Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[freetrader]

since ppl know who i am, unlike you, this is verifiable

Actually, I do not take this as a given. People know who used the handle 'cypherdoc' in the past.
That's in no way verifiable proof that the same person is now in control of your account.

One word: Bitcointalk.

 

[cypherdoc]

i already provided a pgp signature from the public key i posted here in this forum a few years ago when i restarted this thread here and which is in my sig below. that's not good enough?

 

[freetrader]

Maybe I should publish a special Bitcoin Cash (BCH) address, where bitsko, Zarathustra and cypherdoc can deposit $10 in BCH with an OP_RETURN linking to their forum posts which I will then read. (thanks to Ryan X. Charles and before him, Adam Back, for the general inspiration of that idea).

I think this is actually a neat idea. I'll start the vanity address generator. I'll freely trade my attention for your hard cash too.

I am proud to finally announce my very own "One Fuck Given" address a la Ryan X. Charles, qz0te9uu34l30khu8az0r47wlkukwtdt75qtwr4vwd , which will follow the above principle, laid out in more detail below.

Step 1. send $10 to the above address - in Bitcoin Cash (BCH) only. Preferably with attached OP_RETURN linking to forum post, Memo post or whatever you want me to attend.

Step 2. Notify me of your payment txid in some way. Get a buddy or fellow cult member to do it if you don't feel like blowing a sockpuppet on Memo. If you omitted the OP_RETURN, now is the time to inform me of which forum post link, Memo link or whatever you want me to attend.

Step 3. Conditional upon confirmation of the payment, I will inspect the link and reply as I see fit. If what you wish me to inspect is lengthy and boring, I will at that point trade more of my attention for more of your hard earned cash.

This rule in effect immediately for individuals in my "Ignore" list on this forum. Let's give Ryan's scheme a fair go.

Viva free trade!

p.s. Dumping vast amounts of coin into the above address is not guaranteed to buy you my attention. Quite the opposite in fact, as I then almost inevitably go on vacation and spend it all on hookers and blackjack.

 

[79b79aa8]

Predictability is important for growth

Sure thing, but what does that actually mean?

On BCH, transactions work just like they did before, with the additional capabilities available now by OP_CHECKDATASIG/-VERIFY.

gemini decided not to list BCHUSD because of fork uncertainty. at this point it does not seem to be a priority for them to list it anymore.

that is what it actually means.

the fork was not necessary. it led to a split. the authoritarian interventionist model is broken.

 

[bitsko]

So this patchouli burner mod can unilaterally block people in someone else's thread and then posts asking for money.

lol

 

[freetrader]

Anyone else unable to see bitsko's post or is my 'Ignore' list really my own 'Ignore' list and did the trustafarian just inhale too much of his own patchouli?

For the curious, just because it says 'Moderator' next to my profile pic doesn't mean I have any moderation power in this thread. Never asked for any either. Not sure what cultists are smoking these days. So relax, I can't "block" anybody in this thread, all I can do is ignore trolls. And so can you.

For those of you who wish to ignore me, I'm truly sorry this forum doesn't seem to make it easy. Maybe @Bloomie can find a way to make me 'ignorable' in the forum settings.

 

[cypherdoc]

what a sense of self importance. what a joke. Ryan yes, you no.

 

[AdrianX]

"poison blocks, are bad because it hurts small miners which leads to centralization?"
was that his argument??
what a shame...

But if you use parallel validation, the poison blocks can be rendered mute. The creator of the poison block is at risk of being orphaned if the block takes longer than the average time to mine a block. There is also the option that if the block comes from a known miner who you trust you could do head first mining until the miner's reputation is burned. Or just use ABC and the developers will protect you.

 

[AdrianX]

@BldSwtTrs: And a single company running the show plus your chief scientist talking about recirculating lost coins is the hallmark of stability? Not to speak of having to follow the minority of a minority chain plus soon having to deal with replay protected transaction?

For real?

I just liked awemany's post because it is a possibility. The Yin-Yang cult of Craig always believes half of what he says. His Proponents believe the positive, his antagonists the negative, the rationalists ignore the noise and look at the facts.

Stability or instability does not originate on Twitter nor from ideas called papers.

SV has the same incentives as ABC to stay honest the investors in the coin know what to look for. ABC is about sacrificing stability for potential long-term growth, SV sacrificing short-term decentralization for long-term stability to encourage short-term growth.

The experiment continues.
[doublepost=1543630817][/doublepost]

No @BldSwtTrs , I don't mean philosophy, I mean give people a link to the specifications, so that they may adapt their software too...

In regards to the threat of a reorg, we don't need developers to step in and protect businesses in the economy, we need businesses who depend on blockchain immutability to understand how it works.

The free market solution is to increase the number of confirmations needed before you can transact. Uncertainty drives the need for certainty. Miners will converge on a chain when they need to cash out to pay for electricity. Honest players are not affected, dishonest may try spending on each separate chain.

 

[Zarathustra]

For the curious, just because it says 'Moderator' next to my profile pic doesn't mean I have any moderation power in this thread.

Yes, wrong description of your function here. @Bloomie should change it. A moderator usually moderates, ie when conflicts occur, he actually moderates (temper, curb, reduce, alleviate ...)

You are doing the opposite. You escalate. Hence you are not a moderator, you are an escalator.

 

[molecular]

Anyone else unable to see bitsko's post or is my 'Ignore' list really my own 'Ignore' list and did the trustafarian just inhale too much of his own patchouli?

I can see his posts.

 

[freetrader]

In regards to the threat of a reorg, we don't need developers to step in and protect businesses in the economy, we need businesses who depend on blockchain immutability to understand how it works.

The free market solution is to increase the number of confirmations needed before you can transact. Uncertainty drives the need for certainty. Miners will converge on a chain when they need to cash out to pay for electricity.

This is exactly what happened. The businesses who understood the importance of not having records of economic activity undone stepped up and had defensive solutions implemented.
They increased the number of confirmations required on many platforms, but I believe with better defenses in place will be able to lower them until the threat is completely gone.

Honest players are not affected, dishonest may try spending on each separate chain.

Indeed the exact outcome. I don't know of a single economic transaction that was disrupted on the BCH chain during this "war", and now those who stated they were in favor of attacking the chain have their own, separate chain to transact on. WIN WIN!
[doublepost=1543659733][/doublepost]Now that CoinGeek Week is over, I'm a bit surprised since I didn't see any Teranode prototype or alpha being demo'd (it was announced prior that Shadders had this ready to present). Maybe more hot air than reality at this stage?

Additionally I didn't see any technical discussion of the upcoming SV replay protection measures (announced but where are they being discussed and developed?)

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

Imho it's time to split up the community in this forum as well.
The split is real and the last ten pages are just insults. And I don't know if everybody pimping their ignore list is smarter than just splitting up this thread.

BCH and BSV won't become friends.

And maybe BU should start to think about a way to split up into BU BSV and BU BCH as well.

 

[cypherdoc]

Yes, wrong description of your function here. @Bloomie should change it. A moderator usually moderates, ie when conflicts occur, he actually moderates (temper, curb, reduce, alleviate ...)

You are doing the opposite. You escalate. Hence you are not a moderator, you are an escalator.

now people can see how empty of a title it really is quite contrary to the way it was presented to me.
[doublepost=1543664938][/doublepost]>And I don't know if everybody pimping their ignore list is smarter than just splitting up this thread.

I'm sure Bloomie would be happy to take advantage of my name and thread title if it means doubling his ad revenue. I'm sure he wouldn't even bother asking either.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

Imho it's time to split up the community in this forum as well.
The split is real and the last ten pages are just insults. And I don't know if everybody pimping their ignore list is smarter than just splitting up this thread.

BCH and BSV won't become friends.

And maybe BU should start to think about a way to split up into BU BSV and BU BCH as well.

WTF? How about just calming down, getting back to politeness, doing some self-reflections, keeping the brains in this thread united, and rallying around BOTH big blocks Bitcoin? Why are so many people here obsessed with dividing this community? Too lazy in the brain to compute other opinions?

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

I'm sure Bloomie would be happy to take advantage of my name and thread title if it means doubling his ad revenue. I'm sure he wouldn't even bother asking either.

Cry me a river.

@Christoph Bergmann
Everybody got their coin and I really don't like to skip over all the - sorry to say it - bullshit posts by the BSV proponents. If this thread was full of BTC hodl bullshit I'd be bugged as well.

I like to read about the real scaling work people like Peter R do and what intelligent people have to say about it. I don't like to read anymore about gigazillion blocks on the fantasy network and small world graphs and personal attacks on people who only do reasonable work. And I don't see what either side can gather from any of that.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

You are free to talk about science and scaling work, as other are free to talk about scaling without changing the protocol. If you don't want personal attacks, maybe you start with not doing them by yourself.

It's a matter of fact that our Big Block community has split. But it did not split about "bullshit" vs. "science", nor did it split because "intelligent people" vs dumb followers of CSW. There is a gazillon more reasons, and those reasons reflect the variety of disciplines and parts involved in Bitcoin. Restricting this thread's focus on just one part of the whole story doesn't get you anywhere.

 

[Zarathustra]

I like to read about the real scaling work people like Peter R do and what intelligent people have to say about it.

Who prevents you from forking and creating a thread "Gold Collapsing - Bitcoin ABC up?"
Your personal devil would say: "Fuck off!" or "Compete!"

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

But please implement replay protection

 

[Bagatell]

So you BSV supporters despise the devs, loathe the guy who hosts this forum and have forked off, but you want the rest of us to leave?