Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[shilch]

Yes, BU members signing ABC's Enabling Act.

 

[bitsko]

Adjustable Blocksize Cap Unlimited is born.

(but set at medium until we let you know its safe)

 

[lunar]

• 

 

[cypherdoc]

aren't officers of most organizations supposed to stay impartial? this isn't the BU I helped found.

what I see is blind hatred of a man who won't ultimately control BSV. yes, I remain equally hedged. how about @Peter R?
[doublepost=1557154223][/doublepost]

Adjustable Blocksize Cap Unlimited is born.

(but set at medium until we let you know its safe)

its not medium and its not about you knowing. it's about you being allowed.

 

[bitsko]

@Peter R , will you be helping MrMcormack ?

@deadalnix , wen lightning?

 

[cbeast]

He was talking about intentionally recycling coins, not collisions. *sigh* It's estimated up to six million bitcoins are burnt already and the number only grows over time. It becomes impossible to estimate the market cap to determine its scarcity. I mean, why not then just add a small amount of inflation to adjust for leakage? If you throw off economic incentives, folks will look for other forms of scarcity like off-chain transactions. I will find that reference in the future to the 5-year recycling and post it here eventually. Meanwhile, keep learning about BSV!
[doublepost=1557156089,1557155361][/doublepost]

@cbeast
This is the post:
https://medium.com/@craig_10243/fixing-op-fals-fd157899d2b7

"In having an end capacity of just under 21 million bitcoin (BCH), some bitcoin will be “lost”, but this is analogous to bullion money being lost. In time, it can be found, and returned into circulation. I cover some of the differences in a prior article. When a private key is lost, it is merely out of circulation. It may be many years, but all old addresses eventually become mine-able and can be recovered.
Returning “lost” money into circulation is a future means of miner revenue and analogous to salvage firms who seek lost bullion on ships that have sunk in the sea."

Every key can be eventually discovered, he is not talking about implementing some strange way to get "lost" coins from sleeping addresses..

That one is similar, but it talks about intentionally burnt bitcoins. That's more about preventing burning attacks. He does mention old addresses, but not how they will be mined. Cracking keys is not the same thing as mining.

 

[cypherdoc]

>Cracking keys is not the same thing as mining.

I was gonna say.

>It becomes impossible to estimate the market cap to determine its scarcity.

them how will miners ever know what coins are truly lost?

 

[Norway]

@Peter R , will you be helping MrMcormack ?

@deadalnix , wen lightning?

Maybe @Peter R can volunteer as "expert witness" to protect Adam Back from Satoshi Nakamoto in court.

 

[bitsko]

can BU fund peter rizun in helping adam back and peter mcormack, and fund ledger too please

 

[cypherdoc]

setup a buip. anything's possible.

 

[Norway]

And fund Emin Gun Sirer's altcoin and Avalanche and BloXroute.
[doublepost=1557165410][/doublepost]Or how about sponsoring the Hodlonaut legal fund? Anonymous libel and defamation is a human right!

 

[Norway]

@sickpig voted no to BSV on both buip's. Very disappointed.

 

[Zarathustra]

The BU implementation is (un-) dead, but the BU forum is alive and well. I've never been a member. I think anonymous accounts getting membership with voting power of an organisation doesn't make much sense. An implementation, maintained by officers and devs who stopped participating in our forum and instead agitate from behind on other social mediums, will have much less influence on Bitcoin than this forum.

 

[Tomothy]

I recognize that the BU voting may not yet be finalized, but as it appears BSV will no longer be supported, what, for those of you who have and continue to support BSV do next?

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

Yes, it appears so. Even if the voting doesn't reach the required votes, it is very clear: The BU developers do no longer (want to) release a version compatible with BSV.

As Shilch said: This is the ABC enabling act. Bitcoin Unlimited volontarily gives away an alternative to the ABC owner's of BCH.

From some perspective it is positive, as it makes things clear, will get the fighting out of BU and help to focus energy (like every submission does). So, it might be a good thing for BCH. For BU it is imho very bad, but who knows?

In the end, BU stops supporting the vision which was at the beginning of BU - it doesn't support the only blockchain which blocksize is not set by a developer oligarchy, but by market consensus. It also loses the chance to participate in the only public real big blocks testnet. And it gives away the last political deposit to resist ABC supremacy.

What I'm gonna do? Hold my BCH, hold my BTC, hold my BSV, leave the episode of engaging in the fight for big blocks behind, accept the fact that I have always wrong since 2016 respectively end up with the most unpopular team which loses the market. Step back to being an observer, have an eye on other coins which do not start with "Bit". Don't know. Maybe I'll leave BU (and no, I'm not one of the guys BU submissed to today, so I'm not gonna write a angry, salty blog post about it)

 

[bitsko]

BSV supporters could, in theory, try and elect a developer who is friendly to BSV with the intention of using BU resources toward porting BU tech to the BSV codebase.

Would BCH supporters reject in the vote? Its quite possible.

As bitcoin professionalizes, will there remain a place for a democratic development process?

 

[freetrader]

In the end, BU stops supporting the vision which was at the beginning of BU - it doesn't support the only blockchain which blocksize is not set by a developer oligarchy, but by market consensus.

You keep saying this as if it were true.
Meanwhile, you run around making false claims about BU's blocksize being set by Amaury.
I'm ashamed to say you are a fellow BU member.

It also loses the chance to participate in the only public real big blocks testnet.

Wasn't aware that the STN wasn't open to general participation.
How is SV going to ensure BU cannot participate on their test network?

And it gives away the last political deposit to resist ABC supremacy.

You are still in a mindset where BSV hasn't somehow split off from Bitcoin Cash.
BU is free to make its own destiny as a client on Bitcoin Cash.
If demand grows faster than ABC or other clients can handle, and BU is positioned to handle things better, why would miners not use it?

 

[8up]

What is that?

 

[freetrader]

 

[Zarathustra]

BU is free to make its own destiny as a client on Bitcoin Cash.
If demand grows faster than ABC or other clients can handle, and BU is positioned to handle things better, why would miners not use it?

Miners don't use the BU client. Miners read the BU thread.
Bitcoin Unlimited is not the BU client. BU is much more; it's a philosophy. If the client doesn't represent Bitcoin Unlimited, then it isn't part of Bitcoin Unlimited anymore.