Because the DAs are intended to keep block times constant. The simpler the DA, the greater the potential for abuse. Lesson from altcoins. :)
-
-
Not sure I agree with blanket sentiment that a simpler DA = easier abuse, ? that we can use early day altcoininomics as a basis for game theoretic development for mainchain competition.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FluidFluxation @BryceWeiner and
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
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.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'd love to explore your data, and I'm not asserting your data is wrong, nor your thesis. Scale matters because many economic forces don't come into play/prominence until a certain threshold of value/risk is established. Just exploring the chain of logic and seeking clarification
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Yes and no. When it comes to the technical capability of gaming a DA, that’s well known and scales beautifully. There’s no need to summon economic animal spirits and incite them to perform game theory gymnastics. Theory changes as networks mature.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
That's a fair point, but we seem to agree that in this frame, game theory is tiered differently for 1)bitcoin 2)random PoW shitcoin with niche community. If that is core to thesis, the ability to make generalizing predictions on bitcoin seems.. less than satisfying.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Bitcoin doesn’t exist in a bubble and competes in a free market against all SHA256 coins that cannot be merge mined with it, including BCH.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BryceWeiner @FluidFluxation and
There is a drastically reduced penalty for destroying or gaming the BTC chain because BCH exists.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @BryceWeiner @FluidFluxation and
I still haven’t touched my split coins. UTXO comparison reveals many haven’t either.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
I agree with these sentiments and believe that notion. If you have meta analysis on UTXOs and split coins, send it my way. A lot I agree with, and question, in this thread.
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.