• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

216 Excellent

About lkn

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,209 profile views
  1. Your JPM is responsible for posting a monthly income and expenditure report, so go look at that. As others have already said, your management fee will depend on services in your building (primary expense is personnel) and how many residents there are to pay for it (total sq. m.).
  2. Just out of curiousity, how much is the management fee currently? And do you happen to know how many square meters (for which management fee is paid)?
  3. Did he mention how he handles charging? 100 km does sound like a lot, but probably not a full working day for him, so he would either need to do a battery swap or use some sort of supercharger.
  4. Ripple is not based on blockchain technology and my understanding is that the banks will send each other IOUs denominated in JPY and THB (using the Ripple network/protocol), so not using crypto currencies per se. The news here seems to be that banks are willing to forego the established/legacy(?) wire transfer networks to bring lower fees and faster processing times to their customers.
  5. I don’t see how you can agree that I am semantically correct but also ignorant — perhaps you meant a pedantic, though it is really not important to me what we call it, I already subsided on the “effectively rewriting history”. The main point of my comment was that the current implementation of bitcoin is really a set of rules that governs the currency, and that these rules are sometimes changed (e.g. the increase of the block size), and such changes have economic effects (e.g. on the fees market), so they are surrounded by lots of politics. Often, and certainly in this thread, we hear one of the advantages of bitcoin is that it is free from government interference, therefore I find it interesting to shed some light on how immutable the currency actually is. We do not disagree on the history being there, I already wrote that, and you are already familiar with what happened with ETH/ETC, so I do not understand why you want me to give you an example of what has already happened. Though adding to ETH/ETC another way is if somebody gets majority control of the network, they can ignore any block that contains a transaction from Alice, thereby effectively preventing her from spending the money she received from Bob (for as long as they have majority control). Based on what you wrote in post 155 this would either be done by controlling a majority of the nodes, but such abuse of power may be detected and the malign nodes might eventually get blacklisted, so a better approach would be to invest in a mining pool that produce blocks at a faster pace than the rest of the network, so you are orphaning blocks simply by building only on your own blocks. Is this all theoretical and thus unimportant for day-to-day bitcoin users? Well, in this thread it has been argued that bitcoin will be worth $1m per coin, yet if somebody solves these theoretical problems, it is reasonable to expect that a cryptocurrency without these problems will win out, and the value of bitcoin will therefore drop to zero. Personally though, I am much more concerned about bitcoin’s scalability problem, as that is causing some real issues right now.
  6. As I wrote: “new rules can effectively give new interpretations to existing blocks, effectively rewriting history.” So I do agree with you that the history is still there. But new rules can make it so that what you thought you had, you no longer have, even though it is there in the ledger (but the new rules make it so that you cannot spend it), this is why I said effectively rewriting history. Btw: You said “to support your theories” — it’s not really a theory when it has already happened :) but the reason I brought it up was only because someone seemed to be under the impression that bitcoin was untouchable. I have noticed that some people are under the impression that bitcoin is based on pure math with no politics and because it has “crypto” in the name, it is 100% safe from attacks, when in fact there is a lot of politics going on, although it’s different than the politics of a central bank, but e.g. increasing block size may mean less fees for miners (because if you fix the current delays, people are not going to pay extra to ensure their transactions go through quickly), so that is a political decision with economical consequences, likewise it could also be that at some point, it is decided that the mining reward needs to be increased, because it’s otherwise not sustainable to invest in new mining hardware, which may threaten the network in that no new miners = higher chance of existing miners gaining a majority, but increasing mining reward basically means printing more money (than what was originally planned), which could lead to inflation…
  7. The best investment is of course a condo in Montreal, I thought you had already decided that in many other threads! :)
