Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[jonny1000]

What you call 'the right way to do it' is getting eerily close to a 50% attack on what you (and currently, I) deem Bitcoin.

I am not sure what 50% attack you are talking about. If BCH gets 51% (or more) of the global hashrate, I do not see how that attacks anyone.

is due to your and your fellow small blockers tone deaf attitude, ignorance, arrogance and authoritarianism.

I have been trying to best to encourage safer hardforks... That is it. Not sure what your problem with that is

You know just as well as anybody else here that a hard fork cannot wipe out any original chain literally by definition.

I said "imagine IF"

this is so hot right now LOL, those UASF lemmings have no idea, @jonny1000, I am sure knows this, he just doesn't want the minority 1MB forever chain to be wiped out

Do you still not understand wipeout...

The 1MB chain, as you call it, can only be wiped out by a softfork, not a hardfork blocksize limit increase

But of course, I do not want anyone to have their chain to be wiped out. That is why I tried to stop BU happening without wipeout protection
[doublepost=1503914359][/doublepost]

He just gives lip service to the notion and support for a native on chain transaction capacity increase.

Just because I want hardforks to be safe, why do you assume I do not want on chain transaction capacity increases? I have never understood that logic.

 

[AdrianX]

Safe is a relative concept. While it's unsafe to expose one's self to death by road accident, most people accept the risk and go near roads because they offer a benefit that is worth the risk.

Supporting consensus rule changes that move the fees needed to security bitcoin onto a banking layer is not a rational change for someone who wants bitcoin to succeeded. (Unsafe if you want bitcoin to be around in 30 years.)

And calling for 98% support of rule changes safe is hypocritical, when you are blocking the efforts to change the rule to increase the native on chain capacity increase while promotion rule change that destroyed security over time that are forced on the Network by a minority.

Soft forks are by nature unsafe yet users with little understanding a result of propaganda and censorship have been convinced they're safe. Those who support and leveraging censorship to promote this vision have not gone unnoticed .

The value stored on a private key is not guaranteed. What's valued is if you keep your key private the value is yours to direct.

Keys are not compromised when the block size limit is removed. Therefore it's 100% safe. That can't be said for the Segwit consensus rule change that provided a mechanism for governments to garnish bitcoin stored on the blockchain without the private key.

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

All the while, the good, hard working people in power (politicians) are working on "cryptocurrencies"...

http://coinivore.com/2017/08/28/u-s-congress-moves-protect-cryptocurrency-u-s-government/
https://vc.ru/n/minfin-bitcoin-exchange
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https://vc.ru/n/minfin-bitcoin-exchange&edit-text=

Interesting (I guess he knows what Putin wants to hear to care about his ideas ) interjection by the founder of Vkontaky:

For the first time in 70 years the world financial system had a chance to get out of the hegemony of the United States, which at one time imposed its national currency as a reserve on the whole world.
Instead of seizing the chance to make the world more balanced and, together with Japan and other Asian countries, recognize the status of the new digital currencies that are replacing the dollar, the voices of "let's forbid and limit" are heard from the Russian government.

 

[albin]

I said "imagine IF"

Fair enough, I fell for the entry-level trollbait.

Congrats on your feats of verbal pedantry.

 

[adamstgbit]

Random thought:

often poeple say "the market will decide" which almost makes it seem like market participants like bitpay or you and I have some kind of choice to make, "use BCC or use BTC" and That's the deciding factor, its not. what is really happening is more deterministic then we realize. the thing is we dont matter, if its not bitpay that makes the right moves and as a result makes more money and as a result gets bigger, better, faster, cheaper, then it will be the next guy.

I'm bullish on BCC not because I believe the market will "decide" its better. I KNOW someone that accepts BCC for a 100$ item is making more profit then the guy using BTC to make the same TX. I KNOW that the dude sending 300$ in remittance, is going to get a call saying " lets try BCC this time, BTC fees are so high these days"

the market doesn't choose a way, it Finds the way.

thats all.

