Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[Epilido]

@Epilido

The economic majority signals all the time. At the moment it is moving to fiat, ethereum, and other altcoins. The demand for bitcoin is static or declining.

These signals are unclear. The interpretation requires risk and can only be fully understood after all of the chips have been played.

The direction you see the "majority" moving is only an opinion at this time

 

[freetrader]

Now you have a simple choice, dismiss what I am saying as me lying and trolling or listen to what I say and withdraw the Classic proposal and put forward a new proposal that can and will activate, as it gives strong consensus a chance.

You've made this real easy.

 

[bluemoon]

@Epilido

Strictly speaking you are correct. The price is determined at the margin. In that sense price signals are straws in the wind, the product of the current valuations and actions of holders and non-holders.

"Economic majority" was a phrase @jonny1000 introduced into your conversation and made it mean what he wanted it to mean. But he wants politics not holders or economics/markets to decide.

He would rather bitcoin became economically irrelevant (worthless in the market) than that his idea of "strong consensus" be lost, which idea, coming out of nowhere and for which he provides no justification, serves to strengthen Blockstream Core's stranglehold in defiance of the market.

I am not sure it is the done thing to quote myself, but as I have said before:

Conformity with the bitcoin majority is not driven by politics, it is driven by the market. When that ceases to be true, bitcoin becomes coercive and inflexible, unable to meet market needs because it is always preoccupied with itself.

Bitcoin serves the market or it is nothing. The market is not interested in whether some of bitcoin's operators find their operations congenial or fair; so long as the block reward persists, the market rewards them to the extent they maintain or increase the value of the coin.

If the miners are causing bitcoin to fail to serve the market, for example by failing to process sufficient transactions, the market will move elsewhere, the miners' rewards will decline, and miners will go bankrupt. It is up to the miners to resolve the failure. The market is not interested in what majority of miners it takes.

@jonny1000 is of course unwilling to engage on this front. He is interested not in success in the wider world but control of bitcoin's inner world.

Edit: 1) and made it mean what he wanted it to mean 2) holders or economics/markets

 

[Zarathustra]

To give @jonny1000 a breather as we're bombarding him with content, does anyone know what happened to @Justus Ranvier? His last post was two weeks ago and I see he deleted his reddit and twitter accounts.

rocks, justusranvier, hellobitcoinworld. I hope they are not being threatened and extorted.

 

[jonny1000]

He would rather bitcoin became economically irrelevant (worthless in the market) than that his idea of "strong consensus" be lost

Yes, that is a true reflection of my position and I believe a significant number of people in the ecosystem. I analysed Bitcoin several years ago, my analysts suggested it had the feature that changes could not be imposed on a minority without strong consensus, this feature than attracted me to the system, as I thought it was pretty unique, novel and cool.

To me, if any existing rule can be eliminated, without strong consensus, then Bitcoin is almost totally worthless. Whether you agree with this principal or not, I kindly ask you acknowledge a significant number of coin holders have this view and I recommend that it might be a good idea to respect this point of view.

If you strongly disagree with this principle then lets battle over it another day. However right now, increasing the blocksize limit it more urgent. So lets do the increase now and then fight over the principal of strong consensus another day.

 

[Zarathustra]

You've made this real easy.

Consensus perverted. After the consensus rule (block size limit has to be far away from actual block size) has been broken by attackers without consensus, he now demands that a tiny minority gets the power to maintain that situation.

 

[bluemoon]

If you strongly disagree with this principle then lets battle over it another day. However right now, increasing the blocksize limit it more urgent. So lets do the increase now and then fight over the principal of strong consensus another day.

Now you're talking. I agree.

 

[jonny1000]

Now you're talking. I agree.

Great. So you are happy to do the change with consensus now? At least I may have persuaded one person.

 

[bluemoon]

@jonny1000

Core do not have a 2MB HF on the stocks.

What are you proposing if not Classic and a 75% consensus?

 

[albin]

@bluemoon

He's not proposing a damn thing, he's just baiting people with concern trolling. If this guy attended the secret meeting, he already has access and the ear of folks to credibly propose a BIP. Big surprise there is no such thing.

 

[bluemoon]

@albin

You may well be right. The ball is in his court.

 

[jonny1000]

What are you proposing if not Classic and a 75% consensus?

