Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

Tomothy · Aug 5, 2016

Scaling Conference Notes
http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/2016-july-bitcoin-developers-miners-meeting/cali2016/

So included within the 3day transcript is information from LukeJR with code for the block size increase. I'm unable to evaluate it but would love to hear feedback on it in light of the /btcfork stuff.
I think Nullc is pissed at Lukejr because he followed through with the HK scaling conference requirements and put together this hardfork proposal (with regards to lukejr getting ripped apart on irc)

Also, Core, because they now are an official group called Bitcoin Core and identify themselves as such, don't want a hard fork because a hard fork is always contentious. If it isn't contentious than it isn't a hardfork essentially.

"To offset this trend, it's necessary for us to increase the user base. And if we treat Bitcoin as a reserve currency, then the possibility for it to split is high. But if we treat it as a payment network, then people are unwilling to let it split because you would increase the usability."

This seems to not be bitcoin? I dunno. I mean I understand the theory, if it's a payment rail system people have to use it and the system must be protected and is protected by usage; but that's not really a p2p virtual currency anymore; it's a payment rail.

Also, my understanding is maaku7 got angry and left at some point during the weeeknd. Whatever this issue was or what was said was removed from the notes...

Also in there was an admission that coinbase is a competitor with different goals than blockstream

albin · Aug 5, 2016

Unbelievable narcissistic delusions of grandeur from Maxwell, I just can't.
[doublepost=1470450465][/doublepost]

Norway said:
And what is the natural resource in Afghanistan?

What I've heard in the past proffered as an explanation is that they have an extreme amount of mineral resources.

jonny1000 · Aug 5, 2016

Justus Ranvier said:
@johnny1000 describes Gavin's XT plan as "shocking and out of character." Those are negative adjectives designed to scare you, while containing zero intellectual content. The fact that he uses this tactic along should be enough to ostracise him from the conversation because nobody would use emotional manipulation to make their case if they could use facts and logic instead.

Notice that nowhere in his post does he describe tests refuting the results of Gavin's experiments showing the viability of 20 MB blocks. If 20 MB was indeed too high, the correct way to establish this would be with evidence, not with hysteria about how the proposal disturbed their feels.

The shocking and out of character behavior I was referring to was pushing the 8GB idea on the network without consensus after the 20MB idea was rejected. I do not think the 20MB proposal was shocking or out of character.

Gavin even told me in person he would drop 20MB and go for an 8MB proposal instead, and I told him I would support that. It was shocking to me that he went back on his word and used an inappropriate and unpopular activation methodology.

Justus Ranvier · Aug 5, 2016

jonny1000 said:
The shocking and out of character behavior I was referring to was pushing the 8GB idea on the network without consensus after the 20MB idea was rejected. I do not think the 20MB proposal was shocking or out of character.

What's not shocking or out of character for you is the continual dishonesty of using "20MB" and "8GB" as if they were equivalent.

Every time you say "8GB" without also specifying "in 2036" I'm just going to call you out for lying rather than respond to anything you're saying.

chriswilmer · Aug 6, 2016

Does anyone else get the feeling that we've reached peak bizarreness in the world of Bitcoin? Can it get any weirder than right now? It probably can, I just can't imagine it.

Zarathustra · Aug 6, 2016

79b79aa8 said:
That's not how it works. Derivatives are not some kind of hard asset, they are contracts, which can default. The USD $1.2 quadrillion value of the derivatives market is notional.

Well explained, everything true. And the same is true to normal bank account money. Money represents contract relations (credit). Net debt/credit is always zero, but that fact will not prevent a collaps of the global balance sheet, which is inevitable, always in the history of the homo oeconomicus (nationalized homo sapiens):

The more (existing) property is ceded by the state to the private sector or can be created as income after cession in the private (non-state) sector the longer the process called “creation of wealth” (recte: later income or property) can endure, because the more power-sustaining taxes can be imposed.

Nonetheless the breakdown of all property-systems is inevitable. This we actually can study watching the exploding indebtedness of “democratic” powers. The problem of state power vs. private economic activities is per definitionem unsolvable. Wealth creating inevitably sooner or later leads to wealth destruction. This explains “rise and fall” of any power-or state-based system throughout history.
Dr. Paul C. Martin

jonny1000 · Aug 6, 2016

Justus Ranvier said:
Every time you say "8GB" without also specifying "in 2036" I'm just going to call you out for lying rather than respond to anything you're saying.

Yes, BIP101 locked in increases at a fixed rate for multiple decades, to 8GB. Obviously if you think no limit is fine, then you are fine with this. However in the context of a 20MB idea being "weakly" rejected because it was too large, with a new more moderate proposal expected. Do you not see how this BIP101 plan was seen as a bit of a shock?

bluemoon · Aug 6, 2016

albin said:
What I've heard in the past proffered as an explanation is that they have an extreme amount of mineral resources.

Afghanistan is said to have great potential for renewable energy generation, including solar, wind, and hydro.

Perhaps Bitcoin mining will be the key to unlocking this potential? Look out China!

Mengerian · Aug 6, 2016

chriswilmer said:
Does anyone else get the feeling that we've reached peak bizarreness in the world of Bitcoin? Can it get any weirder than right now? It probably can, I just can't imagine it.

