... which makes no sense. You cannot have a secure blockchains unless you have a lot of processing power verifying it - and no one will invest in processing power unless there's an incentive for doing so. That incentive, for the most secure blockchain that exists (processing power surpassing _all_ computers in the top 500 super computing list) is called "bitcoin".
Banks cooperating on a blockchain is equivalent to them agreeing on using the same database.
Or in geek terms: If you want to solve the Byzantine Generals' problem you need a blockchain with incentives. If you do not want to solve the Byzantine Generals' problem you can just as well use MySQL.
natural warming doesn't happen on such a short time-scale.
It most certainly does.
Until a few decades ago it was generally thought that all large-scale global and regional climate changes occurred gradually over a timescale of many centuries or millennia, scarcely perceptible during a human lifetime. The tendency of climate to change relatively suddenly has been one of the most suprising outcomes of the study of earth history, specifically the last 150,000 years (e.g., Taylor et al., 1993). Some and possibly most large climate changes (involving, for example, a regional change in mean annual temperature of several degrees celsius) occurred at most on a timescale of a few centuries, sometimes decades, and perhaps even just a few years. The decadal-timescale transitions would presumably have been quite noticeable to humans living at such times, and may have created difficulties or opportunities (e.g., the possibility of crossing exposed land bridges, before sea level could rise)
Calculations of possible future worth of bitcoin are indeed based in "normal rules of money".
If X of something (illegal drugs, remittance) is done through Bitcoin (because lower fees, pseudonomity, whatever the reasons) then the value of the total Bitcoin network must be able to handle Y size economic transfers. Since there's a finite number of bitcoin at any point in time that means the valuation of a bitcoin needs to be Z.
The "only" thing you need to guess is the likelihood of X happening for a reasonable prediction of Z. At some point in time.
If multiple parties distribute the block-chain, how do you protect it from validation unless mining is an arms race?... and the incentive for an arms race will be a token of value. It doesn't need to be named a "coin", but will in effect be one.
(PoS etc are nice theories but we're back to the equivalent of a regular database in effect)
There's no added security in that scenario compared to a regular database. That is, they must contractually agree not to try to outmine (thus risk a rogue bank doing double spends) each other. From that follows they cannot be sure that an external actor won't outmine them unless they keep the blockchain secret. From that follows...
A blockchain cannot function without verification ("mining"). There needs to be incentives for "mining" to occur. Those tokens of incentives don't need to be called "coins" - but they must have some sort of value.
Thus, for any blockchain to be successful it needs to have have "coins".
I've given you enough rope to hang you with in detailing how your block-chain would work. You're obviously not able to:)
Myself I've been a Bitcoin proponent since 2010. Since you're in Europe you might even had had the chance hearing me talking about it at a conference or two.
Thanks for explaining, finally, that you don't know what a block is, how a chain of blocks is built, how that can be verified and why all of this is a distributed transaction ledger.
You might want to read up on Bitcoin before you claim that others are "truly this stupid". I also think you should generalize this, considering how often your posts are modded "troll" or "flamebait" according to your post history.
And how would random block IDs preclude "mining"? I don't think you understand the basics of a block chain at all. I'm guessing that's why you're unable to detail your idea.
How can news blocks be created in advance without knowing the input and outputs?
There's no blockchain without "mining". There's no mining without incentives. Whether the inventive is called a coin or not is irrelevant as to its value.
On the contrary a leading theory of how reglaciation happens is because of ice melt in the arctic due to warm water influx. The Eemian had a "warm pulse" just before it plunged back into full glaciation.
See Late Eemian warming in the Nordic Seas as seen in proxy data and climate models (Born, Nisancioglu. Risebrobakken)
Yes, and the records are, quite simply, quite short.
It's a well known cognitive bias to always consider the time you yourself live in as special. History shows us that it isn't. Please read the link I gave.
Slashdot Mirror
... which makes no sense. You cannot have a secure blockchains unless you have a lot of processing power verifying it - and no one will invest in processing power unless there's an incentive for doing so. That incentive, for the most secure blockchain that exists (processing power surpassing _all_ computers in the top 500 super computing list) is called "bitcoin".
Banks cooperating on a blockchain is equivalent to them agreeing on using the same database.
Or in geek terms: If you want to solve the Byzantine Generals' problem you need a blockchain with incentives. If you do not want to solve the Byzantine Generals' problem you can just as well use MySQL.
natural warming doesn't happen on such a short time-scale.
It most certainly does.
Until a few decades ago it was generally thought that all large-scale global and regional climate changes occurred gradually over a timescale of many centuries or millennia, scarcely perceptible during a human lifetime. The tendency of climate to change relatively suddenly has been one of the most suprising outcomes of the study of earth history, specifically the last 150,000 years (e.g., Taylor et al., 1993). Some and possibly most large climate changes (involving, for example, a regional change in mean annual temperature of several degrees celsius) occurred at most on a timescale of a few centuries, sometimes decades, and perhaps even just a few years. The decadal-timescale transitions would presumably have been quite noticeable to humans living at such times, and may have created difficulties or opportunities (e.g., the possibility of crossing exposed land bridges, before sea level could rise)
http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projec...
tiny police force strained from uncontrolled immigration things are about to get ugly.