 

[solex]

Gold creeping up at present. Must be all the geopolitical uncertainty and reminders that central banks have done zero to prevent another credit crisis, except by sweeping it under the rug. That rug beginning to look like a postage-stamp on an elephant and even gold is noticing.

 

[Zarathustra]

Science Fiction vs. facts. @jonny1000's predictions:

 

[awemany]

I am not sure what 50% attack you are talking about. If BCH gets 51% (or more) of the global hashrate, I do not see how that attacks anyone.

Right ... but it prepares the field. That's why I said "close to" not "will be"! Your chain (what you'd still call Bitcoin) has less than 50% of the hashrate then. All that's needed is for the gloves to come off on the big blocker side.

And pissing people off for years is certainly not a great way to ensure that taking off the gloves becomes less likely.

Just saying.

Oh and spare me your "safe hardfork" bullshit. Look at the ridiculousness with which Core is now trying to derail the 2MB part. It is unsafe exactly because Greg wants it so - and because folks you like to parrot these guys.

There's no substance behind that, just bullshit. Open your eyes, man!
[doublepost=1503990257][/doublepost]Oh another thing that just came to my mind:

What if Core realistically sees that their propaganda is eventually going to fail and is just a temporary barrier against the rest of the Bitcoin system finding its way?

The miners are going abandon Core/1MB in Nov and might likely even start attacking it.

I think I faintly remember that they said they are going to attack it even if it is switching POW.

To neutralize the "reference implementation" status that Blockstream has with many blinded fools from r/Bitcoin.

To do that attack, the bigger miners likely have GPUs and maybe FPGAs available.

Now: Pure speculation, but might this be a reason why Blockstream hired a hardware engineer recently?

What if Keccak (or something else) is being implemented into ASICs now, and ASICs are pre-stocked to fight for Core-chain's survival?

If anyone is working on this and willing to share anonymously, this would be the one of the juiciest leaks in Bitcoin history ...

 

[awemany]

@adamstgbit: Very fair points. Compared to your usual Altcoins, however, it is still believed that Bitcoin has the strongest network effect of all of them. And that the insane fees are still being paid is evidence for that, I think.

BCC takes most of the network effect of BTC, as all holders of BTC are incentivized to not shun BCC, at least until they sold them. And it is very hard to justify selling something that potentially has the best value as sound money.

That's the essential difference between BCC and Litecoin, and I think it is much more important than people realize. There are still a lot more Bitcoiners than Litecoiners, they still have a much wider network.

Not that the Bitcoin network effect didn't severely suffer. But BCC is basically betting that "not all is lost yet".

However, this is a coin split, if you look at it this way. I think this opened Pandora's box and I still at all don't like the parallel existence of two chains that aspire to be Bitcoin. I am still waiting for the "42 mio" inflation talk.

It would be great if only one of these beasts survives. If it is BTC (which I still think is more likely, branding+network > network alone), miners will piss off folks like @Norway and seemingly a lot of others on /r/btc that have converted their stashes (though that might be propaganda as well, I didn't check the user names).

If it is BCC, the ride to truly replace Bitcoin as the brand will be very bumpy and the confusion the replacement will cause (especially since months of transaction history have diverged) is going to damage the price and confidence of both.

Because it is an incentive failure. The incentive system that should ensure just one chain simply didn't. For months.

A severe, fundamental flaw in Satoshi's idea. In that case, it simply wasn't able to properly deal with the combination of asshats, their propaganda and the stupid masses they steer.

I think this clearly shows why a putting-their-feet down and calling-the-bullshit out direct confrontation with Borgstream/Core would have been in the best interest of Bitcoin as well as the miners. And that this is so is not a new idea in this space, especially not this group or on this forum.

Oh well. By the way, I feel like I have to repress the urge to say "told you so" a lot with recent events in Bitcoin.

 

[adamstgbit]

@awemany

If it is BCC, the ride to truly replace Bitcoin as the brand will be very bumpy and the confusion the replacement will cause (especially since months of transaction history have diverged) is going to damage the price and confidence of both.

Because it is an incentive failure. The incentive system that should ensure just one chain simply didn't. For months.