Yes, I keep thinking that... Then it keeps getting weirder

Zangelbert Bingledack · Aug 6, 2016

It's going to get much weirder when @DanielKrawisz's "rugged Bitcoin individualism" kicks in, and when Cryptolocker-type scams turn the entire gigantic problem of shoring up the tremendous lack of personal and corporate computer security into money via Bitcoin blackmail. Just as a sampling of things that seem inevitable if Bitcoin continues surviving.

Peter R · Aug 6, 2016

And Maxwell banned my IP address so that I can't even respond to his lies.

bluemoon · Aug 6, 2016

@Peter R

Anyone as malign as Maxwell will surely destroy himself.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4klqtg/people_are_starting_to_realize_how_toxic_gregory/

MoonShot · Aug 6, 2016

jonny1000 said:
Yes, BIP101 locked in increases at a fixed rate for multiple decades, to 8GB. Obviously if you think no limit is fine, then you are fine with this. However in the context of a 20MB idea being "weakly" rejected because it was too large, with a new more moderate proposal expected. Do you not see how this BIP101 plan was seen as a bit of a shock?

A shock to who? The discussion had been going on for years by that time, with proposals posted and under review on many channels.

Unless, of course, you count manufactured outrage as "shock" ... meaning that all of your discourse is simply for effect, and continued control.

Peter Tschipper · Aug 6, 2016

@Peter R same old gmax...lol. Comedy central.

cliff · Aug 6, 2016

***

-------------------------------------
MISC

ETC .0048
XMR back down to ~.003
_____________
Saturday Tribute

freetrader · Aug 6, 2016

Full comedy central indeed:
These people are an embarrassment to themselves, but worse, to Bitcoin.

Archive links:

Code:

https://web.archive.org/web/20160806174020/https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4wczcy/california_bitcoin_gathering_transcript_3_days_80/d664wiy

http://archive.is/OYwL1

cliff · Aug 6, 2016

Coinbase lost around $40K in ETC due to replay attack
Aug 6 Update from Z Tackett of Bitfinex
- “we have arrived at the conclusion that losses must be generalized across all accounts and assets. This is the closest approximation to what would happen in a liquidation context. Upon logging into the platform, customers will see that they have experienced a generalized loss percentage of 36.067%.”
"Progress On Hardfork Proposals Following The Segwit Blocksize Increase" - Peter Todd (Aug 5, 2016)
Most discussed Pull Request this week on Bitcoin Core’s Github tree
Symmetry
Lukejr's hardfork work (see page 58/88 - Ice Cream Social notes)
- https://github.com/lukejr/bips/blob/bipmmhf/bipmmhf.mediawiki
- https://github.com/luke-jr/bitcoin/compare/bc94b87...luke-jr:hardfork2016

# btc intersections

-------------------------------------
OTHER

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DEANONYMIZATION OF DIGITAL CURRENCY USERS
[Job] - PostDoc Position - IC3
ETC .0045
XMR back up to ~.0031
Medal Count

-------------------------------------
TRIBUTE
Meditations

freetrader · Aug 6, 2016

"What he was saying was that people in this room are angels. Don’t assume devils don’t exist.
You can’t assume some actors will not fork to a minority chain to disrupt the market."

While we're bringing religion into cryptocurrency:
In a spaghetti bowl all strands are equal, though, proving it is a better religious fit for P2P e-cash users than traditional "cathedral"-type currencies. [1]

Add one to the FAQ:

Q: Do I have to convert to use Bitcoin?
A: No, but it helps to say some prayers at the temple of El-Goog.

[1] recommended reading for cathedral-goers:
http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/ (also available in Chinese)

~~~{~{@ X @}~}~~~

I think this also conclusively proves the case for the point of political strategy I had not clearly observed Core using before:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_strategy#Religion-based_strategies

My prediction on the completion of that list:
First, passing the buck. There's gonna be a lot of that needed.
And finally, searching for some kind of plausible deniability.
Compromise, we've established, is firmly off the list.
[doublepost=1470514639,1470513701][/doublepost]

The history of this is that there was an altcoin that was killed because someone said it was
dead. That's mostly what he did. He was also 90% of the hashrate on this. But he said it was
dead and that stopped it.

Source: Kanzure's Apocrypha , chapter 'Lessons from the Ethereum hardfork'

Someone, pray tell me: who is this God among men?

bluemoon · Aug 6, 2016

@freetrader
Compromise differs from the other items on your list in that it represents actually arriving at agreement while the others are about manipulating and controlling perceptions.

The compromise (agreement) Core seeks is surrender.

That is also @jonny1000's message to this forum: his insistence that we agree to withdraw opposing implementations, i.e. capitulate.

Note this idea is referred to in a short article on compromise linked to from the Wikipedia political strategies article you linked to, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compromise .

freetrader · Aug 6, 2016

@bluemoon
What can I say about the absolute lack of compromise?
Two things stick out at me from that short article:

The problem of political compromise in general is an important subject in political ethics.

Defining and finding the best possible compromise is an important problem in fields like game theory and the voting system.

I'm not sure whether to put my bet on red or black:
a) lack of ethics
b) blind spot of game theoretical analysis
I'll throw the dice, and wait for @jonny1000 to spin the thing.

Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

New Member

Active Member

Active Member

Moderator

Active Member

Moderator

Active Member

Moderator