Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[freetrader]

That's why he said he tried to collaborate with Jihan and Roger to defeat the North Coreans.

I've never seen evidence of that claim either way. I'd like to, but I can't take anything CSW says at face value.

 

[Zarathustra]

I can't understand why so many BCH users are still cheerleading the BTC miners. They never 51% defended Bitcoin against the attack of The Adam's Family (also known as the streamblockers@blockstream). The result of this cowardly behavior is a hyperinflation of chains, coins and tokens; the opposite of universal sound money.

But that's their business model: profit from trading of those hyperinflated chains, coins and tokens, and sell mining-hardware for those thousand chains. Satoshi's vision perverted; create a hyperinflationary caricature of universal sound money.
And now even Roger begins to march in fours with those destroyers.

 

[cypherdoc]

Ayre may think that he's saving BCH, but it's still pretty bad that BCH can be brought down by a single delusional rich person who spends only a million USD per day.

he's not bringing it down. he's perpetuating it along the tenets of the original WP. yes, in an economically violent way. is that necessary? well, I've already showed our BitcoinExpress/Artforz history. I also tend to agree with the critique that BTC miners have been negligent in their passivity towards the Blockstream vision of offchain scaling. we once had a long discussion here about passive Chinese miners being Version 1.0 in worldwide mining affairs and dominance back in the days when @jtoomim was doing his GFC work. since then we've indeed seen a depreciation of their dominance. Antpool's diminishing BCH hash % is to be taken seriously, imo. jihan's upcoming IPO has put him in a box and it's likely to me that his ability/flexibility to fight a hashwar is little to none.

 

[cypherdoc]

Well, I'll be damned. I wrote the above and no sooner get this:

https://coinrivet.com/bitmain-demotes-jihan-wu-to-supervisor-amid-speculation-of-switch-to-bitcoin-sv/

 

[Norway]

Incremental Block Synchronization

Thomas Bakketun, thomas@bitcoin.no
Stein Håvard Ludvigsen, sh@bitcoin.no


Incremental Block Synchronization (IBS) is a method for nodes of the Bitcoin network to faster reach blockchain consensus. No changes in the consensus rules are required.


The mining nodes of Bitcoin will seek to form a small world network, where each node is directly connected to almost all other nodes of the network. Each node is working on extending the blockchain with their own block. Let’s call that their candidate block.


In IBS, candidate blocks are built append only. Updates are continuously shared with the network.


IBS is not a block relay method, where a block is transmitted via several hops. Block relay will still be needed occasionally.


https://www.bitcoin.no/IBS.pdf

 

[Jonathan Vaage]

What is a BSA in this context?

I took that as Boy Scout of America.

 

[cypherdoc]

live right now


[doublepost=1542119275][/doublepost]to me, Amaury's tweet yesterday about switching away from sha256 was a final nail in the coffin. can you imagine being on Bitmain's board and hearing that?
[doublepost=1542119619,1542118794][/doublepost]

 

[79b79aa8]

https://stresstestbitcoin.cash/assets/reports/pre_test_report.pdf

 

[RollieMe]

I took that as Boy Scout of America.

Bull Shit Artist (not you, "BSA")

 

[cypherdoc]

fear and increasing mad respect from Whalepool participants. whodathunk.

 

[go1111111]

Are any of you interested in betting on the outcome of the BCH fork?

I'm not sure I trust Poloniex to handle certain edge cases of the situation well, so private bets secured by 2 of 3 multisig may be a better way to profit. I'd prefer to bet using a coin that isn't involved in the fork, like BTC or ETH. The actual bet would be more detailed but I have in mind something like:

"I win if the market price of the ABC chain is higher on average than the SV chain over the week of Feb 1st - Feb 8th 2019,

Otherwise I lose."

Any interest?

 

[theZerg]

@cypherdoc I disagree that Ayre is perpetuating BCH in the manner described by the whitepaper. At best they are choosing to freeze it at some point which is whitepaper + some code rev (0.1.0 I think). Sounds like Core to me with a different freeze point. To play devil's advocate for a moment, Satoshi DID put in the 1MB limit and he left it in. You could argue that that's his "last word" on the matter.

At worst CSW seems to be proposing his own changes that steal money from CDS users and long term holders (there is no way to unambiguously prove that you lost control of funds, except if you didn't lose control -- i.e. sign a statement that you lost the funds with the PK that controls the funds). So I hope that that is just posturing and clickbait.

 

[cypherdoc]

https://stresstestbitcoin.cash/assets/reports/pre_test_report.pdf

my takeaways from this report are:

1. why do so many supposed big block pools, like ViaBTC, continue to mine such small blocks?
2. where were all the orphans resulting from such "huge" 32MB blocks?
3. congrats to BU for being chosen with EB set to 128MB.
4. fee earnings from 32MB block creation are NOT insignificant.
[doublepost=1542126614][/doublepost]@theZerg

>To play devil's advocate for a moment, Satoshi DID put in the 1MB limit and he left it in. You could argue that that's his "last word" on the matter.

what? are you now arguing in favor of 1MB? i thought we were long past this.

