Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

this is just sad. Bitmain and bitcoin.com can't even keep the hash rebalanced. it's gone back to pre-fork distribution. now is the time to launch the SV attack:

[doublepost=1543102996,1543102125][/doublepost]here Roger claims his multicoining miners were going to keep ABC's hash neck to neck with SV. what happened? any knucklehead that can understand this failure, coupled with the falling behind in block height, and the proportionate SV price gains and BTC price collapse, and the knucklehead reorg protections by ABC devs, should be able to see that their PoW lead is about to vanish as well. what excuse will ABC cucks use then?:

[doublepost=1543103743][/doublepost]

This point makes more sense, although one interpretation is that ABC is feeling less threatened by SV now and no longer feels the need to mine at a huge loss like SV is doing.

how could you even begin to conclude this? you feel safe? really? if you think leaving yourself wide open to all sorts of SV attacks b/c of a hash ratio of 73%SV: 27%ABC amplified now by a new chain split attack vector, i got news for you. why does every ABC supporter feel such a need to declare premature victory? (not necessarily you altho you dumped all your SV).
[doublepost=1543104125][/doublepost]here's another big bad factor you need to consider if you're hoping for a BTC reversal that probably won't be coming thus knuckling down even harder on Bitmain & Roger:

[doublepost=1543104281][/doublepost]oh, i'm sorry. it's widening even faster now:

[doublepost=1543104575][/doublepost]@freetrader no, i think you're going to be the 95%:

 

[cypherdoc]

more bad news. according to this, ABC multicoining miners are losing dollars 25% faster than SV, in contrast to what many mouth breathing ABC supporters have claimed. that's not good:

 

[cypherdoc]

oh brother. and everyone here thinks i wanted some kinda power grab to merely do what every other moderator in any other forum can do; clean out spam.

 

[cypherdoc]

if you keep spamming, i'm sure you'll get plenty of the mouth breathers in this thread to donate.
[doublepost=1543107407][/doublepost]oh, boohoo ABC:

 

[Windowly]

As someone who supports Satoshi's original vision this whole episode is kind of fun. Dr. Craig Wright warned that anyone trying to cross Satoshi's original vision would lose in the end. Seems the end has come quicker than anyone thought.

more bad news. according to this, ABC multicoining miners are losing dollars 25% faster than SV, in contrast to what many mouth breathing ABC supporters have claimed. that's not good:

 

[go1111111]

how could you even begin to conclude this? you feel safe? really? if you think leaving yourself wide open to all sorts of SV attacks b/c of a hash ratio of 73%SV: 27%ABC amplified now by a new chain split attack vector, i got news for you.

I personally feel pretty safe because my last ABC transaction was many days ago. I'm confident that if SV does succeed in some sort of attack, the ABC community will respond either by changing PoW or getting people to upgrade to new software that treats the attacking chain as invalid.

Although I know that the ABC community won't accept any sort of long re-org from the SV people, it is possible that an SV attack could seriously harm the price of ABC. Although interestingly if SV does kill ABC then it just demonstrates to the world that PoW security is not great and that SV is equally vulnerable to BTC miners or states. (Thought I doubt BTC miners would attack -- they view SV as an ally because BTCers see ABC as the truth threat. See Greg Maxwell trying to prop up CSW).

The biggest winner in a successful SV attack on ABC would probably be ETH and a few other coins with PoS plans.

why does every ABC supporter feel such a need to declare premature victory? (not necessarily you altho you dumped all your SV).

I think a lot of it is because it was SV themselves who initially set up the goalposts around the "there will be no fork" claim. You have CSW confidently proclaiming about 100 times that the fork won't happen because SV won't let it. So when the fork happened it made SV look especially incompetent and full of impotent bluster.

It must have felt especially satisfying to ABC people to rub the situation in the SV side's faces after hearing Arye whining about ABC "cheating", because the SV narrative has been that all is fair in a hashwar.

CSW is now pushing a narrative that this is a marathon and if everyone just waits they'll see that SV will eventually triumph. If that was the narrative all along I doubt you'd see nearly as much early celebration from ABC.

 

[cypherdoc]

wow, ok. i disagree with just about every sentence you wrote but that's how ppl are; everyone sees things different. good luck.

 

[Richy_T]

And the world didn't end which further illustrates the depth of Core's bullshit.
[doublepost=1543110839][/doublepost]

EDIT: your images were not showing up for me at first. It looks like your point is more about a trend you see in which ABC hash power is falling off but SV hashpower is staying strong. This point makes more sense, although one interpretation is that ABC is feeling less threatened by SV now and no longer feels the need to mine at a huge loss like SV is doing.

Definitely this. ABC has, to appearances (and whether one believes it actually has or not) won. The main threat would be from a reorg attack and high hash power is not required to be used on the chain to defend against that. It can be switched over, if required. Therefore, it makes more sense to mine the most profitable chain.

 

[adamstgbit]

looking at the charts I find it hard to understand why anyone could conclude that their is a winner.
if anything at the current moment looks like SV is taking the lead.
like what data are you looking at that makes you believe ABC has "won"

this is probably the first split in which hash power on both sides is split so evenly.

and this is 10days in? (last time i check the party line was "there will be no fork")

ahhh if only BU had been like "fuck all you all, we;re forking too!" i would of known who to side with.

