doubt. Any maths paper on this one? It's for sure also not secure, if it's 99:1.
that's just for automatic system, smaller numbers would require manual intervention, as humans can always tell (if they can't, then nothing happened).
There's no point discussing this as it's obvious eth is much more distributed, the single biggest holder is likely grayscale (and then, it's owned by proxy by many shareholders) with 2.7M eth

>>24483076
Ethereum is even worse for privacy

>>24485385
>the single biggest holder is likely grayscale
I'd have said it's the Ethereum Foundation, i.e. Vitalik.

I'm wishing you and all other mETH-heads the best of luck. And I actually think Ethereum will pump in the parabolic part of the bullmarket.

But, the reality is: Proof of Stake is a mathematical impossibility.

And here's the kicker: If it actually would work, you'd be fucked too.

Imagine a ponzi like the PlusToken-ponzi, but even bigger. In a PoS system, these criminals now have partly control over the system forever. In a PoW system, even if someone criminally obtains hash-rate, he continuously has to put in energy and cover cost. So even if PoS works, which it doesn't, it wouldn't actually do what you want it to do.

And even if it works, and even if you could magically exclude all the ponzi-lords and central-bank-chiefs (kings of ponzis) from participating in the system, you're still fucked in the long run.

Because: Liquidity begets Liquidity. If after N years of Ethereum running successfully as a PoS system, who's keeping anybody from airdropping the Bitcoin UTXO set onto a PoS system of its own? This Damocles sword alone guarantees, that the second largest crypto will forever stay, the second largest crypto, by a large margin. If the second largest crypto actually did something worthwhile, it will get adopted and then liquidity wins.

>>24485700
Eth is the single most liquid crypto just because of uniswap and sushiswap.
https://info.uniswap.org/token/0xc02aaa39b223fe8d0a0e5c4f27ead9083c756cc2
https://sushiswap.vision/token/0xc02aaa39b223fe8d0a0e5c4f27ead9083c756cc2
There's $728M of liquidity on dollar pairs. Funnily enough it means the highest btc-usd liquidity has to go through eth pairs.

Not a single adoption metric remains where ethereum doesn't dominate over bitcoin. Total fees. Daily transactions. Total value transferred. Liquidity. Even node count.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/ethereum-set-to-become-first-blockchain-to-settle-1-trillion-in-one-year

More importantly liquidity isn't that important, as evidenced by the fact that eth has become the most liquid coin in a very short time. That's because liquidity has no network effects by itself. It's a purely linear effect. Eth has now the best liquidity because of its network effects elsewhere (users, dapps, developers).

>>24485897
This is simply misinformation.

A "node" in Ethereum is not the same as a node in Bitcoin. An Ethereum node of which Ethereum supposedly has more of, is what is a simple SPV wallet in Bitcoin, i.e. almost every bitcoin wallet in existence, except for Bitcoin-Qt or people who run Electrum against their own Electrum-server. In that metric, Bitcoin has multiples more "nodes" than Ethereum.

Are you serious about the liquidity? I can't tell if you're joking or not...

>>24483318
>Wow this news really helped pump eth. Look at the 2 percent dump
Since when has news immediately pumped any coin?

>>24481069
if you still got more eth than btc by now you deserve it, stop doing those cancerous shills for newfags

>>24481903
it's both, you fucking retard
it doesn't matter if it's slow

>>24486109
>A "node" in Ethereum is not the same as a node in Bitcoin
it's the same thing.
>An Ethereum node of which Ethereum supposedly has more of, is what is a simple SPV wallet in Bitcoin, i.e. almost every bitcoin wallet in existence
wrong, it's called a light node.
>Are you serious about the liquidity? I can't tell if you're joking or not...
it's objectively true and I showed proof.

It's really amazing how disconnected from reality btc holders are. It's like time stopped in 2013.

>>24486542
>it's the same thing.
No, it's not. A node in Bitcoin validates the whole transaction history since the genesis block. A node in Ethereum fast syncs the current system state, i.e. it is what is a SPV wallet in Bitcoin.

> it's objectively true and I showed proof.
The btc/usd volume on one of the larger exchanges alone is bigger than what you posted.

>>24486752
>A node in Bitcoin validates the whole transaction history since the genesis block
False, there's a hardcoded hash of relatively recent block in bitcoin core and transactions before it aren't validated. It's valled assumevalid.
>A node in Ethereum fast syncs the current system state, i.e. it is what is a SPV wallet in Bitcoin.
This is also wrong, because spv wallet relies on trust in bitcoin as there's no way to confirm that coins weren't spent later. In ethereum state hash is part of the consensus, which means falsifying the state would require a 51% attack.
>The btc/usd volume on one of the larger exchanges alone is bigger than what you posted.
Liquidity isn't volume. I can buy $100M worth of eth for dollars in an instant and the price is going to move only by about 19% (uniswap+sushiswap).

>>24487011
>False, there's a hardcoded hash of relatively recent block in bitcoin core and transactions before it aren't validated. It's valled assumevalid.
True. But you can validate the whole blockchain even on a cheap computer.

> In ethereum state hash is part of the consensus, which means falsifying the state would require a 51% attack.
This means the system is constantly 51%ing itself. You're basically trusting the latest state you get presented with and you can't validate it yourself. Unless of course you're running a fully archiving node, which you aren't.

>> I can buy $100M worth of eth for dollars in an instant and the price is going to move only by about 19% (uniswap+sushiswap).
> only 19%.
Saylor bought $500M with no price movement, granted spread out over days, but still.
Also, doubt you can actually do that.

>>24487163
>But you can validate the whole blockchain even on a cheap computer.
Same for ethereum. I have a node on a pc from 2015 and validating one day right now takes about 15 minutes (~100M gas/s), but gas use is the highest ever. 5 years of current usage would require about 20 days, but as usage was much lower, validating the entire blockchain should take between one and two weeks.
Last time I did a full validation was in early 2018 and it took 2 days
>You're basically trusting the latest state you get presented with and you can't validate it yourself. Unless of course you're running a fully archiving node, which you aren't
This is completely separate, state hash is only used during the syncing process. After that node switches to full validation.
Archival node keeps obsolete states, bitcoin core doesn't have an archival mode at all.
Light node only downloads headers and it takes very little space, but that mode isn't used much, as people who don't need a full node are usually happy with a fully remote node like infura