Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherblock]

The point of talking about the Turing completeness in bitcoin is because dr. Craig Wright was the first to point out this property of the system.

One track mind you got there. You assume I have an agenda, you want to prove your man is smart.

My point of discussing turing completeness with bitcoin is to find out 1 ) is it? and 2) what does that mean for us. Claiming it is turing complete based on a plagiarized altered paper written in 1960s with "bitcoin script" inserted in various places is harley proof. If some mathematician familiar with the systems and notation in that paper wants to step up and verify that this in fact does apply to bitcoin script that would at least be Something.

I credit Craig with asserting bold things with handwaving proof and inspiring others to prove him right or wrong. He is good at that. The Peter R bet you mentioned is another example and I'm the only one that seems to know why Craig is still wrong on that general subject despite the semantics of their silly bet. I did learn a few things along the way as perhaps others have when investigating that subject.

This is another example. Person claims something bold, others doubt it, offers a plagiarized proof no one can follow, inspires others to investigate the subject. So I'll give him that.

 

[Norway]

Sorry, but I've seen technocrats hiding their agenda behind technical arguments for many years in this space. You're not fooling me. You continue to downplay the significance of CSW's statements using the following playbook:

- You're not convinced. (No matter how much this is proven to you.)
- It's not effective. (Which is beside the point.)
- It's not important. (Which it is, in the matter of giving Craig Wright the respect for his insights into bitcoin's inner workings that he deserves.)

[doublepost=1569770238][/doublepost]Does anyone know who's behind this twitter account?

 

[bitsko]

I think the forum owner, @Bloomie , runs the @bitcoinsite twitter account

 

[Norway]

 

[cypherdoc]

i'm still waiting for my 2G attack and/or spam blocks. where are they?

 

[Norway]

@cypherdoc
Big "attack" incoming in a few hours.

 

[trinoxol]

That is amazing.

2 MB average per block is 288 MB per day and 100 GB per year. Some of that is just people playing around but that can't be that much volume. It seems that people actually find the chain useful.

BSV is at 1 % BTC price. What a gross mispricing.

 

[lunar]

Day 1: CoinGeek Seoul Conference 2019 live stream

 

[Norway]

@Otaci has a fantastic talk on Teranode. This is how you scale!

 

[Norway]

Must be weird to watch this live stream and still be convinced that it's all a huge scam

What do you say @Peter R? Is it a scam from a guy that can't even do math? I can't ask you in the BU Slack because you kicked me out of it.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

Those which are convinced this is all a scam will not watch it, because they know it is all a scam

 

[cypherdoc]

ah, what they don't know they do not know.

in other news, pretty big deal:

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/new-zealand-legalizes-cryptocurrency-salaries-including-bitcoin-2019-8-1028442320

 

[Norway]

Day 2 of the CoinGeek conference in Seoul will be streamed here. Watch it live or miss out. Hard to tell when the videos get published.

 

[Norway]

Yesterdays livestream is now published as on-demand video here:

 

[Norway]

40 minutes until the live streaming from Seoul begins. I'm eager like a beaver. Today, it will be about business.

Feels like Shitcoin Unlimited (BU) and ABC is a tree house club for 5yo kids. Like Jimmy says: It's time for bitcoin to grow up.
[doublepost=1569972917][/doublepost]Just in! A live report from the treehouse. Kids considering post and pre consensus that is not consensus but it could be. Maybe. Let's implement Avalanche without implementing it. And record the effects it could have had while it doesn't have an effect.

This clown car is getting more crazy each day. Enjoy the madness, and see the true face of technocrats in action here:

 

[Norway]

This is important to remember. It took 1 whole year from @theZerg's optimization of the mempool acceptance rate until it was merged into the code.

1 year.

Shitcoin Unlimited (BU) has no ambition at all.

 

[cypherdoc]

Hello, I recommend MR, Joseph Lee to anyone out there in search of good and legitimate account manager for your Bitcoin cryptocurrency investment. he has really improved my financial status with his tremendous advance signal called the ATL-V500. I am making $17,000BTC weekly with an investment of $1,000BTC. contact him today for more information. josephleeinvestment@gmail.com

lol. oh brother.

 

[Norway]

Was @Peter Tschipper a genius when he made Xthin?

Was @theZerg a genius when he removed a bottleneck for mempool acceptance?

No. We should be honest. We cheered them on because they did it without a salary, and it helped our investments.

They performed trivial engineering tasks without getting paid. That's the truth.
[doublepost=1569976854,1569975808][/doublepost]Shitcoin Unlimited developers have delivered in two years what 1 engineer working for Elon Musk deliver in 1 week. It's not personal. It's about the environment where the development happens.

Professional or amateur. Not about competence, but about incentives.

 

[cypherblock]

Yesterdays livestream is now published as on-demand video here:

I thought the sCrypt complier thing was sort of cool, but they need to optimize the output some more.

Here's their "equal" function initialized to value "5" (it will check if the input, not shown, equals 5).

OP_5 OP_0 OP_1
OP_PICK OP_1 OP_ROLL
OP_DROP OP_2
OP_PICK
OP_1 OP_PICK OP_EQUAL
OP_NIP OP_NIP OP_NIP

While I'm sure there's a reason it ends up like this, an optimization would just be to have it produce:

OP_5 OP_EQUAL

Also their "loop" example (2:03:38) forces the user to enter the number of loops at compile time. As shown in my previous post a cooler loop lets the user decide at run time (using input) how many times to loop, and only enforces at compile time a maximum number of iterations.

 

[cypherdoc]

hey @freetrader @satoshis_sockpuppet @Mengerian. i know this pisses you off but it's true, BSV has permanently exceeded BCH in both blocksizes produced and in tx's per block. that's not good; for BCH:





[doublepost=1569980700][/doublepost]this to me, is actually the most interesting chart of the day; BSV fees per block are steadily rising vs the block reward. during the stress tests, the fees actually exceeded the block rewards. that's exactly what's supposed to happen (as outlined in the WP) as Bitcoin matures and the transition to a fees only per block is how miners get paid and sustain themselves as the guardians of the network. i don't see that on either BTC or BCH. that's bad; for them:


[doublepost=1569981356,1569980368][/doublepost]unbelievable. u/tcrypt, one of the most active and respected technical members of the BCH community wants BCH to become mostly a POS coin:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoincashSV/comments/dby7w3/so_if_im_understanding_this_correctly_you_want_55/