  8. As for “beautification”, one approach is to look at this over many years, for example if it’s an 8 storey building, paint one floor every year, so each floor gets painted every 8th year, and painting one floor is in the yearly budget. For staff, it’s a problem managing staff everywhere. I think you (or maybe someone else) already mentioned writing down everything, make spreadsheets with due date, who’s assigned to the task, what the current status is etc. and I highly recommend put these spreadsheets online, e.g. via Office 365 or Google Sheets, then you can always check status on the various tasks lists, and make sure the staff actually updates them! Also try to have a good dialog with the manager, for example I am not in Thailand full time, but I talk with our manager at least once a week via LINE, and he knows that if there is anything, he should not hesitate to contact me, even if he’s just unsure about how to go about an assignment, as I have told him, I would much rather that he tells me that he does not know how to do something, than him doing it wrong. I also recommend reading through the monthly ledger, this is not to detect fraud, but simply to be aware of what money is spent on.
  9. The argument was that Bitcoin can’t be touched, I said that sure it can, if a majority decides to change the rules, the rules will be changed, and this is exactly what has already happened for Ethereum after the DAO Hack where a majority decided to reverse transactions! I brought it up as proof-of-concept that despite what you may think, there is no guarantee that the rules governing the blockchain today are the same in a year, and new rules can effectively give new interpretations to existing blocks, effectively rewriting history. As for your phone analogy, it would basically be you saying that there is no way for your phone’s lithium-ion battery to explode, and me pointing to how Samsung phones have exploded, but you then saying I have no idea what I am talking about, because you do not have a Samsung phone. Anyway, I find yours and SmartJoe’s comments very telling, in that you are repeatedly just telling me how little I know and how stupid I am, yet neither of you guys have demonstrated any actual knowledge about how cryptocurrencies work.
  10. No, you do not need to take physical control over other people’s equipment to perform a 51% attack on the blockchain. I am honestly flabbergasted by your comment. Beyond the price graph, what do you actually know about the fundamentals of bitcoin? I ask as someone you previously told should not speak of what he did not know.
  11. What I had in mind when I wrote this was miners who changed the rules, for example rewarding themselves more than the agreed upon amount for mining a block. Such block would be considered invalid by other miners, and (hopefully) they would reject these blocks, hence we would get a fork. However, a scenario that I did not consider is that majority of miners decide to ignore transactions from a certain person/organization (address) or maybe above a certain amount, so they will keep appending valid blocks to the block chain, they will just ensure that these do not include transactions that they do not like, and if a block from a minority miner includes a blacklisted transaction, they will ignore that block, and due to faster computation from this colluding entity, they will render the block orphaned. For a larger entity, like the U.S. government, it would not be a challenge to get majority control, as there are only about 6,000 bitcoin miners.
  12. Another post that just belittles me without pointing out a single factual error in anything I have written so far. While a misuse of power by a majority of miners will most certainly result in two blockchains, exactly what will then happen is unknown, and whether or not it was misuse of power is in the eye of the beholder, for example which side did you take in the Ethereum fork? The one that reversed past transactions? Because that seems to have been the winner, yet that goes against the “no-one can touch it”, as is what I was originally replying to, when you made that claim.
  13. It’s hard to take you serious when your rebuttal is just personal insults, nonetheless, Bitcoin and Ethereum are based on the same core principles of a blockchain with distributed miners creating the blocks, hence a majority of the miners control the rules for what is a valid block. As long as no-one has a majority, the rules are so that it is in everybody’s interest to comply with the rules, or so you would think, for example there is currently some controversy in the Bitcoin world about miners rejecting proposed upcoming rule changes, and I mentioned the Ethereum issue because they have lived through some very controversial changes where they rolled back transactions. If there is consensus among Bitcoin miners, there is absolutely nothing preventing them from changing the rules so that e.g. they get 1,000 BTC for mining a single block, or to disallow any future transaction that involve any address owned by you, etc. Here’s a short guide on what I am talking about: Maybe you want a second try on explaining to us why Bitcoin is not controlled by 51% of the miners, and this time without calling me stupid?
  14. This is just a gold ETF that only allow you to buy and sell their shares using a cryptocurrency.
  15. So you want a central bank to control the currency? The lack of this control is basically Bitcoin’s main (and practically only) selling point.