albin
Active Member
- Nov 8, 2015
- 931
- 4,008
Maxwell is already laying the propaganda groundwork for the possibility of 51% attack, and curiously getting upvoted on /r/btc to boot!
Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
- Thread starter cypherdoc
- Start date
@albin, @Norway: Well, I think this is news regarding Greg's mind state (but maybe it isn't, if you assume pitch black evil with a thick layer of manipulation on top for his Character), so contrary to all the usual trolling on rbtc, this is newsworthy and as such worth some upvotes? 
@AdrianX: Well I am wondering because for example regular micropayment channels work well with with malleability just like it exists right now. Because the off-chain transactions that are exchanged are just dependent upon transactions that are properly mined in the blockchain.
I am wondering whether LN depends on some kind of weird situation where you'd have several off-chain transactions depending on each other and depending on each other in a way that incentives for who can publish what only work if the parent transactions are non-malleable. I simply haven't seen a clear argument that this has to be the case for LN to work properly.
@AdrianX: Well I am wondering because for example regular micropayment channels work well with with malleability just like it exists right now. Because the off-chain transactions that are exchanged are just dependent upon transactions that are properly mined in the blockchain.
I am wondering whether LN depends on some kind of weird situation where you'd have several off-chain transactions depending on each other and depending on each other in a way that incentives for who can publish what only work if the parent transactions are non-malleable. I simply haven't seen a clear argument that this has to be the case for LN to work properly.
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
Norway
Well-Known Member
- Sep 29, 2015
- 2,424
- 6,410
@adamstgbit
This is great! I left a message to him at that censored forum to come here and get in touch
EDIT: The original post is here:
https://bitkan.com/news/topic/25778
EDIT2: Gotta love these chinese poetic metaphors:
"Before the non-stopping wheels of history, some people are destined to be nailed up on the pillar of humiliation."
This is great! I left a message to him at that censored forum to come here and get in touch
EDIT: The original post is here:
https://bitkan.com/news/topic/25778
EDIT2: Gotta love these chinese poetic metaphors:
"Before the non-stopping wheels of history, some people are destined to be nailed up on the pillar of humiliation."
Last edited:
jbreher
Active Member
- Dec 31, 2015
- 166
- 526
Favorite part of the thread. Actually spilled by BU opposition, with intent of sarcasm:
#Segxit
Richy_T
Well-Known Member
- Dec 27, 2015
- 1,085
- 2,741
Quick question: Does the relay network play into things if Core should decide to try to tilt the playing field if they're having trouble reaching 95% for their SegWit? Could the blocking 10-15% suddenly find themselves having problems?
Second question. And I'm just pondering this idly... Would it be possible to come up with kind-of SegWit that didn't rely on the cooperation of the miners (other than perhaps to mine a witness transaction) but only on the cooperation of nodes that chose to run it? Kind-of merged mining type thing?
Second question. And I'm just pondering this idly... Would it be possible to come up with kind-of SegWit that didn't rely on the cooperation of the miners (other than perhaps to mine a witness transaction) but only on the cooperation of nodes that chose to run it? Kind-of merged mining type thing?
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
@albin @Richy_T
asking Core to implement their idea on a sidechain is like asking Kim Jong-un to step down as dictator and allow for a democracy to form.
but since the blocking hashpower is using BU, it can use thin blocks, not as efficient as the relay network but similar no?
also they could simply mine empty blocks no?
asking Core to implement their idea on a sidechain is like asking Kim Jong-un to step down as dictator and allow for a democracy to form.
sounds like they could make life a little harder for the blocking hashpower
but since the blocking hashpower is using BU, it can use thin blocks, not as efficient as the relay network but similar no?
also they could simply mine empty blocks no?
molecular
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 372
- 1,391
@adamstgbit
thinkblocks only helps between nodes supporting it. If the "segwit-miner" doesn't support it (likely), it doesn't help.
And mining empty blocks doesn't work either, you still need knowledge of new blocks fast, otherwise you're mining the empty block as a sibling of the chain tip with extreme orphan risk. Or did you mean "spv mine"? That might work.
thinkblocks only helps between nodes supporting it. If the "segwit-miner" doesn't support it (likely), it doesn't help.
And mining empty blocks doesn't work either, you still need knowledge of new blocks fast, otherwise you're mining the empty block as a sibling of the chain tip with extreme orphan risk. Or did you mean "spv mine"? That might work.