Classic with a 95% threshold and six month grace period...
[doublepost=1464073401][/doublepost]

If this guy attended the secret meeting

I found out about it on /r/btc and then walked in...

 

[bluemoon]

So lets do the increase now and then fight over the principal of strong consensus another day

Classic with a 95% threshold and six month grace period...

So much for fighting over the principle of strong consensus another day. And 6 months is not "now".

You are just trolling.

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

That is great, thankyou very much for the quote. The only way to get to 751 out of 1,000 is to cross the threshold of first getting to 750, however once 750 is reached, Classic activates. Therefore the "at least" remark is redundant and misleading, and should be withdrawn.

If you can show me how to get to 751, without first activating at 750, I will apologies and withdraw my assertion that Classic is an attack.

Ok, this makes it clear you're just trolling.
I'm happy you're not censored here and that this isn't an echo chamber but I can't take that serious anymore and I think @theZerg is right.
If Peter R wouldn't vouch for you I'd be sure that this is Adam Back speaking.
If classic activates, 75% of miners are voting for it. Basta. If you don't like it, too bad. 51% could do the same thing.
Btw, if you are so sure classic lost, why are you crying Classic should withdraw?

For example a much better idea would be to have a voting window, where at least 75% Classic support is required in that window.

Exactly what we have. The window is 1000 blocks.


@jonny1000 sounds like Adam Backs personal speaker. And if fits into the current happenings. Blockstream is afraid to lose control over bitcoin development, thus Classic atm is the biggest threat.
One good sign: Apparently they are concerned enough about the outposts of free speech in the bitcoin universe to send their trolls to these places to convince them to give up and get back into the herd of sheeple.
[doublepost=1464074508][/doublepost]

six

Called the "Ethereum is N. 1" HF proposal.

 

[jonny1000]

And 6 months is not "now".

We can get it activated ASAP and then have a 6 month grace period. I agree with Gavin in 2013 when he said the grace period should be at least 6 months. I also agree with Satoshi in 2010 when he gave an example on how to increase the blocksize with an 11 month grace period.

 

[Zarathustra]

@bluemoon

He's not proposing a damn thing, he's just baiting people with concern trolling.

Yes, 'proposing' something which nobody is working on and demand 95% consensus on it = proposing nothing but supporting the stalemate.

 

[jonny1000]

Exactly what we have. The window is 1000 blocks.

Are there any reasonable people here that can explain that Classic does not specify a 1,000 block window and that this claim is false? I keep having to assert these factual points myself.

Classic has a rolling 1,000 block window all the way up until January 2018, if 750 blocks out of any 1,000 period flags support for Classic, it activates. It is therefore a fact that Classic activates when there is exactly 25% opposition.

There then seem to be two group's of people:

1. A group who deny the fact above and falsely claim Classic can activate without this 25% opposition. This is simply 100% false. Perhaps it is not worth my time trying to engage with this group.

2. A second more moderate group, who accept that Classic cannot activate without locking in 25% miner opposition, but who have no problem with it. All I want to get across to you is that the economic majority and miners do have a major problem with this specific point.

 

[bluemoon]

We can get it activated ASAP and then have a 6 month grace period. I agree with Gavin in 2013 when he said the grace period should be at least 6 months. I also agree with Satoshi in 2010 when he gave an example on how to increase the blocksize with an 11 month grace period.

Hack Classic however you want and offer that. No need to troll here. Save you claiming urgency and then referencing old statements to justify the opposite.

 

[albin]

The reason that this is total theatrical nonsense is because if this "strong consensus" concept is the one sticking point preventing miner adoption of a 2MB hardfork using BIP 109 as the vehicle, then miners are already enforcing that "strong consensus" condition out-of-band anyway by colluding manually.

The exact same result as locking in a 6 month scheduled hardfork with something like say 95% hashing power onboard would be achieved by that proportion of hashing power publicly announcing the intention to begin running BIP 109 at that date in the future.

The relative centralization of mining makes all this semantic nitpicking about activation some irrelevant sideshow.

 

[Norway]

Please wake up to reality. The follwoing do not support Classic:

• 81% of nodes
• 95% of miners
• 85% of developers
• 85% of coin holders, in the only polls which exists

Then what are you afraid of? If you are sure Classic is a lost case, why would you spend so much time fighting it? I think you are scared of it.

Your effort to keep BlockstreamCoreAxa in power is a waste of time. Eventually, their power will be taken away from them.