Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
- Thread starter cypherdoc
- Start date
At least we know they're panicking 
They are also somehow automod'ing every comment in that thread, and then manually approving them. It shows 11 comments right now but only 5 are visible.
They are also somehow automod'ing every comment in that thread, and then manually approving them. It shows 11 comments right now but only 5 are visible.
- Aug 29, 2015
- 536
- 2,597
Hehe and they already made the prophylactic "sort by controversial" switch on the xthin topic. Except for a joke the comments are still all positive so far
albin
Active Member
- Nov 8, 2015
- 931
- 4,008
I can kind of see what their motivation is on /r/bitcoin to be this crazy.
The thinblocks story is possibly the most dangerous for Core fanboys/shills, because the party line about Peter Tschipper's scheme is just straight misinformation that makes them look really stupid in regurgitating.
This specific topic is kryptonite for Core because it's a smoking gun for bad faith on its face.
The thinblocks story is possibly the most dangerous for Core fanboys/shills, because the party line about Peter Tschipper's scheme is just straight misinformation that makes them look really stupid in regurgitating.
This specific topic is kryptonite for Core because it's a smoking gun for bad faith on its face.
So jratcliff posted this:
Apart from that he appears to want to pick up the PR part which he deems to be broken at Borgstream, I do find all his assumptions interesting.
He seemed to be, for a long while, an 'on the fence' guy regarding near-term on-chain scalability or at least a block size increase.
Now he sounds like a proper lobbyist - like 'they just need to add components X, Y, Z to their consensifier to break the last pockets of resistance'
It has been said before (like most things have in this debate) but one thing that really sticks out is - how in this very situation and time - the more distant threat of 'full node centralization' is successfully used by Core for FUDding hardforks, yet the more imminent threat of dethroning Bitcoin through Altcoins is brushed off.
It is a pity that we lost Mike Hearn. I think he once proposed on reddit that one should make a proper list of risks, with guesstimated likelihoods and dates on which damage would occur. That would maybe allow to see more clearly what is really to be done soon.
It is absolutely clear that increasing to 2MB now is way down the list, compared to fending of e.g. Ethereum.
Although I can see that Core and Classic would never agree on the exact numbers in such a table, I think just making it would still be enlighting.
[doublepost=1464728345][/doublepost]@cypherdoc: Lets be optimistic and assume that /r/Bitcoin is done with anyways when your ban will be lifted.
This drama cannot continue for another full year - or we're all going to go to the psych ward.
Apart from that he appears to want to pick up the PR part which he deems to be broken at Borgstream, I do find all his assumptions interesting.
He seemed to be, for a long while, an 'on the fence' guy regarding near-term on-chain scalability or at least a block size increase.
Now he sounds like a proper lobbyist - like 'they just need to add components X, Y, Z to their consensifier to break the last pockets of resistance'
It has been said before (like most things have in this debate) but one thing that really sticks out is - how in this very situation and time - the more distant threat of 'full node centralization' is successfully used by Core for FUDding hardforks, yet the more imminent threat of dethroning Bitcoin through Altcoins is brushed off.
It is a pity that we lost Mike Hearn. I think he once proposed on reddit that one should make a proper list of risks, with guesstimated likelihoods and dates on which damage would occur. That would maybe allow to see more clearly what is really to be done soon.
It is absolutely clear that increasing to 2MB now is way down the list, compared to fending of e.g. Ethereum.
Although I can see that Core and Classic would never agree on the exact numbers in such a table, I think just making it would still be enlighting.
[doublepost=1464728345][/doublepost]@cypherdoc: Lets be optimistic and assume that /r/Bitcoin is done with anyways when your ban will be lifted.
This drama cannot continue for another full year - or we're all going to go to the psych ward.
LOL x 100 look who else offended BlockStream.
I've also got a 365 day ban, LOL it would seem Bitcoin is not censorship resistant if you need to ban people for up voting ideas that promote its success. @Gavin Andresen I don't think everyone here wants bitcoin to succeed.
Note from the moderators:
brigading
I up voted Peters posts, @Peter R I don't visit r/bitcoin much so thanks for making me aware of your post the funny thing is I can't comment for the next year but I can still up vote.
[doublepost=1464729491,1464728692][/doublepost]
Fù¢Σ them, I'm not the enemy, such retards.
here is my offending post - well it's my outlook plus the fact that I up voted the same reference on r/bitcoin.
