Re: Nine of the World’s Biggest Banks Form Blockchain Partnership

On 19 September 2015 at 02:52, Adam Lake <creatinglake@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the reply Greg. Its interesting to know that crytocurrencies
> don't need to consume a lot of energy--that is a plus. I don't know how you
> can prevent a cryptocurency to not overcompensate early adopters though and
> this would create inequality right?
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/03/03/forget-the-1-percent-in-the-bitcoin-world-half-the-wealth-belongs-to-the-0-1-percent/
>

If people know how money is created, they tend not to trust it.  So the
emission algorithm has to be both confusing and fair.  Quite hard to strike
that balance and still have a currency worth anything ...


>
> I like the cryptocurrency where they were trying to distribute the
> currency equally to all Icelandic citizens at once. Its a tricky issue. I
> still assert that while I think distributed technologies are wonderful, we
> need a political revolution that results in distributed power through
> direct democracy. If political power is distributed, then a government
> could institute a cryptocurrency nationwide.
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com> wrote:
>
>> Cryptocurrencies come in all sorts of shapes and sizes.
>>
>> From what I can tell the overcompensate early adopters, creating
>> inequality, take a lot of energy, and are non-dymanic in that the
>> underlying algorithm can not be changed.
>>
>>
>> This is true of some cryptocurrencies and not of others.
>>
>> No, cryptocurrencies do not “overcompensate early adopters”, certainly
>> not any more than any other currency, crypto or not.
>>
>> Unlike fiat, cryptocurrencies make it possible to design “fair”
>> distributions, in whatever terms you consider “fair” to be.
>>
>> Cryptocurrencies do not create any more inequality than any other
>> currency, and they are actually far better suited to addressing inequality
>> because of their security and transparency properties.
>>
>> Cryptocurrencies do not take a lot of energy, certainly not more than
>> fiat. This is for several reasons:
>>
>> 1. Cryptocurrencies can use very different consensus algorithms, some
>> that do not rely on energy usage for example.
>>
>> 2. Even those that use energy to secure themselves, like Bitcoin, do not
>> take up a significant amount of energy when compared to the energy
>> expenditures of existing currencies like dollars (which cost a lot of
>> energy and *time* to create, transfer, store, etc.).
>>
>> Finally, your last assertion is also false, the underlying algorithm can
>> be changed, as demonstrated by such cryptocurrencies/blockchains as Tezos.
>>
>> What benefit do the crypotocurrencies provide?
>>
>>
>> They make it possible to keep track of the currency, for one. You can
>> address problems like $2.4 trillion just “disappearing” (search that number
>> along with Pentagon for details).
>>
>> They get rid of middlemen and thereby give people actual ownership of
>> their money.
>>
>> You don’t own your money today (unless you’ve cashed out your bank
>> account and are hiding bills under your mattress), your bank owns it.
>>
>> There are many many many other benefits to cryptocurrencies, and they
>> should become immediately apparently upon study.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Greg Slepak
>>
>> --
>> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with
>> the NSA.
>>
>> On Sep 17, 2015, at 6:19 AM, Adam Lake <creatinglake@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> What benefit do the crypotocurrencies provide? From what I can tell the
>> overcompensate early adopters, creating inequality, take a lot of energy,
>> and are non-dymanic in that the underlying algorithm can not be changed. It
>> seems to me that without a democratic political revolution this is moot,
>> and with a democratic political revolution this is also moot. Whats the
>> point?
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Timothy Holborn <
>> timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes. However by using crypto as the trust agent, the method is likely to
>>> consume ever inceasing amounts of energy over time to maintain.
>>>
>>> Is there a solution for the 51% issue?
>>>
>>> On 02:04, Thu, 17/09/2015 Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, David Nicol <davidnicol@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> And they called "blockchain technology" it what it is -- a ledger.
>>>>> Good!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, the ledger is the key.
>>>>
>>>> A block chain is actually a singly linked list.  Typically blocks
>>>> contain transactions, which when added up form a ledger.
>>>>
>>>> In a centralized ledger system, you have central authorities saying who
>>>> has what.  e.g. National currencies, equities, gift cards.
>>>>
>>>> In a distributed ledger system, you have a consensus protocol and
>>>> actors saying who has what.  e.g.. bitcoin, ripple, alts
>>>>
>>>> In a decentralized ledger system, there is no central authority saying
>>>> who has what, but transactions are possible between ledgers based on
>>>> mutually beneficial rules.  e.g. linked data, the web
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Melvin Carvalho <
>>>>> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Crypto currencies just went mainstream ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://recode.net/2015/09/15/nine-of-the-worlds-biggest-banks-form-blockchain-partnership/
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Adam Lake
>> 540-585-4444
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Adam Lake
> 540-585-4444
>