Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[awemany]

@AdrianX: you mean "interesting why does Adam want that?" ?

 

[lunar]

@awemany

You've seemed quite optimistic about the 2X fork recently. I like your optimism, but don't share it. While I certainly see it as a positive win for the big block camp so far, I'm not convinced things will go through as smoothly as you hope?

Firstly, I agree with Falkvinge's assessment, that there are likely patents within Segwit. I've also had this confirmed from other sources, but as yet no proof. Combine this with the changing of Bitcoin into a double Merkle tree structure, rather than the immutable single chain of Tx and signatures, (breaks contract law) and I see Segwit as far more than an 'ugly wart'. Something In my mind that would need to be removed from the 2X chain if it wins the November hardfork battle? (I'm not sure how easy that would be?)

A second point, is that we know BSCore now. We know what they are capable of. Do you really think they will take this lying down? What's the betting there are several zero day bugs and massive DDOS attacks on anything but Core come hardforkday? How much Hashpower do you think they control, and how much could they take offline through attacking?

I see early November being one mighty clusterfuck. Where prior to the fork, different exchanges wallets, forums, and miners are all labelling the version of Bitcoin they are politically aligned with as BTC and anything else as an altcoin.

 

[go1111111]

I am sure Jihan gets it - but why does it need to be an atomic swap? .

Why not an atomic swap? There seems to be a lot of skepticism of such swaps from seg2x supporters that I don't get.

Adam is not insisting on an atomic swap because he's planning some conspiracy where he technically sabotages the swap mechanics. Adam actually thinks Core coins will be more valuable post-fork, and he knows an atomic swap is a surefire way to lock Roger into a deal that he thinks is bad for him.

I see Segwit as far more than an 'ugly wart'. Something In my mind that would need to be removed from the 2X chain if it wins the November hardfork battle?

If you're into big blocks but don't like segwit, why are you wasting your time with SegWit2x at all? Why not just support Bitcoin Cash for forget about SegWit2x?

 

[AdrianX]

If you're into big blocks but don't like segwit, why are you wasting your time with SegWit2x at all?

I don't think anyone wants big blocks, big blocks are a consequence of increasing transaction volume. In a fixed money system transaction volume implies increase usage and adoption. Restricting adoption and usage will damage money velocity which impacts utility and value.

so no one is "into big blocks" people accept the consequences that bigger blocks are needed for growth and increased adoption.

It is asinine to fight bigger blocks and impede utility and adoption. To all those who think adoption is not being impeded because bitcoin is growing, think again, bitcoin should not just be growing, it should be growing exponentially to become a practical Store of Value for the whole planet, not just the wealthy who can out bid all other users to exchange value.

 

[majamalu]

@majamalu: Yes. It appears to be a great opportunity now to take future BTC for Core Shitcoins from the brainwashed Corium folks.

Beautiful, all this.

Indeed. I have my local broker looking for small blockheads willing to be my counterpart.

I recently wrote this warning to my readers:

If you are an early adopter who still ignores Bitcoin's source of strength and resistance, you owe an offering to Fortune (the goddess). But be careful: Satoshi's filter never stops. If you do not study for the next exams, you could fail miserably.

 

[awemany]

Why not an atomic swap? There seems to be a lot of skepticism of such swaps from seg2x supporters that I don't get.

Adam is not insisting on an atomic swap because he's planning some conspiracy where he technically sabotages the swap mechanics.

I, like so many others, have a hard time imaging what this swap will even look like if the other chain is completely undefined.
Given the history of things, I also wouldn't be surprised by exploitation of weird corner cases in the swap mechanics by Adam and his fellows, and the fact that they are not even saying what their chain is going to be underlines this. I am reminded of the DAO debacle.

I am willing to bet 2.5BTC (which for me is a huge amount of money and significant fraction of my BTC worth, $10000!) on the success of the 2x fork, but with the old fashioned route of a trusted arbiter and a simple, well-defined condition of hash power-wise longest chain containing a >1MB base block excluding SegWit data.