.
albin
Active Member
- Nov 8, 2015
- 931
- 4,008
I'm not any kind of reddit policy expert, but it seems to be that subreddit bans for brigading are extreme bullshit.
Brigading is a slang term for / specific example of vote manipulation, which is a sitewide rule of reddit. If a subreddit mod is going to ban you for brigading, but you're not getting sitewide banned by a real admin, then it's fairly obvious the brigaging charge was just a post hoc rationalization for banning somebody they wanted to ban.
Brigading is a slang term for / specific example of vote manipulation, which is a sitewide rule of reddit. If a subreddit mod is going to ban you for brigading, but you're not getting sitewide banned by a real admin, then it's fairly obvious the brigaging charge was just a post hoc rationalization for banning somebody they wanted to ban.
I'm happy, thrilled would be the better word, that real people with good motives are working on Bitcoin development.
I see extreme promise in your project, "Unlimited", everybody loves the word unlimited and this is the right future for Bitcoin.
Your technology and presentations are outstanding!
Thanks again everyone, you are producing wonderful work!
I see extreme promise in your project, "Unlimited", everybody loves the word unlimited and this is the right future for Bitcoin.
Your technology and presentations are outstanding!
Thanks again everyone, you are producing wonderful work!
Hold on...how do they claim to know that you were brigading? Moderators can't tell if an account up-votes a post.
@Peter R I don't even know what that word means, I've asked for an explanation. I think its authoritarian abuse giving my concern with Core's hegemony.
- Dec 16, 2015
- 2,806
- 6,088
@AdrianX :My assumption is that if someone posts an identical comment in two subs, rBitcoin mods don't like it because it will clearly show up differences in how people vote for content.
You can't let reasonable comments get lots of upvotes in /r/btc and be downvoted in /r/Bitcoin. That would show everyone how silly matters have become in their domicile.
So the answer is to extend the definition of brigading to essentially cover cross-posts (which ironically have become necessary with the sub fragmentation introduced by Theymos' censorship).
The person who said we already forked had it right - now they're just making sure no pesky crosstalk is happening.
You can't let reasonable comments get lots of upvotes in /r/btc and be downvoted in /r/Bitcoin. That would show everyone how silly matters have become in their domicile.
So the answer is to extend the definition of brigading to essentially cover cross-posts (which ironically have become necessary with the sub fragmentation introduced by Theymos' censorship).
The person who said we already forked had it right - now they're just making sure no pesky crosstalk is happening.
@freetrader I think you are correct, to use Peter's analogy they are throwing their bats.
in all honesty, if up votes aren't visible what am i guilty of manipulating, I'm just one voice with one opinion, I don't think I commented there either as it was a fresh post, I don't manipulate anything i just speak my mind when i feel its appropriate occupationally I click the up arrows and down arrows as it make me feel happy.
in all honesty, if up votes aren't visible what am i guilty of manipulating, I'm just one voice with one opinion, I don't think I commented there either as it was a fresh post, I don't manipulate anything i just speak my mind when i feel its appropriate occupationally I click the up arrows and down arrows as it make me feel happy.
VeritasSapere
Active Member
- Nov 16, 2015
- 511
- 1,266
Surprisingly so far the Bitcoin blockchain has not been overly congested, though operating right at the limit of its capacity. Today something interesting has happened, it has been more then one hour and thirty minutes since the last block was found, this can happen from time to time due to variance, this is normal enough. However what that means is that all of a sudden the network has become congested, there are presently more then 14k unconfirmed transactions in the mempool.
I have a transaction that has not been confirmed for over four hours, interestingly having a better fee estimate would not have solved this problem for me at this time since the congestion started after I made my transaction, further highlighting the impracticality of a hyper competitive fee market. I have to admit that the user experience is terrible compared to most alternative cryptocurrencies when this happens.
Just now as I was writing this two blocks have been found, Though we are still sitting with 12k unconfirmed transactions in the mempool, lets see if the miners are able to catch up to this backlog before people start leaving for better alternatives, the price has just started to drop a bit which could be triggering more people sending their BTC to the exchange, in order to panic sell, I suspect that the long waiting times will not increase their confidence.
https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions
I have a transaction that has not been confirmed for over four hours, interestingly having a better fee estimate would not have solved this problem for me at this time since the congestion started after I made my transaction, further highlighting the impracticality of a hyper competitive fee market. I have to admit that the user experience is terrible compared to most alternative cryptocurrencies when this happens.
