I wasn't confused in that regard, but I still don't understand the 15 year part!
-
-
Regardless, yes, the DA work to keep block times consistent, however we are talking about gamification of token emission which is tied to block time. Still not clear on how this explains using this model to predict future trends so acutely.
-
Point being I have data to back up my claims. That you think that data is somehow invalidated based on scale is a gratuitous assertion which is demonstrably untrue. It’s actually more accurate than a test net.
-
However with hundreds of networks, a handful of DAs, and the experience of BCH splitting we can say absolutely that simpler algos are easier to abuse.
-
I will agree mostly that BCH experience validates some of this thesis your forming. 100s of altcoins operating under the radar of serious long term economic visibility and pressure (while experiencing inflated value due to proximity to a sound asset ie bitcoin) is questionable
-
It’s a thesis for you. I cannot build networks without this level of thinking nor can anyone else.
-
I don't dispute that, I'm questioning it's validity as a game theory maxim. Of course we use heuristics and best practices as we go.
-
Oh the example occurred between November 10 and November 14, 2017. There was no reason to put hash power back on the BTC network except for Jihan to declare himself King of Bitcoin.
-
On 2nd sentence, the complexities involving Jihan's hashpower allocation are subject to tiers of scale that he almost exclusively operates on. Long term political/economic gaming in play, doesn't follow as defined/micro of a ruleset as statements like "hashpower follows $"
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.