Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[Norway]

Power corrupts!

More like money corrupts.or one could claim theyre one and the same.

@pekatete and @cypherdoc

No need to argue. Toby + Decap explains the relation between power, money and corruption 22 seconds into this song

 

[jonny1000]

So maybe you would be willing to consider that your interpretation of "release" does not match the public's perception of reality?

Ok sure. Luke just said this as well on Reddit, he said it means released in a version of Core. I guess the developers have at least another 3 months to code the HF then.

 

[freetrader]

@jonny1000 : To the devs: *Do* take your time, please.

 

[AdrianX]

One could argue that the power they have, to the extent you actually believe they do have power currently , was only enabled by the money ($76M) that allowed them to aggregate ~10 kore devs under one roof under the whip of a natural dictator like nullc.

Things worked reasonably well before that.

It's from my observation that it's only the money the network of investors and speculators have invested in bitcoin that made contributing to the code and being a core (little c core) developer an elevated position of perceived power.

nullc has chosen to work on bitcoin not because he enjoys using his skill set but because he enjoys the social status associated with his ability. He would be unfulfilled if he was doing the same work for an obscure project.

Most highly competent developers I know are humble and would actively seek to avoid working on changing a $10,000,000,000 network in concern their lack of knowledge resulting from unknown externalities would be a result of their actions. Not nullc he's always 100% sure, to the point he doesn't need to consider dissenting voices.

The $75M investment backing him is exploiting his ego and inability to be rational. It's the network of investors that have made bitcoin, he's been empowered by us and now he doesn't want to give it up and his employers are leveraging his lack of understanding /misunderstanding while supporting his ego and empowering him to change bitcoin so they can exploit it in the future.

 

[cypherdoc]

Lol, you crack me up dude.

No, you've run out of time completely.

Ok sure. Luke just said this as well on Reddit, he said it means released in a version of Core. I guess the developers have at least another 3 months to code the HF then.

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

Ok sure. Luke just said this as well on Reddit, he said it means released in a version of Core. I guess the developers have at least another 3 months to code the HF then.

rofl
Please, don't rush it. I think 2-10 years is a reasonable time frame for Luke to change a 1 to a 2.

 

[Erdogan]

It seems Big money government and Blockstream have aligned incentives. Desperately seeking a way to siphon off fees from the transaction market.

Could it be this simple (and pathetic)? Yes, it could.

 

[cypherdoc]

Actually its probably a good thing kore thinks they have all the time in the world. That way, it'll give us all the time in the world to disintermediate them.

 

[Erdogan]

I don't feel especially corrupted today.

 

[Roger_Murdock]

Why the Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF is Back on Track for Approval

Key excerpts:

It's been exactly three years since the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust(the fund's official name) filed its initial S-1 form. Until now the last revision seen had been Amendment No. 5, filed Dec. 31, 2014.

On Wednesday the news drought ended with the filing of Amendment No. 6.

That alone tells us that the Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF is alive and moving forward. Another, even more important step in the approval process took place on Thursday...

(I wish they explained why it tells us that. Does it just mean they haven't given up?)

Also:

But in addition to making the SEC extra-cautious (and slow), a Bitcoin ETF also requires the proposal of a new SEC rule – a proposal that must be made by the exchange where the ETF will be traded.

Nasdaq never filed for such a rule change – but on Thursday the BATS exchange did.

Once filed, such a rule change must be posted for a period of public comment, usually 45 days (although the SEC can extend the period if it deems it necessary).

At the end of the 45-day period, the SEC can approve the rule or extend the period another 45 days. If the SEC feels it needs still more time, it can extend the period another 90 days, and another 60 days beyond that if need be.

So the good news for the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust is that now the clock is ticking. In theory the Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF could get approval in August. The maximum period is 240 days, which puts us at Feb. 24, 2017.

Of course, the SEC could also choose to reject the proposed rule change. That would delay the Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF indefinitely.

However, despite the uncertainties, the odds favor SEC approval of the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust at some point within the next eight months.

 

[freetrader]

rofl
Please, don't rush it. I think 2-10 years is a reasonable time frame for Luke to change a 1 to a 2.

He working out what the optimal tonal increase would be.
[doublepost=1467478180][/doublepost]

I don't feel especially corrupted today.

Would you please step over here for a parity check, sir.

 

[awemany]

@Peter R.: Very good idea. I feel I wanna get a good grip on the details on how to implement it first, though.

 

[AdrianX]

This article gives quite a good perspective of silicon valley ideals 'vs big money government.

https://news.bitcoin.com/circle-luxembourg-clash-blockchain/

Circle’s Jeremy Allaire and Luxembourg Finance Minister Pierre Gramegna



Gramegna

It seems Big money government and Blockstream have aligned incentives. Desperately seeking a way to siphon off fees from the transaction market.

Dear Big money and Governments ... if this is what you want, please start mining.

WOW Gramegna point and Blockstream's business plan are in perfect alignment.

When he says someone somewhere has to pay he says it like someone has to ship a bunch of gold bars across the Atlantic and store them in a secure fort. He is blind to the near $0 cost of shipping that value over a transatlantic fiber cable and storing it on a hard drive in near real time. A cost so insignificant an unemployed teenager can afford to do it and give it away free. (a cost previously only empires could afford and would then rent seek, to leverage the months of overhead)

 

[Norway]

The 1 hour video of the debate between Jeremy Allaire and Pierre Gramegna is here:
https://www.weforum.org/events/annual-meeting-of-the-new-champions-2016/sessions/the-next-internet

PS. Too bad I like Jeremy and Circle. I could have made a meme about "The Circle Jerk", lol.

 

[AdrianX]

Ok sure. Luke just said this as well on Reddit, he said it means released in a version of Core. I guess the developers have at least another 3 months to code the HF then.

More over you mean you were also in the meeting room when the miners were lead to believe a hard fork would be coded and available in July.

 

[bitsko]

My favorite part about a potential POW HF vs. 2 MB HF is that lots of small blockers are confident they will keep merchants and exchanges.

 

[awemany]

Someone well-versed in Chinese should make an update to the Chinese community on what's going on with rewriting the white paper. It is my impression that proposing such an action will not be seen as positive by the Chinese community, to say it lightly.

 

[lunar]

@Norway

good to see the onchain scaling talks online. The one I missed and wanted to catch was from Garzik are there more vids to come?

as for your meme... 'Circle and the Jerk' ??? Still it seems a little harsh.

 

[freetrader]

(this is in reference to Cobra-Bitcoin's repeated allegation that the problem on that GitHub discussion is toxicity spread by /r/btc trolls...)

 

[Erdogan]

He working out what the optimal tonal increase would be.
[doublepost=1467478180][/doublepost]
Would you please step over here for a parity check, sir.

Please, not that latex glove.