Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,994

agilewalker

New Member
Feb 23, 2016
20
58
I read through many posts on this Chinese forum only to gain an impression that not many forum members even has a basic understanding of how Bitcoin works. My emotional feeling tells me: Especially the most vocal members there are just speculators/traders who don't care too much about the fundamentals of Bitcoin, they're in it for quick money just like other speculative assets you guys may not been aware of in recent years in China. (Soybeans, Garlic, Nephrite to name a few had some shocking price movements drawing government attention and became major newspapers' headlines.). Miners are more or less the same. They just want this block size debate over as soon as possible so that Bitcoin price keep going up.
 
Last edited:

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,994
@agilewalker

Is @cnLedger on Twitter /u/nextblast on reddit?
 

Mengerian

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 29, 2015
536
2,597

Anyone have an idea of the reasoning here?

I just don't see how the agreement could be seen to give the miners any benefit. I mean, they have nothing now, and no choices available to them, that they did not have before they made the agreement. What did they gain?

If core devs "void it", what does that mean? What do they actually do?
 

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,994
OK, that's weird.

/u/nextblast does every other Chinese translation of Chinese forum chat for r/BTC and seemed pretty neutral for those.

However, @cnLedger is heavily in favor of the recent Mow roundtable pushing it on Twitter.
 

Peter R

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2015
1,398
5,595

Anyone have an idea of the reasoning here?

I just don't see how the agreement could be seen to give the miners any benefit. I mean, they have nothing now, and no choices available to them, that they did not have before they made the agreement. What did they gain?

If core devs "void it", what does that mean? What do they actually do?
I asked him and here's what he said:

 

AdrianX

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2015
2,097
5,797
bitco.in

Anyone have an idea of the reasoning here?

I just don't see how the agreement could be seen to give the miners any benefit. I mean, they have nothing now, and no choices available to them, that they did not have before they made the agreement. What did they gain?

If core devs "void it", what does that mean? What do they actually do?
I should have shut my mouth @Peter R seemed to have uncovered a gold seam and I pissed all over it.

But I couldn't help myself

WTF just happened:
[doublepost=1456383995][/doublepost]@Peter R that's got to be the craziest thing I've read during this debate.

Not only Is an increase OK, but Blockstream are paying $100's of thousands to have Chinese miners only use their code.

@Gavin Andresen is this type of behavior normal in the Core circle?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: majamalu

agilewalker

New Member
Feb 23, 2016
20
58
I almost wish there was a button to play "Entrance of the Gladiators" beside crazy posts like that.
 
Last edited:

satoshis_sockpuppet

Active Member
Feb 22, 2016
776
3,312
Hm so everybody is getting excited because the miners are flipflopping once more.
I'm not opening that bottle of champagne before we have a 2 MB block (before summer).
2 MB Hardfork in the next 2 month and then Segwit as a Hardfork. How about that.

All big mining pools/operations have shown, that they are completely unreliable and apparently incapable of understanding Bitcoin. And it isn't just an issue of cultural misunderstandings with Chinese businesses as Bitfury acted worse than some Chinese miners. I don't know what these people have in mind but they gamed away all trust and they have shown, that they are ok with performing a 51 % attack on Bitcoin (Changing Bitcoin from a currency to a fantasy settlement ledger against the wishes of the users).

Having a PoW fork ready to be deployed any time is still important. Longterm, these miners have to be replaced. If we manage to get the 2 MB Hardfork and get Bitcoin on track again this will probably just happen "naturally" with the existing PoW. But until then, they should always feel the pressure. Right now, they behaved like the rulers of bitcoin and not the temporary enforcers of the rules. Whoever can't distinct blockchain consensus from Adam Back consensus shouldn't make any decision in regards to the bitcoin protocol.
(The misuse of the word consensus might be the biggest crime committed by BS...)
 

sgbett

Active Member
Aug 25, 2015
216
786
UK
What cards were they shown with Classic? Classic is a simple and straightforward offering, it puts the 2MB upgrade to a block vote. There are no cards to discover. Maybe with Blockstream to get them to commit to their "final offer".

They only thing they have done is to demonstrate that they are unreliable and that their words mean nothing. That is not exactly a positive development for them.

And yes they may "know" that they have all the cards and are acting as such, but in reality they do not hold all of the cards. Users do. And more users are getting ticked off every day. Users have options and the final say, and if this keeps up it will be time in a few weeks to remind them as such.
I don't know the cards as I wasn't there, but the miners surely do!

I was alluding to the fact that *if* anyone did have an agenda that wasn't entirely open/honest then this kind of behaviour would be the perfect way to discover what it was.

I would say there is perhaps a certain amount of ego involved in both dev teams. Flattery is a powerful tool. If anyone in core or classic does have strong ego, then by feeding it you invite that person to become over confident in their own ability. Conversely they will also underestimate the intelligence of those around them (the miners). Believing the miners to be stupid, one might start to push the boundary of what you could reasonably expect someone to believe. In this situation there is a high risk of exposing any ulterior motive because your guard is down.

Now put yourself on the receiving end of the miner behaviour. You might start to think that they are daft and that they don't realise the users actually have the power.

Personally, I wouldn't underestimate these guys. I think they know exactly how the incentive system works. Their actions are speaking much louder than their words.

http://www.chinastrategies.com/the-king-the-fool-and-the-fox/

The Fool Strategy
The angry man will defeat himself in battle as well as in life.
Samurai Maxim

The second strategy is the exact opposite of the King strategy, playing the fool. It involves a non-stop display of acting and gesturing. The idea is to provide so much body language that it is impossible for opponents to detect the true mood beneath the surface display, not being able to read the signs because of too much background noise. There are several roles the fool can play. Some use continuous pantomimes, others pretend to be angry and upset, some tell jokes and tease. Playing the fool also serves another advantage; having your opponent underestimate you. The saying you can’t judge a book by its cover is never truer than in a sparring ring but not everyone knows this. If you succeeded in having your opponents underestimate you they will tend to drop their guard and their responses will become slower. This tactic only works once though with a smart fighter.
[doublepost=1456394939][/doublepost]To expound on the "incentive system" point:

Imagine they (miners) have decided to they want 2MB blocks. They know full well they need user support. How do they get it?

They can't just fork (well they can - thats how it works! - but they fully understand incentives not to). That would play right into the hands of those that would call it a hostile takeover. What they have to do first is gain support of the users. Make it so the users are crying out for the switch.

However, they can't just say "oh 1MB is bad", because that would just be another angry voice in the crowd. What they have to do is behave in such a manner as to make other participants expose themselves.

In this fashion, it is no longer the miners driving the change, they have simply created an environment in which that change is seemingly inevitable. So that when they do effect that change the risk of user revolt has been mitigated.

[standard "maybe wishful thinking", "don't necessarily think core is evil","just idle speculation" disclaimers.]
 
Last edited:

sickpig

Active Member
Aug 28, 2015
926
2,541

Organofcorti said:
  • There is some evidence for a transaction fee market -- transaction fees increasing non-linearly with respect to the blocks that contain the transactions.
  • As expected, during the 2015 transaction floods the transaction fees are not increasing more rapidly than block size (although transaction fees per block were greater than average).
  • Since the start of the year the evidence for a transaction fee market is much stronger. Perhaps more people are starting to use the in-built mechanism to optimise confirmation times by increasing transaction fees?
(reply to the last point) ... or maybe blocks are full? :p