Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[theZerg]

BUcash qt splash screen color: try the green or keep the orange?

I don't think this is important enough to have a BUIP... just pop into the PR and let me know your preference.

https://github.com/BitcoinUnlimited/BitcoinUnlimited/pull/868

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

I like orange more, but on a payment screen, when I have the choice, I want it to be easy differentiable from Bitcoin Core.

 

[bitsko]

I say orange as the official color while anybody can do anything they want with the color.

I really like all the different country themed bitcoin cash logos for instance.

 

[Norway]

I think the orange/green debate is the ultimate bike shed debate. Flip a coin to choose the colour.

 

[Zarathustra]

And so it begins:

The banksters start to mount their "see it can just fork, see the 21mio limit is shaky, ..." attack, exactly as I and others have predicted:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/7kkl20/a_devastating_ing_report_about_bitcoin_core/

This is also what I feared would be the answer by the banksters to the BCH:BTC split reaction by the miners (@Zarathustra).

I remain hopeful that Bitcoin (as BCH) survives this, but this is going to be quite effective. Maybe they'll pump BCH now just to let it overtake BTC (and then pull it back again), to further drive the point home.

Yes, they are trying, but it's nothing new. We heard that argument long before the fork, with the uncountable altcoins that arrived on the market place.

 

[Dusty]

Dear fellow bitcoiners, it is with great pleasure that I would like to introduce you to a project I work since a long time, a multi user, multi signature wallet called Melis ( https://melis.io/ ) that now fully supports Bitcoin Cash (together with Bitcoin legacy).

Melis is a very advanced wallet, with exclusive features for Bitcoin, and I would say it's by any measure the most advanced for Bitcoin Cash.

Here are some of its characteristics:

• A single wallet is able to handle an unlimited number of accounts of different kinds, single signature, multi signature, and multi user
• The most advanced multi user implementation available, where you can create an account for example with these characteristics:
  • 5 users, where 1 signature is mandatory and any 2 of the remaining 4 are needed to authorize a transaction
  • 2of2 signatures where one of the two signatures is handled by the server so that it can enforce spending policies like TFA and limit of expenses per period (daily, weekly, monthly)
  • multi user accounts (for example 3of5) with added, mandatory, server signature
• The server coordinates real time messaging between users so that at any time you can know the status of an "ongoing" transaction and the list of cosigners that have already signed
• TFA for enhanced security, available also via Telegram (very handy!)
• The server is smart enough to detect if someone sends BTCs to a BCH address of yours and viceversa, and in that case creates on the fly a new account in order to be able to recover the (otherwise lost, or difficult to retrieve) funds
• Multi device support with native builds for Linux, Mac, Windows, iOS and Android in addition to the web https://wallet.melis.io
• A single backup using standard BIP39 mnemonics is valid and sufficient for an unlimited number of transactions, address and different account types
• A special feature able to recognize the access to the wallet by a designated primary device that is the only one able to access secured accounts. Accessing the wallet from every other device would be impossible to know that there are hidden accounts, with plausible deniability
• Capability to create advanced transactions with multiple recipients, manual tuning of the fees and complete coin control
• RBF support (sadly needed for bitcoin legacy)
• Untrusted server architecture where all the keys never leave the client and are in full control by the user
• Completely open source client with rebuildable sources hosted on github: https://github.com/melis-wallet

I could argue that a single user account with server side signature, TFA and spending limits, secured to be used only by a specific account is one of the most advanced scheme available today to secure its stash (much more secure than a paper wallet, imvho).

Multiple accounts with different characteristics enable different use cases:

Here you can find a sample of the wizard used to build and avanced multiuser, multisignature account:

Melis is not perfect nor complete yet and it is very much work in progress but completely usable in its current form. We are trying our best to make it a very powerful tool for advanced users.

A testnet version is available if someone wants to play with all the features without fear of making mistakes: https://wallet-test.melis.io

We look for feedback and constructive criticism! (of course in another thread if here it's inappropriate, or privately)

 

[AdrianX]

According to Wikipedia, annual natural gas consumption is 3400 km^3.

The total amount of natural gas required to last 1 trillion years is thus

V_gas = (1 x 10^12) x (3400 km^3) = 3.4 x 10^15 km^3​

If the Earth were a hollow spherical shell full of natural gas, its volume would be:

V_earth = 4 / 3 Pi (6400 km)^3 = 1.1 x 10^12 km^3
​

So we'd need a volume of natural gas over three thousand times the volume of the Earth itself for CSW's claim to be true.

