Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[adamstgbit]

just saying, price wize...

My feeling is that there is a lot more room to grow.
For a while now i've been saying things like " it will go MUCH higher"
i'm talking orders of magnitude higher, ( i honestly think we are going to see the biggest rise bitcoin has seen "soon"TM.)
this is just the beginning of a gr8 year and many more to come for bitcoin

 

[sickpig]

 

[Norway]

Great to see the small mining pools upgrade to BU!

Every hash counts!

 

[Inca]

I wonder how high bitcoin will rise. If we start to see some decent volume then things could get really interesting.

Here is hoping for a batshit crazy rise next year due to the ETF.

 

[Richy_T]

Is that a new ETF or the same old one we've been waiting for?

I have to confess, I am more excited than I've been in a long time. If we can get past the old ATH, we can draw a line under the Gox stuff (well, not the people still hoping to get money back, obviously). We still have the block size issue to get through but that's looking more promising and although I think increasing the block size would be better, I'm not sure Bitcoin can't be a success anyway.

 

[solex]

BU members are advised that voting is open for a number of BUIPs.

Please consider casting your vote. We have a very highly qualified list of new people who wish to be members of BU. Also, BUIPs 38,40 and 41 relate to final refinements of the emergent consensus logic which will mean the next release will be the one we can say to the miners "Use this to upgrade to larger blocks: take it or leave it".

Membership vote on BU Improvement Processes​

Technical BUIPs
BUIP006: Blocktorrent – a torrent-style block data transport [funded]

BUIP038: Revert "Sticky gate"

BUIP040: Emergent Consensus Parameters and Defaults for >1MB blocks

BUIP041: (BUIP038 Counter):
Prevent Minority Hash Power From Injecting Very Large Blocks into the Blockchain

Membership BUIP
BUIP042: New Members for Election #4

 

[sickpig]

 

[Mengerian]

Check out the Medium article I just published: "The Market for Consensus".

In it, I try to analyse the market dynamics of the emergence of consensus rules on the network, using ideas from Thomas Schelling's book "The Strategy of Conflict".

Also posted on Reddit here: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5kmr2p/the_market_for_consensus/

Would love to hear what anyone thinks of it!

 

[79b79aa8]

Gold declining. Bitcoin UP.

Just so you keep track:

Gold: $1,141 USD/oz ($1,330 on Oct. 2016)
ATH: ~$1,163 (Nov. 29, 2013)

I don't need to tell you the current BTC price. But it certainly looks like it wants to break those ceilings. Then what?

 

[Roger_Murdock]

@Mengerian, outstanding article! This is my favorite excerpt:

Viewing things this way — realizing that enforcing block validity rules is equivalent to threatening to split from nodes that do not — gives us a new way to look at soft forks and hard forks.

A soft fork is when nodes start enforcing additional block validity rules that were not previously in force. This involves nodes having to increase the risk that they might cause a split in consensus with other nodes, and potentially lower security and confidence in the new validity rules.

A hard fork, on the other hand, involves a threat de-escalation. Nodes can accept a hard fork change by removing enforcement of a rule. Those nodes will follow the longest proof of work chain, so they have low risk of falling out of consensus with the economic majority.

It is now well established that any changes to the monetary properties of Bitcoin can be accomplished through a soft fork just as easily as through a hard fork. For example, soft fork extension blocks could be used to raise the 21 million coin limit. Given that hard forks are no more dangerous to Bitcoin’s monetary properties than soft forks, it makes sense for node operators to lower their risk of rejecting the longest proof-of-work block chain by relaxing enforcement non-monetary rules, thus allowing for the possibility for hard-forking changes to the block chain.

This should really drive home the utter backwardness of the claim that hard forks are "dangerous" / that hard fork supporters are the ones who are "risking a chain split."

 

[Mengerian]

Thanks @Roger_Murdock happy you liked the article!

Yeah, it is becoming increasingly obvious that extreme antagonism to hard forks that has been promulgated is misguided. In many ways, and as you have shown in you work, so-called hard forks can actually be considered friendlier, more honest, and enablers of clearer market choice than "soft forks".

The whole hard fork / soft fork terminology is annoying anyway. Although there is a technical distinction to be made, it is becoming a misleading division. We are in a ridiculous situation where complex and far-reaching changes like Segregated Witness are pushed to be introduced by soft fork, and a simple straightforward change such as raising the block size limit are vilified because of the supposed dangers of a hard fork. This portrayal of the comparative risks is exactly backwards!

 

[Inca]

Excellent Mengerian.

 

[solex]

We are in a ridiculous situation where complex and far-reaching changes like Segregated Witness are pushed to be introduced by soft fork, and a simple straightforward change such as raising the block size limit are vilified because of the supposed dangers of a hard fork. This portrayal of the comparative risks is exactly backwards!

The necessary outcome of the having to preserve the status of the reference client at all costs.
Hard forks mean everyone must upgrade, and that means node counts start at zero for each implementation. Soft forks mean that old nodes remain counted even if they become zombified by ever more far reaching changes.

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

https://medium.com/@mcasey0827/speculative-bitcoin-adoption-price-theory-2eed48ecf7da#.8z25cu16y

This seemingly "yet another price theory" post that appeared on reddit today was actually really good. It codifies most of everything I've thought about the big picture of Bitcoin price trends and the patterns I've been convinced by over the years, without any of the typical overreaching on the one hand nor faux conservatism on the other. In short, it methodically justifies insane bullishness.

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

We've got a lot of catching up to do.

 

[albin]

It definitely subjectively feels like we're in the early days of a new and extreme hype cycle.

 

[albin]

Anybody else caught up in BashCo's latest quixotic crusade against "vote brigading", maybe message the reddit admins explaining what's going on, because it looks like from what BashCo said in Core slack, he is trying to get some mass reddit-wide bans rolling out of sheer paranoia.

 

[adamstgbit]

@albin
what happened?

 

[albin]

There was a thread on /r/bitcoin mobilizing people to edit war the Linux wiki to censor mentions of non-Core Bitcoin clients or non-Theymos forums.

Somebody called attention to it by linking as np on /r/btc.

BashCo perma-banned everybody who has anything to do with /r/btc who participated in the thread for "brigading" and is making claims of vote manipulation.

There are reports that he mentioned in the Core slack that he is pursuing this with reddit admins.