It's nice to be able to hide one's racist views behind the anonymous moniker, isn't it?
With a fascist government you wouldn't be able to.
If only criminals have guns it will be damn easy to identify them and lock them up.
True-ish, but the devil is in the details... you'd probably need a lot more law enforcers to be able to do that. AKA a "police state".
Sweden respectfully disagrees.
Or the just announced Sony Xperia Z5 Premium - 3840x2160 5.5" screen with 806 PPI.
806.
http://www.sonymobile.com/glob...
Welcome to Sweden. Tech workers with a few years experience usually get 32 days off per year here.
Calculations of possible future worth of bitcoin are indeed based in "normal rules of money".
If X of something (illegal drugs, remittance) is done through Bitcoin (because lower fees, pseudonomity, whatever the reasons) then the value of the total Bitcoin network must be able to handle Y size economic transfers. Since there's a finite number of bitcoin at any point in time that means the valuation of a bitcoin needs to be Z.
The "only" thing you need to guess is the likelihood of X happening for a reasonable prediction of Z. At some point in time.
If multiple parties distribute the block-chain, how do you protect it from validation unless mining is an arms race? ... and the incentive for an arms race will be a token of value. It doesn't need to be named a "coin", but will in effect be one.
(PoS etc are nice theories but we're back to the equivalent of a regular database in effect)
There's no added security in that scenario compared to a regular database. That is, they must contractually agree not to try to outmine (thus risk a rogue bank doing double spends) each other. From that follows they cannot be sure that an external actor won't outmine them unless they keep the blockchain secret. From that follows ...
https://www.myblockchain.xyz/
... and you're unable to secure that blockchain without mining. Without it it's just another, regular, database.
A blockchain cannot function without verification ("mining"). There needs to be incentives for "mining" to occur. Those tokens of incentives don't need to be called "coins" - but they must have some sort of value.
Thus, for any blockchain to be successful it needs to have have "coins".
Given that bitcoin has no obvious intrinsic value
What's the intrinsic value of a global transaction network that cannot be censored?
Or in other word, Bitcoin lacks intrinsic value in the same way as the Internet does.
I've given you enough rope to hang you with in detailing how your block-chain would work. You're obviously not able to :)
Myself I've been a Bitcoin proponent since 2010. Since you're in Europe you might even had had the chance hearing me talking about it at a conference or two.
Thanks for explaining, finally, that you don't know what a block is, how a chain of blocks is built, how that can be verified and why all of this is a distributed transaction ledger.
You might want to read up on Bitcoin before you claim that others are "truly this stupid". I also think you should generalize this, considering how often your posts are modded "troll" or "flamebait" according to your post history.
And how would random block IDs preclude "mining"? I don't think you understand the basics of a block chain at all. I'm guessing that's why you're unable to detail your idea.
Feel free to detail your blockchain that creates verified transactions without detail of the transactions.
Huh?
How can news blocks be created in advance without knowing the input and outputs?
There's no blockchain without "mining". There's no mining without incentives. Whether the inventive is called a coin or not is irrelevant as to its value.
They were most there at the time - we're talking _this_ interglacial. A few thousand years ago. Not million.
Alright, I guess it would be easier to just reply to the GP with "no, there's no risk of methane run-away based on historical data".
Why did that not happen 8000 years ago when the arctic was a lot warmer (3 to 9 degrees Celsius) than today?
http://sibran.ru/en/journals/i...
Feel free to add citations to your claims. The Eemian was warmer than our current interglacial.
Why do you believe (yes, believe is the correct word) that the records are broken on longer timescales than the instrumental one?
Example: Satellites are showing ice loss in the arctic. The satellite coverage begins in 1979.
We know from proxies that the arctic was possibly ice free in the summer during the Holocene Optimum - that's within the least 12000 years.
We know from proxies that the arctic was most certainly ice free during the last interglacial, the Eemium.
Thus, whenever someone says "records" - you need to ask yourself at which timescale. The Earth cares very little for human life spans.
On the contrary a leading theory of how reglaciation happens is because of ice melt in the arctic due to warm water influx. The Eemian had a "warm pulse" just before it plunged back into full glaciation.
See Late Eemian warming in the Nordic Seas as seen in proxy data and climate models (Born, Nisancioglu. Risebrobakken)
Yes, and the records are, quite simply, quite short.
It's a well known cognitive bias to always consider the time you yourself live in as special. History shows us that it isn't. Please read the link I gave.
Record storms, droughts, floods, forest fires, and heat waves are costing hundreds of billions and tens of thousands of lives right now.
Record as to compared to what?
30 years?
60 years?
120 years?
1000 years?
Here's a good read of _documented_ (i.e, written down, well sourced) weather from all over the world for the last 2000 years. It's quite eye opening.
http://breadandbutterscience.c...