Natural gas can be compressed into liquified natural gas and stored at 1 / 600th the volume, but we'd still need to fill 5 Earth's full of liquified natural gas for his claim to be true.

My hunch is that Dr. Wright is wrong by a factor of a billion or so, here.

(If the argument is that natural gas can be thought of as a renewable resource, then one could argue that it could last indefinitely.)

Everyone needs to always verify their own data, I love GCBU you are a bunch of critical thinkers.

Every assumption needs to be checked. @Peter R I love your answer too, but you are assuming "us" is the global population of earth. "Us" could be a diminished global population or it could be CSW's twitter followers we don't know. Because of the ambiguity in CSW's statement the "us" and the rate of consumption is undefined, there may indeed be enough natural gas for "us".

If the "us" is the global population and we could use it slow enough that the limited supply actually lasts that long, it would admittedly take a lot of what CSW is claiming "interstitial capital" to make that a reality.

I think we can do it, first step is to stop funding capital projects with inflated fiat. A sound money economy will radically change consumption habits and resource extraction projects. Valuable natural resources in an economy with a deflationary currency will encourage "us" to defer the extraction of natural resources to maximize economic utility, resources will always be more valuable in the future so we won't have an economic intensive to over consume in the present.

The concept of burning non renewable fossil fuels to cook or heat, could be seen as repugnant as trowing your sewage out the window into the street as our economy evolves.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

My impression is that CSW takes nearly every message out of proportion. That makes him wrong, even if he is right. Maybe this is being "Wright"

There is enough Gas for humanity for a long time deep in the earth, but problem is just the method to get the gas out. So basically he is right. But saying it is enough for a trillion of years is bullshit.

Same goes with Full nodes, with adoption, and so on. Fundamentally wright ...

 

[awemany]

@Dusty: I have not heard about Melis yet, but this looks absolutely great.

 

[torusJKL]

Dear fellow bitcoiners, it is with great pleasure that I would like to introduce you to a project I work since a long time, a multi user, multi signature wallet called Melis ( https://melis.io/ ) that now fully supports Bitcoin Cash (together with Bitcoin legacy).

Melis is a very advanced wallet, with exclusive features for Bitcoin, and I would say it's by any measure the most advanced for Bitcoin Cash.

Here are some of its characteristics:

• A single wallet is able to handle an unlimited number of accounts of different kinds, single signature, multi signature, and multi user
• The most advanced multi user implementation available, where you can create an account for example with these characteristics:
  • 5 users, where 1 signature is mandatory and any 2 of the remaining 4 are needed to authorize a transaction
  • 2of2 signatures where one of the two signatures is handled by the server so that it can enforce spending policies like TFA and limit of expenses per period (daily, weekly, monthly)
  • multi user accounts (for example 3of5) with added, mandatory, server signature
• The server coordinates real time messaging between users so that at any time you can know the status of an "ongoing" transaction and the list of cosigners that have already signed
• TFA for enhanced security, available also via Telegram (very handy!)
• The server is smart enough to detect if someone sends BTCs to a BCH address of yours and viceversa, and in that case creates on the fly a new account in order to be able to recover the (otherwise lost, or difficult to retrieve) funds
• Multi device support with native builds for Linux, Mac, Windows, iOS and Android in addition to the web https://wallet.melis.io
• A single backup using standard BIP39 mnemonics is valid and sufficient for an unlimited number of transactions, address and different account types
• A special feature able to recognize the access to the wallet by a designated primary device that is the only one able to access secured accounts. Accessing the wallet from every other device would be impossible to know that there are hidden accounts, with plausible deniability
• Capability to create advanced transactions with multiple recipients, manual tuning of the fees and complete coin control
• RBF support (sadly needed for bitcoin legacy)
• Untrusted server architecture where all the keys never leave the client and are in full control by the user
• Completely open source client with rebuildable sources hosted on github: https://github.com/melis-wallet

I could argue that a single user account with server side signature, TFA and spending limits, secured to be used only by a specific account is one of the most advanced scheme available today to secure its stash (much more secure than a paper wallet, imvho).

Multiple accounts with different characteristics enable different use cases:

Here you can find a sample of the wizard used to build and avanced multiuser, multisignature account:

Melis is not perfect nor complete yet and it is very much work in progress but completely usable in its current form. We are trying our best to make it a very powerful tool for advanced users.

