Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[bitsko]

cant stop wont stop ride it til the wheels fall off

 

[Norway]

where you can get UNLIMITED bitcoin, (literally as much as you want)

Can I get 22 million bitcoin on your website?

 

[bitsko]

BUIP ? Unlimited Bitcoin on BCH

 

[torusJKL]

They say BSV is a cult but who would put a framed image of Adam Back in the middle of their Blockstream Satellite Kit packages.
Or is that even part of the package?

 

[79b79aa8]

that looks more like einstein to me, but in any case i remember people used to tell me bitcoin was a cult. same conventional wisdom types that talk all macho about BTC today.

 

[79b79aa8]

micropresident belaboredly coming around to the conclusion that infighting over protocol development has led BCH nowhere.

imaginaryusername, tomzander, cardona, pacia, fyookball, lunderberg, toomim, tomharding, wecx, and other fellow travellers will either tire or follow suit (if they haven't already).
BU (peterR, zerg, solex, sickpig, awemany, ptschipper) lost their impetus somewhere along the way. other assorted BU devs and marketers are looking for a subsidy.
freetrader and daedalnix will continue to duke it out in the name of liberty or whatever.
some kind of plug was pulled in BCH a few weeks ago, txn count plumetted and did not recover.
BCH as worldwide payments network is not yet recognized as a fantasy.

 

[AdrianX]

It is precisely because everyone is in charge that Amaury Séchet is unable to force his will upon them. Is it because everyone is in charge that the opposition has been unable to achieve their goals?

I don't think the micropresident realizes that BSV is the Bitcoin that resulted from Amaury Séchet inability to force his will upon "them" .

The rest of that blog post is followed by complain, complain, complain. FYI I stopped trying to help Amaury (possibly misinterpreted as complaining) after he split off. I now want Séchet to follow through on his commitment to make my BCH more valuable for me.

I encourage the community (looking at you @freetrader ) to stop trying to fork BCH again and just do what Amaury says and let him take responsibility.

 

[79b79aa8]

I encourage the community (looking at you @freetrader ) to stop trying to fork BCH again and just do what Amaury says and let him take responsibility.

but that would be to accept it's all over. obviously séchet can't pull it off by himself. better to continue doing blockchain protocol research on piecemeal code that will never be merged, collect a subsidy when possible, pretend things are going to change, and play victim along the way.

 

[AdrianX]

Séchet has already tole me to fork off, he's efficacy stated that the split was necessary for CTOR the optimal way to scale in addition that investors weren't relevant and adoption was second places to protocol design.

So now we have BSV that's optimizing for a different vision. I may be wrong and Séchet may be right, but we will never know if the BCH strategy changes midway. To succeed or fail and provide value BCH needs to follow through on the founding principles that started the experiment. It's pointless BCH changing and copying BSV, or BTC, if it does that the value of holding BCH diminishes and the experiment will fail.

Post automatically merged: Jul 5, 2020

but that would be to accept it's all over.

I suspect it was all over when Séchet refused to cooperate or compromise with the BSV miners and the majority of BU members. Doubling down on a lost cause can't fix anything. I'm willing to let him prove me wrong, as I've been very wrong in the past.

I remain invested in BCH because it comes at no cost to me and it amuses me to think Séchet is working to make me rich. But to be honest, I think, Amaury and most of the BCH cult will sooner see BCH fail than me profiting off their efforts.

While I made the trade of a lifetime predicting the ramifications from the BSV split my winnings were stolen by Canadian "blockchain whiz" Gerald Cotten.

 

[79b79aa8]

I suspect it was all over when Séchet refused to cooperate or compromise with the BSV miners and the majority of BU members.

yep

I remain invested in BCH because it comes at no cost to me

opportunity cost, b

While I made the trade of a lifetime predicting the ramifications from the BSV split my winnings were stolen by Canadian "blockchain whiz" Gerald Cotten.

that blows.

 

[AdrianX]

opportunity cost

I'm invested in global adoption of bitcoin, my narrow definition of what bitcoin is, is irrelevant, my knowledge on how to do global adoption is far more relevant.

So Yes it's an opportunity cost, but with bitcoin having such slim odds for success, to begin with, shifting from BSV to BCH or the reverse has relatively zero impact on the outcome. The risk of loss is more concerning.

Should bitcoin's probability for global adoption increase there will be an opportunity to capitalize on that opportunity later. While it may mean a lost opportunity in the best case scenario, hedging in BSV or BCH even BTC does not increase the probability of bitcoins success.

 

[Norway]

A good wallet for large savings should:

A) Be recoverable with a 12 word seed.
B) Use a dedicated hardware device like Trezor/Ledger for signing.
C) Split UTXO to small amounts, like 50 USD for each unspent output to preserve privacy.

I think ElectrumSV would fulfill all of this if they implement C).

Could this be done @kyuupichan ?

 

[Zarathustra]

The prologue of the result of the charlatans' flu medicine. The government debt creation of the past three months equals the cumulative amount created between 1800 und 1977.

 

[79b79aa8]

In What is censorship resistance?, CSW continues to dismantle the view that somehow Bitcoin was going to function unfettered by the legal order. It can't, and that was not a worthy goal in any event.

But the point about "censorship resistance" was not limited to the ability to transfer any amount of funds outside the purview of the law. It was also about, e.g., being able to pay without a credit card company denying service because of the country you happen to be at. Or a payment processor extrajudicially deciding that some vendor is banned. Or a person not being able to purchase online because no instrument is readily available to people with their credit rating. Or even a powerful country unilaterally imposing sanctions on monetary transactions by the people, businesses and governments of certain countries. These are still important problems that Bitcoin can help alleviate, quite distinct from of the cypherpunk's alleged, far more radical objectives.

 

[AdrianX]

Despite CSW claiming otherwise, Bitcoin is "censorship resistance". CSW teaches us ( well those of us who never understood how bitcoin works) how it is "censorship resistance" and he demonstrates this by describing how you censor a transaction. The way you censor a transaction (naturally resistant to being censored) is you use the legal system to force the majority of miners to unwind the blockchain or follow an alternate fork. CSW further explains how we can use the legal system to censor a transaction by obtaining an order from a jurisdictional authority that requires compliance within the law.

Bitcoin is naturally resistant to such censorship because we don't have a one-world government and laws are not universal.

While people argue over the definition of "censorship" and "resistance" people are generally arguing over whether or not such a legal order in all the necessary jurisdictions is possible.

One side effect of CSW's position is to create the fantasy that having a copy of the blockchain on your raspberry pi and calling it a node will prevent such censorship.

 

[torusJKL]

I wonder how the BCH governance will play out with the proposed new DAA.

With the IFP ABC wanted to push in a change and the opposition was able to defer this change.
With the new DAA the previous opposition is now the group who wants to push in a change.

In addition to the miners this change would also require wallets to change their code.

I haven't seen Amaury's reaction but Shammah has already come out as a string opponent to it and I'm almost certain Amaury would want to keep his algorithm or if a change is needed implement a fix he would have come up with (not invented here).

 

[torusJKL]

This is also an interesting read on the new DAA topic.

 

[sharpenerhandsome]

Haha i saw the thread title and got confused until I saw the date

Gold and Bitcoin both solid hedges

 

[79b79aa8]

welcome @sharpenerhandsome . you've hit on a thread started in 2011 with over 4.5 million views. looking forward to your input.

This is also an interesting read on the new DAA topic.

that leads to micropresident's post, which starts with this gem:

Recently, Jonathan Toomim has written a detailed proposal for addressing a significant issue on Bitcoin Cash. That issue has been that "benevolent" miners are losing money relative to profit seeking miners. This is undesirable because Bitcoin is supposed to run on profit motives. If miners who drive the chain forward are not profiting properly, the system is effectively broken.

let me see if i got this right . . . Bitcoin is supposed to run on profit motives. except if the miners making those profits are not the ones the devs would prefer, then the system is effectively broken. the fix requires a hard fork, and to agree on that the anglo community needs to come to consensus to identify the best proposal. but before that, there needs to be an agreement on the criteria to determine which proposal is technically superior.

meanwhile, usage has fallen off a cliff.

but once that difficulty algorithm is adjusted the tide will turn for BCH.

 

[Norway]

Funny. @jtoomim is mining BSV

SHA-256 miners process Bitcoin SV regardless of ideology

If a chain is profitable to mine, they will mine it regardless of ‘Aussie man bad’, what Twitter says or even in spite of their own statements.

coingeek.com