>At worst CSW seems to be proposing his own changes that steal money from CDS users and long term holders (there is no way to unambiguously prove that you lost control of funds, except if you didn't lose control -- i.e. sign a statement that you lost the funds with the PK that controls the funds). So I hope that that is just posturing and clickbait.

i kinda agree with you here. i'm on record stating old non-moved coins should be left alone since one can never prove someone doesn't purposefully still have the privkeys. but otoh, the more recent argument that with newer sha256 cracking algos decades out and inevitable, with enough lead time, hopefully these key hodlers will move the coins or else risk having them recovered.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

fear and increasing mad respect from Whalepool participants. whodathunk.

Bitcoin maximalists are smelling blood?
[doublepost=1542127392][/doublepost]

Are any of you interested in betting on the outcome of the BCH fork?

I'm not sure I trust Poloniex to handle certain edge cases of the situation well, so private bets secured by 2 of 3 multisig may be a better way to profit. I'd prefer to bet using a coin that isn't involved in the fork, like BTC or ETH. The actual bet would be more detailed but I have in mind something like:

"I win if the market price of the ABC chain is higher on average than the SV chain over the week of Feb 1st - Feb 8th 2019,

Otherwise I lose."

Any interest?

What happens when there is no split or only BCH in february?

 

[Richy_T]

context

Bull Shit Artist.

 

[awemany]

what? are you now arguing in favor of 1MB? i thought we were long past this.

I think what @theZerg wrote is illuminating the interesting (partial) parallel in the CSW rhetoric compared to Blockstream's. That of "code is law". It seems to be wrt. "V0.1" of the code, but then also not really on the opcodes, nor the sighashing, nor any commits in the range V0.1.0 ... abc-master when SV forked.

It is a rhetorical vehicle really, playing on our all desires (albeit maybe of different degree and with different focus) to be conservative with money. Yet, on the other hand, there's all this recent talk of "fund recovery" ...

We should not end up with an (e)nchained BCH after escaping a block(ed) stream.

 

[Richy_T]

I've never seen evidence of that claim either way. I'd like to, but I can't take anything CSW says at face value.

He was smart enough to notice there was an opportunity that he could exploit if he said the right things at the right time and impressed the right people but he's less than half as smart as he thinks he is.

I have to admit, I'm feeling about the most pessimistic about things as I ever have right now. BTC is hopeless. I thought BCH was the answer but I've come to believe that control of BCH was wrested from the community in a coup by Amaury ("communictation difficulties", my arse) and the only apparently viable opposition is a guy who gets caught in deception after deception (after launching himself on the scene with a deception that should have buried him for good).

I don't see a good path out of here. Not even any of the alts are looking promising at the moment.

 

[_bc]

Ayre may think that he's saving BCH, but it's still pretty bad that BCH can be brought down by a single delusional rich person who spends only a million USD per day.

I think "brought down" is overstating it. BCH could be influenced by a rich person.

Here's another thing to consider. What if other "rich people" learn something by watching a "rich person" influence BCH. What might they learn? Would they think CWS was forever to be king? What if, post-Nov-15, we had multiple rich folks wanting to influence/bring-down BCH in their own way? Would they be able to collude? Or would they flood the world with competing HP (independently), and end-up making Bitcoin safer?

 

[cypherdoc]

@_bc

precisely. this is the game theory that permeates Bitcoin incentivized by it's Sound Money properties. equally applied to miner investment in a never ending financial competition.

my approach to the old coin theft or whatever else CSW fraud dangers that might be lurking would be to hard fork to BSV to re-establish the original vision path and get rid of Amaury/ABC and then immediately code up a pure unlimited blocksize implementation and hold it in the wings if anything goes wrong. @freetrader? who btw is the real Bitcoin hero and BCH progenitor (who never sought the limelight b/c of a desire to remain anon imo).
[doublepost=1542132832][/doublepost]remember, we've had several iterations of past Kings that have come and gone; first Artforz, then ghash.io, then Bitmain, then ?, and then...
[doublepost=1542133026][/doublepost]this always works b/c any one rich person/company/nation is merely a subset of the larger superset called the free market. anything fundamentally good eventually gets diluted by competition.

 

[theZerg]

>To play devil's advocate for a moment, Satoshi DID put in the 1MB limit and he left it in. You could argue that that's his "last word" on the matter.

what? are you now arguing in favor of 1MB? i thought we were long past this.

Of course not. That's what "devil's advocate" means. You all well know that I am for a blockchain that evolves even faster than BCH (GROUP et. al.). Freezing the technology anywhere turns us into either the value-storage "gold" crypto, with most of the economic activity occurring in the more useful cryptos, or more likely a failure because BTC already is aiming to be the "gold" crypto.

Anyone who understands "Gold Collapsing, Bitcoin Up" should understand that the rational debate is not whether a blockchain evolves, but only how fast and which way.