 

[solex]

From observing the current Hardfork, I have a pet theory.
From a distance this seems like a failure of Nakamoto Consensus? (what if it wasn't, just something new to learn?) It occurred to me; What if there are two forms of Nakamoto Consensus, Weak and Strong (like the weak and strong nuclear forces in particle physics?)

Great observation.
Perhaps the NC failure can be described this way:
1). Multiple forks with competing miners using the same protocol with the same network effect.
2). Multiple forks with competing miners using a different protocol, but for the same network effect.

The first is the example described in the 2008 white paper and can be considered "strong NC".
The second case is what we are seeing in BCH. The failure of NC is "weak" because of disagreement on protocol. The latter takes much longer to play out as community splits.

 

[Zarathustra]

@Zarathustra: So section 10 of the white paper isn't Satoshi's vision anymore?

Section 10 is about privacy. Do you think anonymity, privacy and pseudonymity are identical?
ABC's devil wrote an article about the differences.
[doublepost=1543131694,1543130610][/doublepost]

I personally feel pretty safe because my last ABC transaction was many days ago. I'm confident that if SV does succeed in some sort of attack, the ABC community will respond either by changing PoW or getting people to upgrade to new software that treats the attacking chain as invalid.

Changing PoW. That will be the 'Endsieg'.

Although I know that the ABC community won't accept any sort of long re-org from the SV people, it is possible that an SV attack could seriously harm the price of ABC. Although interestingly if SV does kill ABC then it just demonstrates to the world that PoW security is not great and that SV is equally vulnerable to BTC miners or states. (Thought I doubt BTC miners would attack -- they view SV as an ally because BTCers see ABC as the truth threat. See Greg Maxwell trying to prop up CSW).

Maxwellian support can only damage SV. He knows it.

 

[8up]

looking at the charts I find it hard to understand why anyone could conclude that their is a winner.
if anything at the current moment looks like SV is taking the lead.
like what data are you looking at that makes you believe ABC has "won"

this is probably the first split in which hash power on both sides is split so evenly.

and this is 10days in? (last time i check the party line was "there will be no fork")

ahhh if only BU had been like "fuck all you all, we;re forking too!" i would of known who to side with.

There's valuable knowledge to be gained in times of uncertainty. Knowledge/order has to be created out of chaos to make sense of it.

 

[go1111111]

Maxwellian support can only damage SV. He knows it.

If that's true, why did Coingeek seem so happy about Greg supporting SV? https://coingeek.com/former-blockstream-cto-gregory-maxwell-sees-light/. Is Coingeek secretly trying to damage SV?

Why did CSW leak the email? I guess he wants to damage SV too?

 

[KoKansei]

I think what @Zarathustra is saying is Gmax knows he's the kiss of death for anybody's reputation in the eyes of those who view bitcoin as electronic cash rather than a toy settlement layer. He was trying to subvert SV from the outset by associating himself with CSW in an attempt to poison the latter's reputation by association.

The gambit is downright comical (like the tone of the CG article: "Gmax sees the light" lmao) and I don't blame CSW for making light of it given how obvious it is. It reeks of neck-bearded desperation.

 

[Zarathustra]

 

[cypherdoc]

@freetrader

Lol, everything now makes sense. Congrats to Mr. HOdlcoin! I'm honored by the name! :

 

[cypherdoc]

damn dude, nice site!

"dumbshit maximalists, dumbshit maximalists" - @freetrader

that I am! lol! free trade my ass.

https://memberapp.github.io/#thread?root=5314ee04b707e49f96cfcda24ce093a178526808b48b4cd634f4d19e7b48048d&post=dd9e94334922e524493bee4903b418df46b9260b4e2876ac98ac26c8b8f7415b

 

[freetrader]

@cypherdoc

It has been sad to see you degenerate, and with it this thread.
I don't know where you went for your long leave of absence, but you've certainly not caught up again, and it's not done you any good.

Oh well, can't bring along everyone on this ride. Hope you stay true to your name, "Hodl".

https://www.reddit.com/r/btcfork/comments/6rxoo1/fyi_i_am_not_free_trade_the_hodlcoin_dev_he_is/

 

[cypherdoc]

Well good. glad to see you clear that up. what a fricking relief! I was gearing up for a months trolling campaign! I see that I'm not the only one who got that confused. I'm happy to retract.

Btw, you're confused about me and the tone of this thread. anyone who's followed this thread over its years knows that it is filled with my battles with various trolls who have dared enter here spewing bullshit. kinda like you. if anything, my return is returning it to its original vision. be happy and free trade!
[doublepost=1543149559,1543148816][/doublepost]@freetrader

Btw, you did call us maximalists "dumbshits". doesn't that mean you like altcoins aka multicoining?

 

[freetrader]

Btw, you did call us maximalists "dumbshits". doesn't that mean you like altcoins aka multicoining?

It means that I think anyone who believes there will be just one world currency, and that currency will be called Bitcoin - or resemble Bitcoin v0.1 - , is a dumbshit - and doesn't understand human nature.

Even worse if they believe they need to, or can, force others to use it.

No kings, no masters.