Norway
Well-Known Member
- Sep 29, 2015
- 2,424
- 6,410
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
@molecular
i guess my idea was that if a BU node learns about a block fast, and then it can tell the minning node about it with thin blocks...
basicly, i guess the they would have to setup a node that connects to the relay network ( is this free and open? ) and then piggyback new block via thin block using that node.
kinda nuts.
right they need the hash of the previous block...
i guess my idea was that if a BU node learns about a block fast, and then it can tell the minning node about it with thin blocks...
basicly, i guess the they would have to setup a node that connects to the relay network ( is this free and open? ) and then piggyback new block via thin block using that node.
kinda nuts.
right they need the hash of the previous block...
Norway
Well-Known Member
- Sep 29, 2015
- 2,424
- 6,410
A new, better translation is available. But I still think the same. The chinese metaphors are beautiful.
"As the wheels of history keep on turning, there will always be some whose legacy it is to be remembered as a shameful disgrace."
New translation is here:
https://medium.com/@zhangsanbtc/why-we-must-oppose-cores-segwit-soft-fork-bitcoin-miner-jiang-zhuo-er-tells-you-why-28f820d51f98#.gonn5txc8
Are you guys as excited as I am to settle your Lightning (finished soon!) channels of 100$ value for a 80$ fee on the blockchain?
albin
Active Member
- Nov 8, 2015
- 931
- 4,008
@Norway
Kind of tangential shower-thoughting here, but that Chinese post is making me think that Core might've inadvertently planted the seeds of their own destruction by coming out with the "roadmap" in the first place.
The roadmap became the centerpiece of their PR strategy against Classic, and through surrogates like Mow they committed to this messaging --
1) Core has the only (or at least most superior) vision for moving forward
2) Core is the only project with legitimate developers (the apex of this messaging was Mow's tweet posing with the Bitfury guy with Disney characters in Times Square, captioned as a meeting with the Classic devs).
They were super successful at the time PR-wise for a lot of reasons, I personally think mainly because they were prepared and organized with an army of political surrogates to repeat these talking points everywhere, and because the good guys generally are not super saavy (for example, look back at how with XT / BIP101, per the XT mailing list on google groups, Gavin and Mike weren't doing any miner outreach or lobbying whatsoever, yet somehow the other side was able to portray them as attackers).
But now to defeat Core, all anybody has to do is produce good messaging on the following, because their strategy in trying to defeat Classic committed to creating the blueprint to beat them --
1) Some other project has a better vision for moving forward
2) Some other project has good developers (including better process control, less toxic dev environment, better outreach, etc.)
BU is extremely well-positioned to make these arguments, and the Jiang Zhuo comments seem very encouraging that it's not falling on deaf ears.
Kind of tangential shower-thoughting here, but that Chinese post is making me think that Core might've inadvertently planted the seeds of their own destruction by coming out with the "roadmap" in the first place.
The roadmap became the centerpiece of their PR strategy against Classic, and through surrogates like Mow they committed to this messaging --
1) Core has the only (or at least most superior) vision for moving forward
2) Core is the only project with legitimate developers (the apex of this messaging was Mow's tweet posing with the Bitfury guy with Disney characters in Times Square, captioned as a meeting with the Classic devs).
They were super successful at the time PR-wise for a lot of reasons, I personally think mainly because they were prepared and organized with an army of political surrogates to repeat these talking points everywhere, and because the good guys generally are not super saavy (for example, look back at how with XT / BIP101, per the XT mailing list on google groups, Gavin and Mike weren't doing any miner outreach or lobbying whatsoever, yet somehow the other side was able to portray them as attackers).
But now to defeat Core, all anybody has to do is produce good messaging on the following, because their strategy in trying to defeat Classic committed to creating the blueprint to beat them --
1) Some other project has a better vision for moving forward
2) Some other project has good developers (including better process control, less toxic dev environment, better outreach, etc.)
BU is extremely well-positioned to make these arguments, and the Jiang Zhuo comments seem very encouraging that it's not falling on deaf ears.
Last edited:
- Aug 29, 2015
- 536
- 2,597
Reality is starting to infiltrate the r/bitcoin front page. It is currently about 80% complaints of unconfirmed transactions, delays, and high fees.
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
Reality is going to hit core like a ton of bricks 666 megatons of hashing hardware.
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
Time to hit 'em where it hurts.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5es2fs/sayonara_21m_bitcoin_cap_its_effectively_being/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5es2fs/sayonara_21m_bitcoin_cap_its_effectively_being/
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
