Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,995
In my opinion, having validated UTXOs and getting history from miners for (lets say a year back) would be enough to prove that all is fine. Because else, the whole network would need to lie to you for a full year.

Why is it that such ideas are completely excluded from Blockstream Core's 'Overton window'?
this makes perfect sense to me.

once you've downloaded the entire chain and validated it, pruning blocks from one year and back and running with UTXO's would be safe.
 

VeritasSapere

Active Member
Nov 16, 2015
511
1,266
@lunarboy
It is great to see the list of companies on the list, but in the end we need miner commitment. So far I'm only aware of KnC supporting bip101, are there any others?

If we gain strong merchant support but do not gain miner support, it will be an interesting situation to say the least. It is unclear how that plays out.
The miners should eventually follow the economic majority, that is the theory at least. At this point their support would not mean much anyway, it does make sense that they are waiting before January to cast their votes.
 

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,995
weakening badly. i almost want to see one last push up in the $DJI for max pain to bears so as to be able to set the other half of my short. but i won't argue if it rolls here. Primary Dow Theory Bear Trend still in force with big divergence over the last countertrend bounce:


[doublepost=1448904049][/doublepost]
this is significant.

that's b/c Nejc is a well connected part of an inner circle of major economic actors in Bitcoin. look at their backing by Pantera Capital and his inclusion in the annual insider conference talks at Dan Morehead's resort home. you can bet all those participants are pretty much on the same page for him to be so definitive.
 
Last edited:

Peter R

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2015
1,398
5,595
this is significant.

that's b/c Nejc is a well connected part of an inner circle of major economic actors in Bitcoin. look at their backing by Pantera Capital and his inclusion in the annual insider conference talks at Dan Morehead's resort home. you can bet all those participants are pretty much on the same page for him to be so definitive.
With the excitement over Bitstamp switching to BIP101 next month, I thought it would be a good time to re-submit the BIP101 visual:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3uvaqn/visualizing_bip101_a_payment_network_for_planet/

The mini-blockists are down-voting hard, but I think this will still float to the top!
 
  • Like
Reactions: solex and majamalu

rocks

Active Member
Sep 24, 2015
586
2,284
Bitstamp on the 101 train
It would be interesting to know if bitstamp's support for 101 includes a non blockstream client as well. I get the sense that somesome entities support 101 but prefer to stay on the "official" client.

This matters because I want to see the market shift to alternative clients maintained by devs aligned to the original vision for bitcoin.

If after 101 starts to make real progress the blockstream devs quickly include 101, and then most miners and users stay with the blockstream client, we still have the problem of the wrong people in charge.

This isn't just about block size now, it is about changing control to people who better support satoshi's vision. This RBF insanity has made this need clear.
 

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,995
@rocks

i seriously don't think they would add 101 even if it gets adopted by the economic majority. nullc's hubris and financial confliction runs too deep:

"Ultimately the risk dynamics are different for different people. If a unwise rush to over expand blocks destroys the fundamental value of bitcoin I will merely lose /lot/ of value, but I along with many of the active developers will simply move on, and begin a new system either totally new or one-way pegged against the (perhaps pre-divergence Bitcoin system) which we would believe would upholds the qualities that make Bitcoin valuable in the first place."

 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter R

Justus Ranvier

Active Member
Aug 28, 2015
875
3,746
The mini-blockists
I think a better term is "Anthropogenic Blockchain Bloating (ABB) movement".

ABB members engage in virtue signalling (demonstrating membership by treating a subjective preference as an objective virtue):

http://bravenewcoin.com/news/provable-market-data-bitcoin-liquid-index-now-on-the-blockchain/

Each one of these historic data points was hashed individually on the Blockchain using a Merkle Tree. This was done to create a proof for each data point, without spamming the blockchain with ~2 million transactions.
This process of committing merkle roots could be described in terms of minimising costs (an objectively good property), but instead is written in a way to signal the author's acceptance of the ABB movement precepts (a subjective preference).