A testnet version is available if someone wants to play with all the features without fear of making mistakes: https://wallet-test.melis.io

We look for feedback and constructive criticism! (of course in another thread if here it's inappropriate, or privately)

That looks amazing.
I'm impressed by all the advanced features.

 

[awemany]

Hey folks,

so here's an idea: Someone should(TM) make a website that shows bytes of traffic per transaction on the BTC network and bytes of traffic per transaction on the BCH network. Maybe also bytes of RAM used per transaction per second.


This will clearly show the resubmission and mempool circulation problems of BTC and will be fair and accurate.

EDIT: If you point me to someone who already has graphs of both BTC and BCH running (and the basic infrastructure running and in place to support this) and is friendly enough to accept a patch to add these two graphs - please notify me. I am willing to write that.

 

[sickpig]

@awemany

http://statocashi.info BCH
http://statoshi.info BTC

written/maintained by Jameson Lopp

https://github.com/jlopp/statoshi

 

[awemany]

@sickpig: Yeah, well I think then I'd rather write it myself. I am thinking BCH friendly.

 

[awemany]

Interesting. Lately I am agreeing with the mood on /r/Bitcoin, and I also was never banned there (at least to my knowledge). But apparently I have been preemptively banned?

I was just trying to gild a submission over there which I very much agree with (not the analysis, but the outcome):

But they won't let me Comment disappeared right after posting!

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

Every account I ever had has been banned on r/bitcoin

Statocashi is very cool.

On of the most interesting things of current Bitcoin Cash dynamics is the reduction of UTXO. It demonstrates that high fees directly translate into high requirements for nodes and prevent the emergence of cheap-ressources UTXO-only nodes (which are imho the onliest method to make a SPV node private).

I can confirm the dynamics. On Bitcoin Core I have hundreds of UTXO from daily cloud mining outputs, and I never wanted to pay the fees to consolidate them, hoping that we will see real cheap fees at some time again. On Bitcoin Cash I immediately cleared them.

Something more in alliance with the title of this thread: I think the analogy "Bitcoin is digital Gold, so it should be slow" is flawed. Gold has never been a slow means of payments. Every UTXO of gold - in other word, every coin - can be spent in seconds without fees. If one coin of gold is 1.5 gramm, and the transfer of one coin from hand to hand needs 10 seconds, gold has a limit of 66,000 transactions each second - per ton.

Silver has never been the main means of payment because it was faster. It was because in Germany Gold was too rare to be the main popular means of payment, and there has not been the technology to mint gold coins small enough that their value matched with allday payments. It had nothing to do with transactional capacity.

 

[8up]

Some random thoughts on BTC (after decreasing my BTC holding and increasing my BCH holding today):

What bothers me is a well designed and introduced dynamic block size/weight increase algo. It could really get things going for BTC again.

Downside: it needs to overcome the betrayal in confidence over BTC's immutability. But I guess social consenus is manufacturable.

 

[solex]

@Dusty. Fantastic work on Melis. I will check it out.
@8up. Seeing the BTC miners accepting the BTC as digital-gold model, why should they give 75% support to any "dynamic block size/weight increase algo", let alone the 95% jonny1000 extreme consensus, required to make such a change happen.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

I guess 95% consensus is reached when Core devs are for something, because then you need a 95% consensus to not do it

 

[awemany]

@Christoph Bergmann : That remains to be seen. The moments the miners collectively say "Nyet" to such a proposal is the moment BCH will go through the roof IMO - and might induce the flippening.

 

[awemany]

People on reddit are talking about the odd quietness from Core. And I agree, it is odd. They are thinking hard about what to do or are already scheming. The potential for a massive pump and dump (to destroy any belief in crypto) through tether (maybe from the CBs themselves ...) is often talked about.

But what if they want to wrangle control from the miners? I mean, the divide seems pretty clear now, and it also appears that the miners (as well as the whole crypto ecosystem) are their enemies. Here's redditor "roguebinary" on that idea.

UASF didn't work, but it had the appearance of working.

Here's an idea of what they might do: Stage the next UASF (with e.g. extension blocks) with a follow-up HF to a different hashing algo (that BS developed HW for) after that, but just in case the UASF fails. Call it 'the consensus of the community', as usual. So basically an outright threat if the miners don't comply. The new hashing algo is likely some American, NIST-approved crypto and not too easy to quickly make new ASICs for.

Thoughts?