Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[lunar]

lol. I too hastily reported @duck for spam.

Watching LNX play out almost exactly as predicted years ago, is both frustrating and
reassuring.

The frustration is with it taking years for the rest of the world to catch on.
"It's going to kill the tree"

'NO!!, this is evolution, a new, enhanced, double layer tree'​

"I'm telling you, it will suck its life and eventually kill the main tree"

'You're a toxic shill, Fork off'​

CrrrrrACK..... "timber"
[doublepost=1576868496,1576867874][/doublepost]Meanwhile ....

Bitcoin not Unlimited, must really be feeling the sting of irony these days. You guys got played, or have an unacknowledged conflict of interest. Which is it? @solex

 

[bitsko]

Genesis Hard Fork Upgrade: Unlimited Bitcoin

Bitcoin Unlimited: ABC's redheaded stepchild

 

[Norway]

lol. I too hastily reported @duck for spam.

So did I, lol!

 

[cypherdoc]

Genesis Hard Fork Upgrade: Unlimited Bitcoin

Bitcoin Unlimited: ABC's redheaded stepchild

yes, it has to be embarrassing

 

[Jonathan Vaage]

"Support the original sighash algorithm for transaction spending pre-Genesis UTXOs"

Does this mean valid, unbroadcast transactions signed prior to the BTC-BCH fork will now be valid on BSV?

 

[Norway]

If BCH didn't split, I doubt we would have the same fast progress to the genesis of the original protocol because of all the politics that would have happened.

The split was a big step back, but then a huge step forward. It was worth it.

 

[AdrianX]

By any definition LNX is a altcoin

If this was overlooked before, it should be visible now. LN in principles is like a side chain, my reservations and criticisms apply.

The people messing around with these not bitcoin ideas have not yet realized how to make money in bitcoin. These tools degrade the value proposition.

That'll be hilarious if the price decouples.

 

[Zarathustra]

Perhaps the devs have no other choice than make the former Bitcoin Unlimited an Unlimited Bitcoin again. The splitting and rejoining of the swarm system with the split control law ...

 

[torusJKL]

"Support the original sighash algorithm for transaction spending pre-Genesis UTXOs"

Does this mean valid, unbroadcast transactions signed prior to the BTC-BCH fork will now be valid on BSV?

I thought they would only allow UTXO pre BTC-BCH split?

This would essentially make all past and current BTC transactions re-playable on BSV until the Genesis upgrade.

 

[lunar]

What are peoples thoughts on this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoincashSV/comments/ee9262/censorship_resistance_repost_of_the_david_r_allen/

"My conclusion is that David R Allen formed FVNI society, to subvert the big blocker movement through bringing in dirty money that funds ABC, and pushes ABC against BU. Anyone in BCH community should questions why someone with David's past is allowed to run the Developer fund society and why is David allowed to play such a key role in BCH development, given he's neither a developer, nor a champion of adoption, or a major investor."

The FVNI society are giving off a funny smell. ??

 

[bitsko]

supposedly this read.cash account had content which was removed:

https://read.cash/@FVNIisBlockstream2.0

 

[torusJKL]

I thought they would only allow UTXO pre BTC-BCH split?

This would essentially make all past and current BTC transactions re-playable on BSV until the Genesis upgrade.

Although I don't think that removing the replay protection by itself is a bad thing there are scenarios that could affect BSV holders and we should acknowledge this so that the affected people can take action.

A possible scenario is people who spent their UTXO on BTC but never moved their BSV.
Up until now they were protected by the replay protection.
After Genesis those tx could be replayed on BSV.

The easiest way to prevent this is to go back and check if for all BTC transactions (that spend pre BTC-BCH split UTXO) they also made a BCH/BSV transaction.

 

[torusJKL]

This is how grown ups and professional people behave.

https://bitcoinsv.io/2019/12/23/bitcoin-sv-blocking-potential-p2sh-replay-attack-after-genesis-hard-fork/

Shame on those who risk other peoples money for fame.
The same behavior has been seen by other BTC proponents (e.g. Peter Todd who disclosed the Xthin bug)

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

We're still back at "trivial inconvenience" barriers and devteam spoonfeeding consensus rules to miners? All rules should be settings with no default. Force choice at startup.

Nakamoto consensus = competitive economic consensus

Nakamoto consensus created by a dev team is an oxymoron. While nChain does have skin in the game of Bitcoin, they don't have skin in the game of mining; they don't have a strong profit motive to ensure they don't get orphaned. Only miners do. The invisible hand only imbues miners with the incentive to be elite node software developers. Smart miners know this.

If you're going to hand miners software on a silver platter on the reasoning that Honey Badger is still a teenager, at least don't spoonfeed; treat them like a teen: suggest and make good arguments for your position, then let them sink or swim on their own.

Smart miners are hoping nChain makes mistakes in their charity code offerings so that other miners will be tripped up and they can profit as a result. Gmax's central-planner paradigm is a scourge that needs to be cleaned from every nook and cranny of thought around Bitcoin.

 

[Norway]

I agree with most of this @Zangelbert Bingledack. But I disagree with this:

All rules should be settings with no default. Force choice at startup.

There should be a default. And the default should be infinity. If miners get concerned, they should limit themselves. Both for what they accept, and what they produce.

 

[Norway]

BUIP101 was an IQ test. Almost half of the BU membership passed the test. 10 terabyte blocks was not the current capacity of the hardware/software/bandwidth combo.

The idiots thought they had to gauge and decide the abilities of entrepreneurial miners.

The people who voted "no" to BUIP 101 had the smallblock mindset where an exclusive group of developers (the priesthood) should have power over money.

Craig Wright understands this problem now, and so do I. That's why he is pushing all his power to lock a restored protocol down.

To remove the power from a priesthood of developers.

Sorry, @solex & the rest of the BCH power club. You will not have any say on what the protocol should be. Get used to the word "redundant".

 

[Norway]

Word of advice:
When manipulative people like David R. Allen initiates a private conversation with you, you should publish everything as soon as possible.

I did that myself, on the BU Slack.

Peter Rizun kicked me out of the BU Slack because he claimed an anonymous person didn't want my voice to be visible in that forum.

So I can't provide links/history.

The economy of BU is currently out of control. The elected officers don't want you to see the spendings. They are hiding spendings for a reason.

 

[lunar]

Peter Rizun kicked me out of the BU Slack because he claimed an anonymous person didn't want my voice to be visible in that forum.

Peter did you a favour. The BU slack has been very quiet, void of decent discussion, and full of toxic infighting, ever since the split.

metanet-icu.slack. is by far the best signal of any channel I've found.

 

[lunar]

A great debunking of the recent P2SH drama from Kurt Wuckert

https://coingeek.com/is-someone-going-to-steal-greg-maxwells-bsv/

Is someone going to steal Greg Maxwell’s BSV?

 

[Norway]

Snake oil salesmen are going down.