Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.


Active Member
Nov 8, 2015
I recall in like spring of 2014 this exact kind of attack was devastating to both BTCGuild and Eligius, and for BTCGuild in particular, I wouldn't be surprised if the fallout of the situation contributed greatly to the subsequent rapid loss of hashrate and eventual loss of will to deal with the Bitlicense, leading to shutdown.

From what I recall supposedly it had to do with a fairly large (~1% total hashrate) miner in China privately putting together his own hardware, and running his own buggy cgminer fork that threw an exception when share difficulty was > 2^32, thus making it impossible to submit a block solution when difficulty exceeded 4 billion, yet still accumulating shares. I remember an amusing thread on Bitcointalk where someone purporting to be this miner was bickering about Eligius explicitly withholding his money. On the BTCGuild side, that era was grim, because the pool luck was just implausibly low for way too long.

Edit: btw an unrelated tangent I can't resist about Bitlicense. The very idea of regulating pools somehow on the idea that they have custody of customer funds is patently insane. Our beloved Prof. Bitcorn actually even scribbled this in handwritten pen on top of a printout of the draft text and submitted these scans as his comments, because apparently he's such a rockstar that he can just submit it like he's grading their paper, instead of producing written comments like a regular human being. Anyway, say you're hashing on a pool, you're basically doing a job that the pool operator pays you to do. The UI basically tells you what the pool owes you. This is further substantiated by the fact that in the US, mining revenue is taxed as income. If there's any interpretation that has legs that categorizes pools as MSB's simply because of perceived funds custody, then I don't see how eventually we don't avoid any employer at all being an MSB because they presumably hold your money until the date by which checks are cut arrives!
Last edited:


Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2015
The letter to the SEC already leaked!

Dear Sirs, I am Thermos, CAO (chief agitprop officer) of Axa-PwC-Blockstream-Core, none other than the greatest censor of all times.

We are a bit in trouble at the moment, especially our CTO, but I can assure you, it's just a flesh wound!
I strongly recommend that Bitcoin will be defined explicitly as the cryptocoin controlled by the software of The Honourable Society, which forever will be represented by The Four Magnificent Seven:

Adam Back, inventor of Bitcoin
Gregory Maxwell, inventor of Everything
Peter Todd, the greatest advisor since Seneca
Luke 500 kB jr., official Speaker of the God of all Gods

Yours faithfully

Last edited:


Staff member
Aug 22, 2015
Bitcoin Unlimited has a new Secretary in the person of Peter Rizun.

His track record speaks for itself and I hope you will join me in offering heartfelt congratulations to @Peter R

We thank @digitsu and @TrevinHofmann for putting their names forward. It really shows the strength of this organization that we had three incredible candidates for the one position.

The Bitcoin Unlimited Foundation has taken a back-seat due to the efforts placed in our recent conference but this will come to the forefront, so we still hope to expand the organization further and more roles will be made open for those interested in the challenge.
[doublepost=1476393421][/doublepost]Bitcoin Unlimited also welcomes four new members.

Congratulations to @cliff, @Norway, @chriswilmer and @tim potter

We will be updating the membership list on our website. The default is assuming that members want anonymity. Anyone who is a member and is OK with being public on our website is asked to get in touch and we can add their real-name as this does give us a better image overall.


Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2015
Yes, but I don't think many know. Even @theZerg worried that Rogers event could collide with mine, he he. I met Roger Ver in Milan thursday, two days before the event.

He liked the idea, and when I told him I tried to arrange it without a budget, he just said he would pay. What a man!

I had to borrow @theZerg's laptop to design the paper invitations, and @sickpig helped me cutting them out with scissors in my hotel room over a beer :)


Well-Known Member
Aug 19, 2015
Ok. So on this Metcalfe's idea thing and Greg causing facepalms and laughter all around:

Of course this is all unchartered territory and economics is in general not falsifiable, especially if it is such a one time experiment like Bitcoin. That's why I take the whole correlation with a grain of salt - though don't doubt a bit the general trend of more transactions possible -> higher value of BTC( ... who'd have thought... /s)

And I must say that even though I do feel the grain of salt is more than appropriate, the match is indeed uncannily good.

Now, there are on some guys from the Corium side of things trickling into my reddit submission on Greg being very gregarious, downplaying the whole thing. "Why log? That seems weird." seems to be a common complaint. Another one is 'well, we don't know'. (Yes, we don't know as well, but we point this graph out, no kidding ... /s)

Now, I have done my fair share of count rate histograms and the like in semilogy plotting (actually up until the point when I was full of them).

It is absolutely clear to me why @Peter R. appropriately used a log plot here. I really wonder now, how many of those fight the graph because

a) it doesn't fit their world view
b) they don't understand it why you plot this like you do
c) they are paid to not understand it

I also have to say that I have first real doubts about Greg's competency now.

We really should have a shill / paid troll index. Because maybe with some patience and after removing the burden of needlessly dealing with those of type c), we could, with patience, maybe still move some from b) at least. /u/ytdm digging up a recent small blocker who's at least convinced now that Core is full of shit is an example.

But maybe I should also be optimistic and this might soon not be necessary anymore. One can hope!
[doublepost=1476399106][/doublepost]@Norway: Sounds awesome, great job, and yes I think Roger seems to be a great guy in gettings things moving. Great to have him on our side.
Last edited:


Staff member
Aug 22, 2015


Active Member
Mar 14, 2016
As a supporter of doing a hardfork to increase the blocksize limit, I kindly ask you join the majority like the Core team for example (see BIP103), who want to increase the limit without giving such an unnecessary, massive and decisive asymmetric advantage to the chain enforcing the 1MB rule.
I suppose you did not a reality check, discovering that that was only another stalling technique, and Core has decided to not fork, ever.

If you was in Milan you should have talked with them and discovered that with "block size increase" they only mean to use things like segwit and schnorr sigs to pack more tx in the same 1MB block.


Active Member
Dec 15, 2015
Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP!
BTC $639.28
Gemini Daily $635.945 | 1950 BTC | Total $1,240,092.75
XAU (spot)* $1,258.06
COMEX CG1* $1,259.50
BTCswap(BFX - FFR) 0.0358% | BTCswap(Polo) 0.0286%
HashRate 1.83 EH/s
MarketCap $10,173,247,267
BTC Dominance 80.8%
Exchange Volume (BTC) $59.90m
Exchange Volume (ALT) $26.23m
Exchange Volume [BTC] Dominance 69.5%
GBTC* $92 | SPDR Gold Trust ETF* $119.38
10YR Treas 1.79%
Copper* $212.6/lb
Crude (WTI)* $50.58/barrel

*Indicates price at market opening
** Prev Close
Last edited: