Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

The hate BU is getting from both BSV and ABC fanboys lately tells me that you guys must be doing something very right.

Makes me more optimistic again!

 

[cypherdoc]

the poison block theory from the likes of dweebs like @freetrader @jtoomim Greg, Luke, and PT continues to be a stupid theory to justify crippling Bitcoin via limits; an honest block and a poison block both require solving the same PoW. the problem with the poison block is that, instead of taking immediate sustainable profit from an honest block, it requires a huge risk of releasing it based on some economic loss and tenuous at best assumptions of future benefit in bankrupting small miners that may be way better capitalized than large miners think. not to mention the retribution. plus, poison blocks need to be sustained to do any real damage.

 

[digitsu]

Like Dr. Craig Wright try to teach people: Ownership of keys is not ownership of funds. @theZerg, @solex and @Peter R does not own the BU funds. The membership should be informed about what's happening with the funds. If the funds have been used privately by some or all of the three key holders, it would be a serious breach of trust.

Agreed on the transparency bit. Hiding behind some claim of 'security' is facetious given that in the 10 years of Bitcoin there has never been a security breach, deliberate double spends or illegal seizure of any funds --despite all the hashwars and forks.

Anonymity is the shield of deceit.

 

[Zarathustra]

The hate BU is getting from both BSV and ABC fanboys lately tells me that you guys must be doing something very right.

Makes me more optimistic again!

Supporting the ABC fork has more to do with masochism than 'doing something very right'.

 

[cypherdoc]

the replay protection and EDA from the initial ABC/BTC fork were meant to ensure the split to two chains. that was a mistake (probably intentional) .

 

[digitsu]

I think it would be a good read for folks here: This is Amaury's playbook, and many others as well. It is the seminal book on how to start a subversive campaign to destabilize the establishment, and gather the support of the lower classes to your supposedly 'noble' causes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals

 

[bitsko]

@satoshis_sockpuppet , patents exist, the world exists beyond your feelings, no matter how hard you press your thumbs through the holes of your sweater or flick your bangs out of your eyes.

muh patents. jfc wake up hippie.
[doublepost=1567350896][/doublepost]@Peter R , Are you paying taxes on conversions and sales of crypto on behalf of BU?

 

[freetrader]

the replay protection and EDA from the initial ABC/BTC fork were meant to ensure the split to two chains. that was a mistake (or intentional) .

Not a mistake at all.

Exchanges practically demanded replay protection for a Bitcoin fork.
That's why BCH implemented it and performed the cleanest fork to date.

The EDA was a survival mechanism which was removed once it was no longer needed.

The BSV fork illustrated perfectly well that a dirty fork without replay protection causes grief for users.

For some reason, exchanges did not insist that BSV requires replay protection, like they did for BCH and the proposed Segwit2x fork.

The correct response to avoid user hassle would have been not to list BSV at all unless it implemented that.

However, it's clear now that this "mistake" by the exchanges was, in some cases, intentional.
It correlates well with certain Core-supporting exchanges that are known for their shenanigans.

 

[bitsko]

Bummer that 100,000 coin inflation bribe with little to show for it now.

 

[Norway]

Exchanges practically demanded replay protection for a Bitcoin fork.
That's why BCH implemented it and performed the cleanest fork to date.

Could you share some more details about this? I believe there will be court cases related to this, and the facts should be brought to daylight.

 

[cypherdoc]

Not a mistake at all.

it was. the continual switching and oscillation prior to the EDA would have resulted in one coin winning; desirable unless you're a divider.

since when do exchanges dictate sound money principles?

EDA merely morphed into DDA.
[doublepost=1567353908][/doublepost]

For some reason, exchanges did not insist that BSV requires replay protection, like they did for BCH and the proposed Segwit2x fork.

that's because it was never needed. it's for dividers. like you.

 

[freetrader]

Could you share some more details about this? I believe there will be court cases related to this, and the facts should be brought to daylight.

It was all over public media.

Are you somehow unable to google things?

 

[Peter R]

[doublepost=1567350896][/doublepost]@Peter R , Are you paying taxes on conversions and sales of crypto on behalf of BU?

I have never converted any crypto on behalf of BU. Tax implications is one of the unresolved obstacles that prevented BU from executing BIP072 over the timeframe intended. @solex has been working hard for over a year now--and as a volunteer I should add--to set up the correct legal framework to allow conversions to take place safely and without exposing BU, its directors, or its members to any legal ambiguities or risks.

In hindsight, we should have posted a note in the BUIP072 thread to communicate to the members that BUIP072 would be executed more slowly than described in the BUIP. On behalf of the BU directors, I apologize for the lack of clarity in this regard.

 

[bitsko]

thanks for the response. why not we pay solex or hire a professional?

 

[Zarathustra]

"BitcoinUnlimited"

And Roger's blocks are even more un-unlimited. Don't block the stream!

They don't like Adrian's humour.

 

[cypherdoc]

wtf? I thought it was supposed to be 32mb? how lame.

No BCH miner will dare mine >32mb under a dev default regime. it will get orphaned due to a limited regime coordinated through the github . unlike with an unlimited BSV where you see miners freely experimenting with 256mb blocks and greater coordinated through economic demand.

 

[Norway]

He is probably talking about the default of max generated/soft limit.

 

[cypherdoc]

still lame. let the miners decide furchrissakes.

 

[Norway]

Yes, agree. 8MB default max generated on BU is a joke. Gives the pigs more influence on the farm.

 

[cypherdoc]

why can't caveden realize he's making the argument for BSV? that whole thread doesn't realize it's pro BSV :

[doublepost=1567377580][/doublepost][doublepost=1567377704,1567376995][/doublepost]meanwhile, bsv diligently jamming through progressive blocksizes produced all the way up to 256mb with more to come.