Adam actually thinks Core coins will be more valuable post-fork, and he knows an atomic swap is a surefire way to lock Roger into a deal that he thinks is bad for him.

Meanwhile, I have not heard news from that 25kBTC offer and Adam didn't go into details either - and also didn't respond to anyone who asked for such details. It honestly does look like simply posturing to me at this point in time. Sounds impressive, and some weak people will be swayed by that - even if it all turns out to be hot air in the end. (Oh he said 25000BTC, he must mean it!)

----
@lunar: I think you are fearing the ghosts that the Blockstream FUD instilled in you. Rather than a clusterfork, I see the 2x as the rocket launch! However, a rocket launch is extremely loud, so, make no mistake, that blast from takeoff will be heard as an extremely loud, screeching noise in rBitcoin. The echoes after liftoff will sound like sobbing in rBitcoin.

The question is simply: Is Bitcoin defined by the mechanism in the whitepaper, or has it been redefined to be not-so-decentralized by a bunch of ill-intended jerks attempting massive psychological manipulation tactics? Can it even be redefined? After four years of fighting the manipulation, I don't see how.

This is the big test. I also think this the fight for Bitcoin. The increasing noise levels show you that HP-wise-longest chain is a sound concept, because otherwise, they wouldn't be worried. It also shows you that Core is fighting the ghosts that they summoned themselves - if no change is permissible other than with extreme consensus - the 1x chain will simply die. 90% of HP mining 2x, and enough miners seeing 1x as dangerous competition: I suspect there's going to be just empty blocks on that chain.

A soft fork to 0kB block size, maximum decentralization, if you want

If I where a miner, I'd even go and draft a soft fork blocksize reduction proposal (let's say 1kB ) and then implement it on the 1x chain as a soft fork. As we all know, soft forks are gentle and don't change the rules and are permissible, so Core can't even complain when that soft fork down to 1kB comes. You sell it as maximum decentralization Bitcoin Gold, solely for settlement between the central banks. And I think you can make a solid argument that 1kB indeed suffices in this case - so if you believe in settlement coin, you actually, logically shouldn't object!

Given that this would totally rip apart all the past tactics from the Core camp, I actually wonder why some miners (@Jihan , @Haiyang ?) didn't start this campaign yet. It might be a dick move, but you don't win a war by being nice. It is the perfect and valid trolling opportunity. Payback time.

Maybe this is actually the way to deal with the Core folks who say this is unfair and dangerous: Tell them that, yes, there will be an S2X Altcoin if they want to call it so, but Bitcoin will also likely fork to 0kB blocksize for maximum decentralization, as a gentle soft fork.

And ff they go POW fork, what legitimacy do they have left? That's right: Fucking none. And I will be amazed if an exchange risks putting their customer's fund onto the wrong chain, risking a huge deal of litigation from their customers.

If they dare to do that, they'll have to successfully argue why they think their Bitcoin is Bitcoin in court.

And, other than the onslaught of trolling on reddit, they have to make a sound, logical argument why POW changed CSC is somehow Bitcoin. But no such sound argument exists!

At most they'll go with two very neutral names, neither or both of them equally Bitcoin-related, into the fork.

Finally, I like to say that the decrease in price of BCH is a sign that 2x is getting more likely. I still think the BCH:BTC price tracks about the risk that the 2x won't happen or that Core will cause massive destruction. I also think that the actions by Ver, Jihan and others are simply to build a more and more credible threat (e.g. Jihans 'might flip' comments) that they mean it, to ensure proper passing of the 2x agreement.

And I don't see how Core can cause massive destruction. I am not worried by DDOSses. Simply turn of the 2x bits and connect your node manually to known 2x nodes. A flaw in the code? Maybe, but that would impact the 1x Core nodes as well. They are so keen on 'my Core node can stay online and will never have to be updated' that they'd cut into their own flesh, so to say, on that front as well.