Just now as I was writing this two blocks have been found, Though we are still sitting with 12k unconfirmed transactions in the mempool, lets see if the miners are able to catch up to this backlog before people start leaving for better alternatives, the price has just started to drop a bit which could be triggering more people sending their BTC to the exchange, in order to panic sell, I suspect that the long waiting times will not increase their confidence.
https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions
That's not my experience, on Thursday the 26th I sent some coins to my mycelium wallet, Armory confirms they were sent, all the bloclhain explores see the pending transaction, (not mycelium though)
and its still nothing. I send coins all the time and the delay has never been this bad not even during the peep of the stress tests.
79b79aa8
Well-Known Member
- Sep 22, 2015
- 1,031
- 3,440
yep spread down to a normal ~3% premium on chinese exchanges, effectively shutting the arbitrage window (it took about 24 hours to even out). price has stabilized at around USD$530. pressure in china is clearly on the buy side.
we thus appear to have left the $400s behind. last time we did that, price doubled to >$800 in about 9 days, from november 14 to nov. 23, 2013. of course, nobody expects a repeat of that.
albin
Active Member
- Nov 8, 2015
- 931
- 4,008
Way back at the beginning of the blocksize "debate" Gavin brought up the possibility of speeding up the difficulty target as an alternate way to increase capacity, which I'm sure made him the laughing stock of the Politburo, but I think there might be some wisdom in exploring that direction. Assuming that we're talking about a blocktime that doesn't create undue instability about the tip, there would definitely be some benefit in making the probability distribution more granular with respect to producing those events.
@albin that's just heresy. the solution is not to change one set of immutable rules to compensate for not changing the other set of immutable rules.
VeritasSapere
Active Member
- Nov 16, 2015
- 511
- 1,266
@AdrianX This is the first time for me in a while at least that I have not had a transaction confirm for this long. It is still stuck actually. More blocks are being found now at least.
It should be obvious that this can not continue for ever, at least not without Bitcoin losing much of its potential market cap. I have been entertaining the theory that we will never see a completely congested network as Core has at least envisioned it for their fee market. I think it might be more likely that people will simply leave and use alternatives before we will ever see a low volume high cost network, I just do not think it is economically viable especially considering the competition that already exists.
I think @cypherdoc just hit the nail on the head for why that is the case. Bitcoin is a better and lighter alternative to gold, this fundamentally solves the problems of gold as a dominant form of currency by having the properties of it being light (cheap) and fast, build on top of a scarce supply like gold, this would represent a return to true commodity currency. In the history of human civilization fiat currency is only a relatively new invention, one that will most likely be considered a failure by future historians looking back.
An unrestricted Bitcoin is the functional alternative to gold as a currency. By restricting the blocksize the utility of Bitcoin is decreased, by turning it into a settlement network it completely destroys this dream of a radically and profoundly different future, brought about by Bitcoin. Fortunately at this point I think this transformation has become unstoppable whether it is Bitcoin that becomes the dominant cryptocurrency or one of the many alternatives. I think the most likely outcome is that we will have a multitude of dominant cryptocurrencies, reflecting the diversity of thought in the world.
It should be obvious that this can not continue for ever, at least not without Bitcoin losing much of its potential market cap. I have been entertaining the theory that we will never see a completely congested network as Core has at least envisioned it for their fee market. I think it might be more likely that people will simply leave and use alternatives before we will ever see a low volume high cost network, I just do not think it is economically viable especially considering the competition that already exists.
I think @cypherdoc just hit the nail on the head for why that is the case. Bitcoin is a better and lighter alternative to gold, this fundamentally solves the problems of gold as a dominant form of currency by having the properties of it being light (cheap) and fast, build on top of a scarce supply like gold, this would represent a return to true commodity currency. In the history of human civilization fiat currency is only a relatively new invention, one that will most likely be considered a failure by future historians looking back.
An unrestricted Bitcoin is the functional alternative to gold as a currency. By restricting the blocksize the utility of Bitcoin is decreased, by turning it into a settlement network it completely destroys this dream of a radically and profoundly different future, brought about by Bitcoin. Fortunately at this point I think this transformation has become unstoppable whether it is Bitcoin that becomes the dominant cryptocurrency or one of the many alternatives. I think the most likely outcome is that we will have a multitude of dominant cryptocurrencies, reflecting the diversity of thought in the world.
