Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

continuing the climb:

 

[Norway]

Just realized...
The most expensive coins I ever bought, in june 2014, are close to getting green!

 

[theZerg]

@Peter Tschipper, @theZerg,

Thanks for the feedback. I have been looking through to code on github, trying to understand...

I pulled this discussion out to here: https://bitco.in/forum/threads/expedited-discussion.1196/

 

[Norway]

Ok, getting seriously drunk now. But how about this:
Greg is running crazy in the open. He is very desperate to do this.
To me, it sounds like a meltdown. Like the berlin wall.

 

[solex]

@Norway
He is taking on the whole of r/btc in a one-man 1MB4EVA crusade, imagining a battle like this:

Whereas the reality is more like this:

 

[Norway]

@solex
I LOL my sexy ass off!!!!

 

[jonny1000]

the idea is that the forked split never happens; either the fork is ignored or everyone and their mother moves across. The exchange then doesn't have to be concerned about any of the cross-chain issues; trading continues until one coin reaches ~$0. This may not be true at some future time when it actually would be worth it to split into two persistent chains for some reason, but for right now yeah.

This is a very smart comment. I totally agree. One coin should have a high price like $500 and the other should have a low price like less than $1. This sums up my view and why I am engaging in the debate. We want to stay on one chain. If we do a hardfork, which I have no problem with, we need to be very sure that the new chain absolutely annihilates and obliterates the existing chain, such that it is non viable.

Do you see why I am so opposed to Classic and the 75% threshold now? I have the feeling, rightly or wrongly, that the XT/Classic proponents were trying to score a narrow victory over Core, to me this is unacceptable. Classic needs to achieve an absolutely resounding victory. Part of this is being confident and assuming a resounding victory and not choosing a 75% threshold. Had Classic demonstrated this confidence, it would have won. As Classic seemed to want only a narrow victory, it felt to me, like an attack.

I have no problem with a 75% miner non binding signal, or a 75% threshold as one part in a multistage activation methodology. However, in my view the point at which nodes make an irrevocable decision to accept 2MB blocks, there should be 95% miner support.

This 95% threshold is not a strict rule, its a proxy. Its part of a signal that the advocates of the hardfork put forward to demonstrate they have overwhelming consensus.
[doublepost=1465013205][/doublepost]

Can't tell whether we still disagree here. Does the market forcing every minority toward 0% and every majority toward 100% satisfy this for you? Because from your wording here it sounds like this situation might be upsetting to you

Yes a market cap of 100% to zero on the two chains would be a strong signal to me. There is the potential for a lot of strong momentum and all the signals influence each other. I will look at:

• The nodes people are running (Hopefully non binding)
• What miners are supporting (Hopefully non binding)
  
• Any votes with coins
  
• Any futures markets/prediction market prices
  
• What the developers are saying
• The content of the hardfork

If the hardfork starts to build momentum in these interrelated groups, such that opposition becomes insignificant. Then we can propose a binding but safe activation methodology, with a reasonable grace period to allow people to upgrade.

I do think the market idea is a good one for helping to decide to hardfork, I was one of the first people to begin advocating this, and tried to create this market, in January 2014:

Re: Fork The Blockchain And Block The Seized FBI Coins.
January 27, 2014, 07:37:16 PM
#173
I have seen that many people appear to think forking Bitcoin to seize some coins the FBI hold is a good idea. I think this is an interesting concept, however I am not sure if it is that much of a good idea. However, if you think this is a sensible move which can succeed, I am giving you the opportunity to buy this altcoin now. I will sell 10 of these coins for just 1 BTC. I own over 10 BTC in the current chain and will therefore be granted 10 coins in the new anti-FBI altcoin. I am happy to pre-sell these now, this could be an opportunity for you.

You will be able to multiply your money by 10x for free if the new chain succeeds.

Please bid at the following website
https://www.coingig.com/Shopping/10-Bitcoin-on-any-anti-FBI-fork---Guaranteed-Now---10x-your-money-9308

 

[cypherdoc]

continuing the grind down:

 

[Zarathustra]

I have no problem with a 75% miner non binding signal, or a 75% threshold as one part in a multistage activation methodology. However, in my view the point at which nodes make an irrevocable decision to accept 2MB blocks, there should be 95% miner support.

This 95% threshold is not a strict rule, its a proxy. Its part of a signal that the advocates of the hardfork put forward to demonstrate they have overwhelming consensus.