And on the patents: First of all, that's a U.S.-only thing. Secondly, if I am not mistaken, the miners can phase out SegWit transactions by making a fork that will turn them back into anyonecanspents. If they announce it with the right wording and a sufficient time ahead, I don't even think the price impact on Bitcoin will be that massive (SegWit was an experiment that will be rolled back due to patent issues, no harm done to the rest of Bitcoin). And the beautiful thing would be that if that happens, the chain can be validated with the old rules, as if SegWit never happened but for some reason, there was a time when the miners collectively for some reason didn't dare to touch a set of anyonecanspends.

 

[awemany]

@lunar, to further demonstrate why I am so bullish, let me just leave this here:

 

[lunar]

I've not been following the latest moves, is either side backing down and adding replay protection, or is this going to be a 80Billion$ game of chicken?

There's going to be a shortage of popcorn come november. Personally i've gone heavy into BTCCash and Regular Cash. There's too much uncertainty, so i'll be mainly waiting on the sidelines until after the fork.

BSCore - not happy with destroying the community, the forums the Dev channels, hijacking the entire business ecosystem, delaying bitcoin adoption by three years, polluting a new science with propaganda, and forcing three hardforks, have now made me an 'altcoin' investor. There will be a special place reserved in digital hell, for these ..........

 

[awemany]

@lunar:

Replay protection is another word for "please, please, give us and our aligned exchanges the weapons to kill you".

It is so nice to see them begging for that.

I don't think there is going to be replay protection - if Jeff adds replay protection, he's giving up the Bitcoin brand. If replay protection is added, as in 2x leaves the default chain for wallets and SPV clients to the enemy - then all is lost.

2x is an agreed-upon update after all.

Jeff is saying 'sure yeah we'll look into replay protection' - but all variants that he finds acceptable are ones where Core essentially loses the war. He's just very polite and professional on this point.

Given that Gavin is also on the team and hopefully watching this closely, I would really lose faith in humanity if both of them plus the other folks on the team somehow implement something that leaves the defaults to 1x/Core.

There's going to be a shortage of popcorn come november. Personally i've gone heavy into BTCCash and Regular Cash. There's too much uncertainty, so i'll be mainly waiting on the sidelines until after the fork.

I think the system will work, also against the worst enemy yet - the Core dev team and their puppeteers. But I do agree on the Popcorn.

 

[jbreher]

if I am not mistaken, the miners can phase out SegWit transactions by making a fork that will turn them back into anyonecanspents. If they announce it with the right wording and a sufficient time ahead, I don't even think the price impact on Bitcoin will be that massive (SegWit was an experiment that will be rolled back due to patent issues, no harm done to the rest of Bitcoin). And the beautiful thing would be that if that happens, the chain can be validated with the old rules, as if SegWit never happened but for some reason, there was a time when the miners collectively for some reason didn't dare to touch a set of anyonecanspends.

I don't follow. If segwit gets rolled back, all existing segwit transactions will be true anyonecanspends. The natural result of this is that whatever miner mines the rollback block will get a windfall of the sum of bitcoin in each and every anyonecanspend UTXO. And each and every dependent (antecedent) transaction will instantly be annulled.

This is one of the more insidious aspects of segwit that core has routinely acknowledged but ridiculed as impossible, as such a discarding of segwit could never occur.

edit: ridiculed by the kore kamp - be they right (ha!) or wrong

 

[adamstgbit]

@jbreher and @awemany

maybe the best way to phase out SegWit transactions is with a new softfork that make new blocks with segwit TX invalid, there would forever be code that supports segwit blocks, but it will not be valid to produce a new segwit block.
but... segwit is a monstrous add-on, removing it is probably going to be more work then adding it was, so very unlikely this ever happens.
its such a shame miners choose to compromise, miners should have all agreed to fork off with a BU setting of 2MB and let the core chain die a year ago. F' , they should have forked off with >75% hashing power that was behind BIP101? YEARS ago.

At least we have BCH which is uncompromised, in the end bitcoin will shoot itself in the foot sooner or later, and BCH blocks will just keep growing and gorwing and growing, untill BCH blocks are so big that it crushes all other coins!