I think your wrong on this point. there's nothing bumpy about it, in many cases the choice is adopt an alternative crypto or forget about crypto altogether. this is probably the case with anyone needing a payment system for ~100$ TX's, and it will get worst...

Maybe without Bitcoin Cash, the rebranding of "digital currency" would have been bumpy and confusing ( I can't use bitcoin... so ... which crypto do i use?!?! ). Bitcoin Cash is succeeding at becoming the clear choice alternative to the "big-fees-means-bitcoin-is-useless-to-me" problem.

Like it or not, uncomfortable or not, the "rebranding of digital currency" NEEDS to happen, even bitcoin core knows that, they are trying to rebrand it to LN, while we are trying to rebrand it as bitcoin cash.

I can't say for certain if LN or bitcoin cash will prove to be the choice alternative, but i am now SURE these are the only two Real choices. which is a far better less bumpy less confusing thing then "if BTC isn't doing it for you... one of these crazy not sure what there about highly experimental alts, might do it for you".

Edit: actually maybe the rebranding of digital currency is only necessary because core is hell bent on forcing the development of bitcoin in such a way that LN can serve a bigger purpose as currency, while bitcoin is the Gold which backs it. oh well wtv what i said still mostly makes sense i think.

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/coinbase/btcusd

Nice to watch for anybody who didn't go full norway.

Possibly because of the obvious self-destruction of core. Maybe because someone wanted to buy Bitcoin.
Or because of N Korea (the one with nuclear weapons, not theymos)... Gold up, Bitcoin up...

 

[Norway]

@satoshis_sockpuppet lol!

Dictionary:

Full Norway
[foo l nawr-wey]

Adverb
1. To invest 33% of Bitcoin Segwit into Bitcoin Cash.
she went full Norway.

 

[Richy_T]

To do that attack, the bigger miners likely have GPUs and maybe FPGAs available.

Now: Pure speculation, but might this be a reason why Blockstream hired a hardware engineer recently?

It's been let slip that they have a server farm. Now, that might just seem like that would mean a datacenter to many people (which one would expect such a company to have) but a server farm is a fairly specific thing.

 

[Norway]

My friend, who has over 30P hashpower mining Bitcoin Cash, sent this picture from his Tesla:

Is that cool, or what?

 

[adamstgbit]

bitcoin's a fad and its on fire

 

[molecular]

I just checked in here for like the first time since the Arnhem conference (the abc slack and ElectronCash were diverting my attention) only to see this awesome news:

ROCKS IS BACK ;-)

So how is everyone? Did I miss anything?

The Arnhem conference and meeting a bunch of bigblockers IRL.

Glad you're back and well.

 

[Norway]

bitcoin's a fad and its on fire

[doublepost=1504036732,1504035749][/doublepost]

Bitcoin Cash priced in Bitcoin Segwit on Kraken
Call it a bear maket if you want because it's going down in a selected time frame. But to me, it looks like Bitcoin Cash is putting on some weight from day zero.

 

[Norway]

OMG! I don't want to become the Tone Vays of big blocks!

I hate TA because I know it's bullshit. Please don't look at the chart I posted and read the text I wrote.

 

[adamstgbit]

Bitcoin Cash priced in Bitcoin Segwit on Kraken
Call it a bear maket if you want because it's going down in a selected time frame. But to me, it looks like Bitcoin Cash is putting on some weight from day zero.

agreeed
and its well deserved weight its been putting on.
[doublepost=1504041312][/doublepost]still the charts are depressing.

i think what we are seeing is everyone that thought " ill just hold this bcash crap and see where it gose" trade it for what they think is "OMG bitcoin is never going to stop making new ATHs!!!"

 

[79b79aa8]

The incentive system that should ensure just one chain simply didn't. For months.
A severe, fundamental flaw in Satoshi's idea. In that case, it simply wasn't able to properly deal with the combination of asshats, their propaganda and the stupid masses they steer.

for there to be a single chain may be a desideratum of yours, but it is not some kind of requirement on which satoshi failed to deliver. nobody could have predicted how crypto was to evolve. we watch as bitcoin continues to find its way.