Yes, it is not the rule. It is just an opinion. In my opinion it is consensus perverted. The consensus of the 5 percent overrules the consensus of the 95 percent. No wonder the Politbüro supports this perversion.

 

[Inca]

continuing the grind down:

However, the eth:usd price is almost static, and, still near to ATH in dollar levels.

I will probably trickle a few more of my trading btc stash into eth as the price rises towards magic resistance levels. The reason being at some point the price will dump down and eth is likely to soak up some of that speculative value. The other being that eventually bitcoin will begin to lift the alts as the MSM start blaring that bitcoin really isn't as dead as once thought

But bitcoin is looking good indeed, still rallying in stealth mode. No doubt remaining that we have emphatically broken out of that massive flag to the upside. Cold storage should be left alone in case of moon shot later this year. We could have a similar pattern to 2013, with two rallies, the first we are experiencing now (and not quite believing) with another coming later in the year requiring new lunar apparel and matching vacuum-proof footwear as the ATH is bested.

 

[Zarathustra]

Ok, getting seriously drunk now. But how about this:
Greg is running crazy in the open. He is very desperate to do this.
To me, it sounds like a meltdown. Like the berlin wall.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4mhc8y/to_me_it_sounds_like_a_meltdown_like_the_berlin/

 

[Erdogan]

This is a very smart comment. I totally agree. One coin should have a high price like $500 and the other should have a low price like less than $1. This sums up my view and why I am engaging in the debate. We want to stay on one chain. If we do a hardfork, which I have no problem with, we need to be very sure that the new chain absolutely annihilates and obliterates the existing chain, such that it is non viable.

You are close to understanding now. What is missing, is that in a fork situation, the longest chain is always the old chain. The new chain, consisting of miners who walk away from the majority, insisting on a defect, outdated opinion on max block size, will be the new chain. In bitcoin we are conservative, we don't like that new and complicated stuff. We just want free market, sound money for the world.
[doublepost=1465029241][/doublepost]By the way, I think 582 is a number that supports free market, sound money for the world.

 

[freetrader]

@cypherdoc : https://gitgud.io/ftrader/bitcoin-no-crazy

 

[Peter R]

Part 3 of 5:

https://medium.com/@peter_r/towards-massive-on-chain-scaling-block-propagation-results-with-xthin-792a752c14c2

Xthin blocks cut through the Great Firewall of China like a hot knife through butter.

 

[sickpig]

@Peter R

ROTFL

fwiw I used the exact same idiom while reporting initial result to @solex

 

[cypherdoc]

@cypherdoc : https://gitgud.io/ftrader/bitcoin-no-crazy

great job!

don't forget to list out the pubkeys of the ppl who've signed on bitcoinocracy.com if you have time. that would add substantial additional pressure given all the info that's coming out on your thread currently.

also, your question is extremely clever. congratulations:

"I believe that Exposing your pubkeys to argue on this site is not something a security professional would endorse."

http://bitcoinocracy.com/arguments/exposing-your-pubkeys-to-argue-on-this-site-is-not-something-a-security-professional-would-endorse
[doublepost=1465048424][/doublepost]

 

[freetrader]

@cypherdoc : I can't claim credit for that argument you cited.

That was put up a month ago or so by someone:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4ildt3/bitcoinocracycom_is_not_something_a_security/

 

[cypherdoc]

 

[AdrianX]

@Peter R

ROTFL

fwiw I used the exact same idiom while reporting initial result to @solex

I've just posted it on r/Bitcoin, see:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4mibin/part_3_of_5_xthin_blocks_are_less_affected_by_the/

It would be good to post it in r/btc too so the community could discuss censorship free.

@Peter R you're addition is adding tremendous value to bircoin thanks for doing the work you're doing I think your efforts could have a huge impact as time moves on. Your past contributions have definitely filled voids in my understanding. Thanks

 

[Peter R]

@AdrianX

It is posted at /r/btc. The /r/bitcoin mods were getting upset that we were posting links to the various reddit discussions. That's why I didn't include a link and asked sickpig to remove his as soon as I saw it.

In any case, it looks like the article has now been censored from /r/bitcoin. Haha the results simply make it too obvious that Xthin is an impressive achievement so now it's forbidden.
[doublepost=1465049796][/doublepost]Thanks for the compliment. However, I only played a small role in this Xthin project (mostly just analyzing and presenting the data). This was a significant team effort.