 

[Bagatell]

Rollback SegWit? BCH PLS!

 

[Norway]

This was news to me: Charlie Lee does not work for Coinbase anymore
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/73v4nm/charlie_lee_how_coinbase_and_other_exchanges_will/

 

[79b79aa8]

IMF to central bankers: bitcoin is like the pc.

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2017/09/28/sp092917-central-banking-and-fintech-a-brave-new-world

 

[jbreher]

Hey @Zarathustra - looks like you've got a stalker in Ms Lagarde:

One thing is clear: we always have more data. Some estimates suggest that 90 percent of the data available today was generated in the past two years. [1] This is not just information on output, unemployment and prices, but also behavioral data on the quirks and irrationalities of the homo economicus.

 

[awemany]

I don't follow. If segwit gets rolled back, all existing segwit transactions will be true anyonecanspends. The natural result of this is that whatever miner mines the rollback block will get a windfall of the sum of bitcoin in each and every anyonecanspend UTXO. And each and every dependent (antecedent) transaction will instantly be annulled.

This is one of the more insidious aspects of segwit that core has routinely acknowledged but ridiculed as impossible, as such a discarding of segwit could never occur.

edit: ridiculed by the kore kamp - be they right (ha!) or wrong

Now I don't follow: If I spent an anyonecanspent, I don't have to put into another anyonecanspent?
And that's why I was thinking you make it a phase-out period.

Of course, what is left in anyonecanspents then would be open for the miners to grab.

 

[awemany]

Hey @Zarathustra - looks like you've got a stalker in Ms Lagarde:

One thing is clear: we always have more data. Some estimates suggest that 90 percent of the data available today was generated in the past two years. [1] This is not just information on output, unemployment and prices, but also behavioral data on the quirks and irrationalities of the homo economicus.

Interesting approach. So look at the words commonly used on some platform and basically assume words are their own little memes and then try to correlate one's "memetic markup" when speaking to common sources. Memetic ancestry!

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

Now I don't follow: If I spent an anyonecanspent, I don't have to put into another anyonecanspent?
And that's why I was thinking you make it a phase-out period.

Of course, what is left in anyonecanspents then would be open for the miners to grab.

Would be a disaster imho. If the 2x hardfork succeeds and Bitcoin continues, we'll have to live with Segwit.. Well, nobody has to actually mine it, but allowing miners to grab SW transactions (even after a phase out period) wouldn't be healthy. Miners are responsible for this wart but now it's there.

Something like a 2 year phase out might be acceptable but still not great.

 

[79b79aa8]

Bitcoin Cash -- Segregated Witness free, by foresight.

EDIT: has anyone looked at Bitcoin Gold? I don't know if it has any merit, but it certainly could be a deliberate effort to de-legitimize or destabilize Cash (an attack that could have been predicted with news of that first fork attempt a few weeks back, which @freetrader thought was a scam but in retrospect looks like preliminary salvo in the information war).

But of course, if Bitcoin Cash is to survive, it has to survive or live alongside forks, just like SegWit Bitcoin 1X or nX. So, as Junior used to say, bring it on.

 

[adamstgbit]

@79b79aa8

I looked into it just now,
sounds like there are going to go the way of big blocks with segwit plus algo change, seems like a pretty bad idea that won't catch. the only thing that might make it somewhat appealing is the idea of a algo change to make minning more decentralized... But there is this weird money grab ICO they plan do to. 1BTC = 10BTG WHAT A SCAM!

Sounds like a total shitcoin, it seems to me this isn't a coordinated effort to make other bitcoin forks look bad, its more of a money grab... a dev sees forking bitcoin as a way to make his shitcoin have alot of attention starting off.

probably any other altcoin is better than this crap, But, i could see it making some noise and have its exchange rate kinda high for the start, and then endlessly trend to zero, kinda like Zcoin. i feel bad for all the confused newbies that try to trade this coin for profit.

long term this is going to be great for BCH, everyone that gets scammed into this coin, will begin to understand the difference between hype and demand.