Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[adamstgbit]

feels like more hash power just hit the "go segwit" button.

that or BTCC got a lucky streak...

 

[Mengerian]

Bitfury just started signalling for segwit

 

[awemany]

It is my impression that the other miners are now sorely regretting the dick move that was 'killing the competition' with the HK consensus.

All it did was artificially inflating Core's minority position on blocksize by a huge amount and causing despair among big blockers. I am quite sure that with a saner, more aware attitude back then, we'd have bigger blocks by now. The repercussions can still be clearly felt, even though I do think that Core is on its way out.

Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas.

 

[Inca]

Reality is starting to infiltrate the r/bitcoin front page. It is currently about 80% complaints of unconfirmed transactions, delays, and high fees.

What a bloody surprise.

The dethroning of Core will be the most healthy thing for bitcoin in a long time. I am sure that and increased network capacity will bring about the next stage in price appreciation as it becomes clear for the first time (in a loooooong while) that bitcoin actually can become the payment layer for the internet.

 

[freetrader]

If someone tells you they have a plan for a minority (< 50%, by definition) hardfork of Bitcoin using an existing unmodified client, then you should be a little skeptical. Perhaps they have forgotten about difficulty.

Any current unmodified client will respect the rules that the valid chain with the most work is the active chain.

Unmodified clients should not accept chains with sudden difficulty resets in them.

A miner who thinks they can mine a spin-off chain until it exceeds the length of the active chain must have a lot of hashpower, or they might be thinking of advance-mining that chain under tweaked (non-real-time) clock conditions.

Why I am posting something which seems so obvious?

Well, because sometimes the obvious tends to be forgotten or not mentioned on purpose...

Any minority fork attempt should give ample advance notice and clear information so that fair mining can take place on the spin-off chain. Let's keep this in mind.

As far as /r/btcfork is concerned, we will not endorse spin-off attempts that violate such basic premises of fairness in mining.

To those who would say "but SHA256 mining is not a fair environment anyway", I would just say that a minority spin-off should not make a bad situation worse.

Otherwise we risk damaging the reputation of Bitcoin.


P.S. This post is not to be confused with ViaBTC's plan to upgrade via a majority fork using BU. I think that would be feasible, if done with a large majority (~75%).

Reddit discussion thread:
A minority fork without difficulty adjustment is not feasible

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

 

[awemany]

@Zangelbert Bingledack : I usually try to use the picture of 'the train company that has just a single train car' for the insanity that is a fixed blocksize limit.

However, I think the gray market for concert tickets that often has very volatile prices might be a model that is better suited to explain this basic fuck-up to more people at the moment. At least as long as lots of hope prevails that Bitcoin will get this fixed eventually (so many people want to see /that/ Band, and not /any/ replacement Band (Altcoin) yet).

With the variation in hash power, this is akin to randomly resizing the stadium while, before and after the band plays. (In addition to having unpredictable demand for stadium tickets)

And hash power variation across the very stiff, inelastic supply will 'nicely' create these wholly unpredictable prices and unusable fee market.

A whole other level of insanity would be added when one makes pre-committed off-chain (LN) contracts with miner fees embedded.

I can already see Core again pushing some kind of flexcap scheme as another complex, over-engineered scheme to 'dampen this variation' and 'create a smoother fee market'. I bet nullc is crawling out of his hole now or in the next few days to advertise such 'solutions'.

Instead of doing the simple, sane, right thing. But I am optimistic that people are waking up now.

And for those trying to quote mine me: I am not saying above that the 'driving off new users effect' doesn't exist. I am rather pointing out, like @Zangelbert Bingledack did, that in addition to driving users and holders away (e.g. the submission from a day or two ago about unusable Bitcoin ATMs and new users leaving the ATM in frustration without buying Bitcoin due to all the delays), that there is an inherent feature of this fee market that makes it completely bonkers even without the effect of people migrating away from BTC.

Unless so many walk away that Maxblocksize is again above market demand. But then Bitcoin is dead.

 

[yrral86]

mad censorship on bitcointalk...
wow.

