Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

I wonder how much of this Core/BS stalling actually matters in the end, because I can't picture people being satisfied with a Bitcoin that is painfully constrained or centrally controlled.

People supporting Core are now only being placated by promises. If those promises don't come true, they will not just continue to be placated; they will demand the experiment move forward, and be less likely to assume good faith next time someone tries this.

Bitcoin is just going through a needed learning phase. The Fidelity Effect is a short term casualty.

 

[Peter R]

Adam Back live now:

https://bitcoinclassic.slack.com/messages/welcome/

 

[cypherdoc]

when Adam goes live again claiming they're offering a 2MB increase, someone show him this again:

[doublepost=1454041203][/doublepost]Japan goes rogue and the markets go wild; oh wait:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-01-28/markets-turmoil-after-nikkei-reports-bank-japan-discussed-negative-interest-rate-pol

note how the dollar and stock futures explode together now. and wither.

 

[albin]

Going back to the Stolfi comments a couple pages back, I think it might be good to try to empathize with the context of where he's coming from. Brazil suffered for two decades under what was perceived as a right-wing military dictatorship that only ended in the mid-80's, and culturally it's very common to be vehemently opposed to anything remotely characterizable as "right-wing" (obviously that's not a fair way to perceive libertarians/ancaps/objectivists/misesians/etc., but I think that's the perception down there).

To some extent politically I think this is justifiable, as even in the US for example we saw highly establishment crony capitalist ring-wingers like Rumsfeld and Cheney take to Milton Friedman (not an Austrian or ancap but very libertarian-friendly) starting in the 70's. The rennaissance in "Liberty" politics (even the phraseology of a "Liberty movement") is something that I've seen evolve in my adult lifetime, looking back I think stemming from the Ron Paul presidential campaign and the rise of Austrian commentary out there for the layperson in the aftermath of the '08 crisis. In my teenage years we certainly had Rothbard and the notion of being anarcho-capitalist, but it was very fringe and nowhere near as well-developed as we've seen it become in the 2010's. People in Brazil are not necessarily exposed to the same political culture that people in North America have been in this time period, and it makes sense historically for them to be extremely apprehensive, because the only thing alot of folks have seen in practice has been the authoritarian lip-service to certain political ideas.

 

[Justus Ranvier]

Every miner, every wallet developer, every investor, every entrepreneur in this space, everyone who has expressed doubts that Blockstream is doing the right thing: they are all part of a mere Reddit mob.

Only the chosen ones know what they are doing, and only their opinions are valid.


Continuing to assume good faith on their part is pathological. This is going to continue to get worse until they are either excised from Bitcoin, or until they successfully kill it.

 

[cypherdoc]

there is going to be an awesome opportunity to arise out of this.

 

[Roger_Murdock]

The engineers have been working to calculate the optimum capacity of the rocket boosters.

Does that mean they're going to show us the "calculations" they performed to determine that the (originally-intended-to-be-temporary) 1-MB block size limit just so happened to be the "optimum" size, i.e., the one that perfectly balances all of the tradeoffs supposedly involved? That's great, because I would love to see those calculations and all future ones. (Obviously, the "optimum" size could change based on available technology or other changed circumstances so I'm assuming they do this kind of number crunching on a pretty regular basis.)

 

[Justus Ranvier]

Problem with putting the rocket scientists in charge of a projects is that they want to put rockets on everything, even if they're supposed to be building a car or an airplane.

 

[awemany]

[...]
Continuing to assume good faith on their part is pathological. This is going to continue to get worse until they are either excised from Bitcoin, or until they successfully kill it.

Indeed, I have to say it took a while for me to get to this point where I see them as deeply malicious. There are still people who believe in the good intentions of BS, though. (While being bigblockers and not shills) /u/aminok on reddit seems to be such a fellow. He's getting a lot of heat for that.

 

[YarkoL]

Having seen aminok debate both in r/btc and core slack, I have great respect for him for eschewing all kinds of herd mentality and thinking for himself. In reddit they think he's CIA, in core slack they think he's Aquent

 

[cypherdoc]

Classic will be like a large reorg.

Except this time miners just have to reboot their servers.

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

Indeed, I have to say it took a while for me to get to this point where I see them as deeply malicious. There are still people who believe in the good intentions of BS, though.

People with good intentions become malicious when put in a position of power. /u/aminok sees good intentions because most of them actually have good intentions. We see evil because that has been the actual result. This is the meaning of "power corrupts."

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

Googled PWC. Found this:

 

[Norway]

@Zangelbert Bingledack
I hate red dildoes. The green ones are better.

 

[lunar]

For those playing the censorship lottery, today's lucky numbers can be found from the CTO of PWCcoin

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/438hx0/a_trip_to_the_moon_requires_a_rocket_with/

 

[cypherdoc]

SF's have their place. But at this stage of The Bitcoin Game, it's simply a way for core devtatorship to hold onto their power.

 

[Melbustus]

I've assumed good faith most of the time. Perhaps that was wrong, but I tend to think BS/core *thinks* they're doing the right thing, but they are actually affected deeply by their conflict of interest and/or legacy as a central 'power' within bitcoin. @rocks had an excellent post several dozen pages back describing the insideousness of these sorts of COIs. I guess I'm just saying they're not necessarily *intentionally* acting against bitcoin's longterm interests.

 

[Justus Ranvier]

People with good intentions become malicious when put in a position of power. /u/aminok sees good intentions because most of them actually have good intentions. We see evil because that has been the actual result. This is the meaning of "power corrupts."

Motives can not be measures, only outcomes.

We could probably invent half a dozen different stories to explain the motivations which can produce these outcomes, but all of them are unfalsifiable.

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

SF's have their place. But at this stage of The Bitcoin Game, it's simply a way for core devtatorship to hold onto their power.

They oppose HF because HF means putting it to the market, and they fear their ideas cannot stand a market test. Gmax calls it mob rule. Adam calls it tyranny of the majority, by which he really means economic majority, which of course means, "It's not fair that we have to be subject to the market's favor or disfavor to succeed. We should succeed because we are academically superior." In other words, "Buy Corecoins or else it's a tyranny of the majority." Imagine if Litecoin used that line

Wonder if this'll get deleted?


[EDIT: False alarm. Looks like it was deleted then undeleted. Weird. Mod wars?]

[EDIT2: It looks like, wonder of wonders, the /r/Bitcoin mods are actually trying to be fair and only delete comments that are insulting or use expletives - from both sides! Looks like market share loss is a powerful motivator. Or maybe the drak is just asleep.]

EDIT3: Needless, unprompted needling of Gavin by Adam Back. Someone's not in a good mood today.

 

[sickpig]

I find this very worrying:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1343716.msg13714673#msg13714673

Many Chinese Bitcoiners - not only miners, but also exchanges and wallet services, originally supported Classic for its support of 2MB block size, but after meeting Jeff Garzik in Beijing, many backtracked because they didn't believe that the team behind is capable or there is a roadmap.

does anybody have more info about Garzik meeting with miners in Beijing?