Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[AdrianX]

I'm all burned out pumping Ether /s

I think an alt hitting the $1B mark is the news of the day. Blockstream out in force is telling. Etherium is a potential competitor to some of their hair brained ideas. They're taking a beating on both fronts, 1) a competitor seems to be raking it in, selling a dream, and 2 they're losing control as the bitcoiners who believe in that dream as they can just move over and leave. What's left is the hard money advocates fitting the good fight to grow bitcoin.

The future of bitcoin is looking better, the few times I checked r/btc had over 50% the number of users of r/bitcoin.

 

[cypherdoc]

nice article @digitsu!

Roundtables vs. Honey Badger (0-2)

http://wallstreettechnologist.com/2016/03/12/roundtables-vs-honey-badger-0-2/

 

[AdrianX]

Also very interesting https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4a6acf/the_winklevoss_twins_on_the_block_size_debate/

Winklevoss looking a little ignorant on block size issues and bullish on ETH.

 

[solex]

@AdrianX

Winklevoss looking a little ignorant on block size issues and bullish on ETH.

I think the Winklevoss' shining moment was rowing boats.

They were zucked over when Facebook started, their COIN ETF has been zucked by SecondMarket's Bitcoin Trust, and now its third time zucky as Gemini is treading water against Coinbase and Kraken exchanges.

 

[cypherdoc]

lol, what's a supposed 23 yo kid working for Soluvox doing getting in the middle of this debate with the President of Xapo?:

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

step back a sec and realize that this rapid expansion of full node counts directly refutes the long standing & oft cited criticism by core dev that Bitcoin is inevitably undergoing centralization, the other arguably being miner centralization. it doesn't matter that it is from "manipulation" by economic actors jacking counts of their favorite implementation. what matters is that it's happening and is capable of happening (on both sides). Bitcoin is working as intended to route around damage

Exactly. We are seeing what a bullshit argument that always was. If anything, what matters is the nodes that will come online if someone tries to mess with Bitcoin, not the nodes that are online at any given time.

I wonder when Core will look at itself and realize, "*I'm* the danger."

 

[cypherdoc]

@AdrianX
I think the Winklevoss' shining moment was rowing boats.

They were zucked over when Facebook started, their COIN ETF has been zucked by SecondMarket's Bitcoin Trust, and now its third time zucky as Gemini is treading water against Coinbase and Kraken exchanges.

when i said most ppl will lose money investing in cryptocurrency, i meant alot of most ppl.

 

[freetrader]

I wonder when Core will look at itself and realize, "*I'm* the danger."

The best we can hope for is that they look around, and see others doing what they themselves originally wanted to do, and then switch. At least, I think that's more likely than someone coming up with the thought "I am become danger, the destroyer of Bitcoin".

 

[79b79aa8]

Did Satoshi call it mining? I know it was originally referred to differently in the early days.

“By convention, the first transaction in a block is a special transaction that starts a new coin owned by the creator of the block. This adds an incentive for nodes to support the network, and provides a way to initially distribute coins into circulation, since there is no central authority to issue them. The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins is analogous to gold miners expending resources to add gold to circulation. In our case, it is CPU time and electricity that is expended.

The incentive can also be funded with transaction fees. If the output value of a transaction is less than its input value, the difference is a transaction fee that is added to the incentive value of the block containing the transaction. Once a predetermined number of coins have entered circulation, the incentive can transition entirely to transaction fees and be completely inflation free.”

S. Nakamoto (2008). 'Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System', p. 4.

 

[Mengerian]

Have been away for a while, interesting to to catch up on what has been going on. Lots of frustrating developments, but some hopeful signs too!

I am always trying to understand what is going on in other people's heads, especially those I disagree with, and have been attempting to understand the core/smallblocker arguments. This led to me trying to pin down some of my own opinions. Would be interested to hear any feedback, especially if any of you disagree on any points.

My Bitcoin Manifesto

1. I envision and want to work toward a future where bitcoin is many orders of magnitude larger than currently, in terms of both price and adoption.
   
   
2. To get to that future state, Bitcoin will have to undergo periods of rapid exponential growth. The Bitcoin network should prepare for these bursts of activity.
   
   
3. Infrastructure development (including nodes, wallets, services, etc.) should attempt to remove arbitrary limits to growth. The only limits should be those from physical or technical constraints. Bitcoin should be pushing towards and bumping against these technical limits.
   
   
4. Coin distribution from relatively few hands to many will require transactions. The more transactions there are, the more quickly coins can achieve wide distribution.
   
   
5. Growing adoption will also result in a growing UTXO set and a growing blockchain. These should be welcomed as signs of success.
   
   
6. There are no “Spam” transactions. In a censorship-resistant network, it is counterproductive to attempt to decree which transactions more legitimate than others.
   
   
7. Security and censorship-resistance is better achieved through adoption and widespread use than through tinkering and technical wizardry.
   
   
8. As Bitcoin inflation tapers off, network security will have to transition to transaction fees. It would be best for transaction fees to come from a high volume of low-fee on-chain transactions.
   
   
9. Bitcoin is a creature of the market. Participants in the network should be competing with each other to push against technical scaling constraints. It is a good thing if some gain temporary advantage due to better technology, infrastructure, or technical expertise.

 

[theZerg]

You're espousing the Bitcoin Unlimited philosophy.

 

[cypherdoc]

@Mengerian

wow, that was a nice distillation. i'm sure i'll have comments later but that should be stickied and recommended to be a part of Classic.
[doublepost=1457888632][/doublepost]

 

[Richy_T]

“The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins is analogous to gold miners expending resources to add gold to circulation. In our case, it is CPU time and electricity that is expended.

S. Nakamoto (2008). 'Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System', p. 4.

True. But that's a little different from actually calling it mining.

 

[Justus Ranvier]

When the "print yourself infinite bitcoin" integer overflow manifested, Satoshi asked people to stop generating, not stop mining.

 

[Richy_T]

Yes, I found an early post...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6.msg31#msg31

I'll see if I can get an idea of where "mining" came from.

Not that it matters

And I think "generating" would be just as hard to explain in any case.

 

[Erdogan]

I was DDOS-ed. From tcpdump, lots of these (my own ip hidden):

19:08:55.743650 IP 46.101.215.90.domain > hidden.8333: 45245 25/0/1 TXT "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx4", TXT "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx5", TXT "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx6", TXT "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx7", TXT "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx8", TXT "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx9", TXT "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx10", TXT "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx11", TXT "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx12", TXT[|domain]
1

 

[freetrader]

True. But that's a little different from actually calling it mining.

I suggest a new term instead of 'miners' (to be confirmed by BitFury): 'the expenders'. Who can easily turn into 'the expendables'.

 

[Richy_T]

Well, it's extending the blockchain so "Extender" would be an option.

Though it's basically making entries into a ledger so clerking might be a more apt name.

 

[Erdogan]

Re DDOS, stopped using ipv4, using only ipv6. Node operating. Attack still ongoing, but I have a good link, ping times increased from normal 2.5 ms to 10 ms.

 

[yrral86]

I've always preferred "transaction processing".