Yep... I've only posted 2 times in the past month and both were deleted today.

 

[awemany]

So usually I try to avoid AvW and KT, but here's an article making an overview of the ecosystem vs. SegWit and there is this bit I just can't avoid quoting:

F2Pool (~14 percent hash power)

[...]

"Since our system cannot build C++11, I would like put this on hold for a while, until we can get our new servers online up and running," Chun said. "Next spring, maybe."

Oh and I made it a reddit submission, too.

 

[freetrader]

Guyz, it's 2.1MB now. SegWit is getting more bigly all the time.
New shill accounts promoting that nonsense in that thread.

P.S. careful, I think my NP link got trashed during submission.

 

[Dusty]

Guyz, it's 2.1MB now. SegWit is getting more bigly all the time.

For the sake of correct information: benefit in block increase by segwit depends on the number of P2SH multisig transactions: the more of them, the more of the "witness" part that can go on in the extension block.

1.7MB initial figure was based on analysis of blockchain transaction data in 2015, where P2SH transactions were less popular than today.

 

[albin]

Segwit is turning out to be a real Brexit / Trump situation.

Massive censorship/manipulation of the discussion -> protective echo chamber / bubble -> elitist views completely untested by opposition -> massive miscalculation of expected results

And lo and behold, unless something significant happens, it looks like this thing isn't happening.

Net result of censorship I think backfires significantly. The people who aren't welcome on Theymos-controlled propaganda venues are still in Bitcoin, no matter how much power-tripping BashCo thinks banning from /r/bitcoin somehow means ostracism from Bitcoin!

 

[awemany]

@albin: Yes indeed. There's some uncanny similarity between these two issues (MSM compared to rBitcoin). For example, how did the rBitcoin guys learn all these censorship and manipulation tactics so quickly? If you want to speculate more, you can say that it almost looks like they took classes at CTR ... ;-)

 

[adamstgbit]

@albin i was thinking the same thing.

But with bitconiers... we're more "connected" everyone everywhere sees the tactics used...

i read somewhere somthing about someone telling poeple to "not vote emotionality" and vote for segwit solely based on its technical merit.

as if telling the minners and all the user "we know we wronged you ( HK agreement ), we know we censored the shit out of the discussion, we know we've acted like assholes, please dont consider that when you consider segwit"

 

[adamstgbit]

Yep... I've only posted 2 times in the past month and both were deleted today.

https://s12.postimg.org/5okwi5anx/Untitled.png
[doublepost=1480205826][/doublepost]here some of my delete posts

everyone wants to scale bitcoin -_-

dont lose faith
last year we saw >75% hashing power organize behind a BIP ( was it BIP101 i forget ), core stopped that from happening, but i dont think they have this power anymore. BU is very similar to that BIP, BU is exploding in chain,
this is the final stretch.

>1MB in <2weeks

all i'm saying is that if core called all the shots and questioning them was banned, and trying to go against anything they proposed was seen as blasphemy... well then! ... id say welcome to bitcoin 2016!

 

[Zarathustra]

jonny1000 has 'some questions from a skeptical point of view' about Bitcoin Unlimited:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5f3sae/bitcoin_unlimited_bu_some_questions_from_a/

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

@Zarathustra Saw it while browsing on reddit without being logged in, I have him on ignore on reddit as well so I really don't care for answering him. (Because I know he'll pretend he doesn't understand that 1+1=2).

But all he asks seems to be "How does Bitcoin work?". Every "concern" he has, is not new with Bitcoin Unlimited but inherent to Bitcoin.

 

[Zarathustra]

Yes, but on Reddit many users who are not (yet) familiar with BU seem to believe that his 'point of view' is indeed 'skeptical' (sic!) but not septical.

 

[freetrader]

Unfortunately I think we need to put more effort into analysing and criticizing some of the prominent hardfork proposals, to point out the potential flaws

Please do. Two things will happen:

1. you help those proposals improve (thanks!)
2. you and your employer realize that some of those proposal are already an improvement on the status quo

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

/u/Taidiji, my new favorite small blocker, in response to Greg: