Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

Let's hope this grows like wildfire;

https://news.bitcoin.com/bitpay-enables-bitcoin-cash-bch-and-bitcoin-core-btc-for-tax-payments/

 

[Tomothy]

Would anyone have any interest in attending a bch conference in upstate ny, sometime w/in next two years?

 

[lunar]

@Christoph Bergmann I also voted no, but share these same sentiments. Well said.

https://www.yours.org/content/about-the--cash--denomination--bitcoin-unlimited-and-democracy-in-a-mu-a6c54e3b6b58

Beware and don't engage the agitants, We should be good at this by now, they jump on every slightly controversial topic and poke both sides. See peter/csw BCF/finances Cash/Bits debates. Ignore them, stay courteous and build.

Happy upgrade day folks. T minus, 1 block.

 

[sickpig]

So it seems like we made it.

We forked and already mined a bunch of transactions w/ new op codes included in the scripts (OP_AND and OP_BIN2NUM).

So far everything seems fine. We are monitoring the situation but so far no incidents reported.

Have a nice fork protocol upgrade everyone!

 

[cypherdoc]

outstanding work

 

[Tomothy]

@awemany I wasn't able to catch all of lund's IBM speech/ama, missed the beginning and end caught a a bit of the middle. It sounded like he said a public chain had importance. Later he was discussing the questions you had asked but then again I had to run. I was wondering if you caught the whole ama or his answers to your questions and if he let slip or hint about any of his thoughts regarding bch/BTC. It seemed odd that he posted in /r/BTC and not lumens unless he did that as well. Just trying to see outside our immediate ecosystem which is still relatively contained. There is so much hate towards bch it's sometimes difficult to gauge how we are seen. Just was wondering.

 

[lunar]

And the winner of the upgraded OP_RETURN ASCII art competition goes to....

https://cryptograffiti.info/#d568e667e9adf939708691f5958dcdb964b17ee180eaa3ff59153df953dc400c


Runner up

https://cryptograffiti.info/#c4f71b5015b916123f9c9191e5219450b5b2e53692f75d06431aafbd00629573

 

[AdrianX]

Bitcoin core is BTC according to Novogratz. Bad luck for him that loaded up with BTC in a major way just after 1st August 2017. If he is the smart man he thinks he is, then "diversification" is a good word for him to learn.

looking at Mike's fund https://news.bitcoin.com/novogratz-benchmark-index-cryptocurrencies/

I'd say they are relatively bullish on BCH. The above allocation weighted on the market capitalization is 2.23 BCH for every 1 BTC at today's evaluation. So the capital going into the fund has acquired a relatively large proportion of BCH when looking at the current market capitalization. Bitcoin Core boycott astroturfers incoming.
[doublepost=1526431007][/doublepost]@OpenMind here is a start. https://bitco.in/forum/threads/buip090-new-members-for-election-9.11039/#post-63131 Ultimately I'm looking for someone who is engaged in the bitcoin space, has an opinion, and has spent lots of time discussing the pros and cons of proposed BUIPs in public.
[doublepost=1526431099][/doublepost]

Nothing more. Apply for membership.

that's the best answer yet.

 

[awemany]

@Tomothy: As it came up on reddit, I took it as an opportunity to ask someone on the other end of the spectrum, where there's "permissioned blockchains" and whatnot on what he had in mind regarding tokens and BCH. And he ignored the first part of my post, likely as he took it as a jab at him regarding bullshit bingo

I think his answers were a bit bland and generic, but I wasn't expecting much different. Basically, it was a confirmation for myself that the whole idea of "blockchain business" is exactly where I expect it to be.

Don't take it the wrong way - maybe that's exactly what these folks want out of this, and I am a sceptic regarding the whole tokenization hype anyways, so I might also simply be blind to what others see as awesome features. To each their own

 

[solex]

@AdrianX
I didn't know his portfolio make-up is public info. Indeed, it is biased to BCH. Interesting.

 

[solex]

After the successful upgrade, has BCH leapfrogged Paypal in these bragging rights?
edit not yet, as it is based on the old 7tps per 1MB.

 

[cypherdoc]

we've played our cards right, gentlemen. and, years ago did we:

US Regulators Agree That They Will Not Suppress Cryptocurrencies

https://medium.com/@VidrihMarko/us-regulators-agree-that-they-will-not-will-not-suppress-cryptocurrencies-1e91e66e5b14
[doublepost=1526487609,1526486981][/doublepost]i'm having quite the laughs today. first, the gypsytoy saga and now this, lol:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/8jtnoa/they_may_take_away_our_cash_but_theyll_never_take/

 

[Norway]

Bitcoin Unlimited is a membership organization. It is now, and will be in the future a reflection of the members as a whole.

I'm asking myself: What kind of new members do we want? Should it be many members, or a few?

Do we want social media cheerleaders as members? People that say they share the vision?
Do we want technical developers as voters?

I think the answer is no.

I think we should go full Daniel Krawisz. We should aim for investors as members.

This raise difficult questions. Who are they, and should we ask them to prove ownership of funds?

I never signed up for Haipo Yang's chat channel where you have to prove that you can sign a message that is related to a sum of BCH (I love the concept though).

But I think it's wrong to demand that people flash their hodlings in public. It's a very real security issue.

Roger Ver is not a member anymore because he didn't do the voting thing that is not 100% UX optimized, but it's getting a lot better now.

I think we should re-recruit old members with stake in the game more than accept enthusiastic people.

EDIT: I'm asking myself: What kind of new members do I want?
EDIT2: Please replace the "we"s with "I". I'm just speaking for myself here.

 

[AdrianX]

This raise difficult questions. Who are they, and should we ask them to prove ownership of funds?

@Norway Its a very easy question to ask, not a very easy question to get an answer too. There are no rules, . Ifask the question. You don't need anyone's permission. I ask a bunch, and if I don't get a reply, I don't feel obligated to vote.

The responsibility is on the applicant to convince each voter they will bring value to Bitcoin Unlimited. On reflection @cypherdoc nailed it with this response:

Nothing more. Apply for membership.

Put the responsibility on the applicant to figure out everything we may need to solicit a vote. You create a list of requirements and they have to fulfill them before you vote (you don't need to even tell them what those requirements are). It's not in your interests to tell them how to get in.

You can vote "no" for every applicant and justify it as follows if they don't respond to your request.
Insufficient information provided: Insufficient proof of net worth in BCH.

We have to get over this stigma to behave within social norms. You don't need everyone here to agree what a norm is, create your own.

I think we should re-recruit old members with stake in the game more than accept enthusiastic people.

Expired members need to expire, if they are valuable, they can get their membership back by asking. But being a member adds to Quorum, being a nonparticipating member can stall development if Quorum is not reached, nonparticipating members need to be dropped from the vote count.

 

[Windowly]

Bitcoin Unlimited is a membership organization. It is now, and will be in the future a reflection of the members as a whole.

I'm asking myself: What kind of new members do we want? Should it be many members, or a few?

I have been wondering the same thing lately and thinking that I'm going to get a lot pickier myself in who I vote for.

At the same time, the original vision of Bitcoin Unlimited as far as I understand it was to reflect all stakeholders in the currency -- users, scholars, investors, entrepreneurs and of course developers.

I'd imagine BCH miners, software developers, and entrepreneurs would hold a lot of Bitcoin Cash and be incentivized. But is that something we are just taking for granted?

@AdrianX I like your questionnaire. I've been wondering for a while if I want to blanket reject any applicant that hasn't answered those questions.

One thing I think we could ask (and have it be on the honor system) is ask how much percentage of their assets are in Bitcoin Cash. Someone who has gone full Norway imho will be a better member than someone who just dabbles in different crypto currencies but has no real skin in the game BCH-wise.

 

[AdrianX]

@Peter R thanks for this concise and articulate answer well done.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/8k5y9h/which_chain_is_the_real_bitcoin_this_is_a_must/

 

[Dusty]

I think Peter's response is the more correct and objective one and we all should be ready to answer like that.

Thanks Adrian for the link to the video.

 

[Richy_T]

I think we should re-recruit old members with stake in the game more than accept enthusiastic people.

Bingo. I think with low voting turnout, we risk a few enthusiastic members being able to push BU in directions that might not be for the best.

 

[Bloomie]

@imaginary_username it's @Bloomie I think he will see it and take appropriate action if you just report the post as spam.

Sorry guys, was at Consensus and neglected spam-cleaning duties for a few days. Stopped by the Blockstream afterparty (incognito) for about an hour. Those guys definitely beat the record for the lowest number of female attendees at any blockchain event. Lots of social awkwardness from Samson & co, overburnt chicken nuggets, and stale spring rolls. The Jaxx party was good.

 

[AdrianX]

Well on that note "Women in Bitcoin and Blockstream" I was thrilled to see people outside of my circle come to a similar conclusion.