They are also prone to violent outbursts when presented with people who disagree with them:

 

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,995
China bulls running again:

 

awemany

Well-Known Member
Aug 19, 2015
1,387
5,054
this makes perfect sense to me.

once you've downloaded the entire chain and validated it, pruning blocks from one year and back and running with UTXO's would be safe.
I was actually thinking about a different scenario, which is somewhat less safe, but I think this somewhat can be arbitrarily small:
1. Change protocol so that a hash of the UTXO is put into each block
2. As a new client, download data: UTXO set 1 year ago + 1 year txn data + all headers of course
3. Check that the downloaded data follows the rules and all UTXO hashes match
4. Profit - it is extremely unlikely that the whole network conspires to build a hashpower-longest chain for a full year that lies to you
[doublepost=1448914212][/doublepost]
Miners have to pay their electric bills in order to remain miners.

If they don't produce the product that the market for the 3600 new bitcoins mined every day wants to buy, how will they keep the lights on?
It is long ago that I looked at the economics of mining. My impression is that they're all still mining at a large loss, is that correct?
 

Justus Ranvier

Active Member
Aug 28, 2015
875
3,746
It is long ago that I looked at the economics of mining. My impression is that they're all still mining at a large loss, is that correct?
Somebody is buying their coins at a price which makes their operation self-sustaining.

It might be traders on the exchanges, it might be OTC buyers paying a premium over spot, it might be the investors of the mining operations (via the operations burning cash).

It doesn't really matter who is buying the coins - their willingness to do is what makes mining possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: majamalu

awemany

Well-Known Member
Aug 19, 2015
1,387
5,054
@Justus Ranvier
Hmm, I was rather wondering whether they are really self-sustaining currently? (The last of your scenarios)
I mean the price level and the insane hash rate and expensive ASICs - are they still waiting for a future profit or are they profitable today?

EDIT: Nevermind, @VeritasSapere kind of answered it.

Impressive!
 

VeritasSapere

Active Member
Nov 16, 2015
511
1,266
@awemany I do not think the miners presently available to the public are a good buy, unless the price continues to spike of course. Presently there is a lack of competition among mining manufactures selling to the public. This is probably the greatest threat to mining decentralization.

The S7 in my opinion is over priced, however the increased price will stir competition I hope. The next generation of miners will hopefully be suitable and profitable for smaller miners like myself.
 

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,995
@awemany I am mining profitably myself, it depends on the electricity price and the cost, timing and efficiency of the equipment deployed.

Been running SP31's and S5's for the last year now and I have ROI'd. I even use the heat they generate to warm my home. :)
not only you but @AdrianX has told us he is also running with ROI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AdrianX

lunar

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2015
1,001
4,290
@rocks
Slush is almost certainly onboard, but as cypherdoc points out most of the big miners will probably play their cards close until the december conference, or after the January XT start date.

The irony, or in my case irritation from all of this, is from looking again @Peter R 101 for planet earth, it's clear even with 101 it's not the last we'll see of this issue. I don't know about others, but I do feel a tide has turned, propaganda and hyperbolae flow faster than reason or truth. It's taken several years and the last 6 months of 'urgency' to force this issue.

To my mind BSCore are in a very fragile position right now. The scaling conference is 'their big day' if they don't pull out something special 'namely implement 101 into Core', then I think they may well see a full scale revolt on their hands. Effectively Coinbase, Bitpay and Bitstamp with others, are laying the cards down and calling team CoreDev out, 101 or bust.

It's a real shame it has to come to this, there has been an enormous amount of intellectual capital and reputation spent on this debate. There were better uses. Even now, I respect many of these people to the point I can't believe bad faith. The issue to me is, too much high brow, narrow thinking and arrogance.

Maybe? Just maybe, they are right? But if that is the case, why cant they explain their reasons in terms the rest of us can understand.
...................................
As for this idiot he can just F**k righ off
 

Members online