Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[albin]

@_mr_e

No way!

They're better at creating a shitty atmosphere and derailing the conversation than anybody is at being patient and competent. They can make anybody look bad, worst case scenario for them is if you're making sense, they start talking over you and stopping to deconstruct everything you say semantically, so you can never get anywhere, then once you're gone they do a wrap-up where they get to frame everything that happened and declare victory no matter what.

 

[awemany]

The amount of handwaving one gets from many of the pro-LN-rowd is astonishing, when poking them at what looks like the right spots:


I really want to see LN in a positive light, I want to see its off-chain capabilities in a positive light. I want to be welcoming to (optional) new fancy stuff on top of the chain.

As I said, I am looking for good things it would actually give us in addition to the type of payment channels Satoshi baked into Bitcoin, and my hands turned up empty so far.

And, also, the snake's oil - type sales pitch going with with LN as the solution (see above reddit post) makes me more and more wary of motives of many of its supporters. Because they too often align themselves with Core's 1MB4EVA poly and suspiciously strongly argue pro- SegWit. All while they are supposedly ortogonal concerns at the same time. This is highly suspicious and stinks.

I think we need to put LN into the very same bin mentally that Counterparty or various other colored-coin or payment providers or 21.co's payment hub (a working 'lightning hub' btw...) is. Something fancy on the chain, but not at all related to the question at hand of on-chain scalability.

Do LN, whatever, I don't care here and now. I care about Bitcoin, and thus I care about SegWit as a proposed change (that maybe I am willing to see positive, but only after a lot more sane and quiet consideration (without the screaming snake's oil propaganda) and getting the on-chain problem solved).

 

[albin]

If they didn't turn Lightning into a political football and were willing to do something reasonable, like actually collaborate on some kind of hardfork to 2-4MB (which could've easily been deployed by now), while working on these layer-2 technologies, the single biggest systemic risk to Lightning functioning as intended (i.e. the risk of not being able to enforce the game theoretic integrity of your channels in time on-chain) would've been astronomically lower. Now we're in the bizarro world of hacking that concern by overpaying an order of magnitude on fees when establishing the channel, or even the glorious leader having suggested freezing timelocks on the protocol level in times of congestion!

 

[Norway]

So what do you think this is? An accounting trick like SegWit, or real improvement?

 

[Richy_T]

@Richy_T

"Behind the rise in seizures is a little-known cottage industry of private police-training firms that teach the techniques of “highway interdiction” to departments across the country.

One of those firms created a private intelligence network known as Black Asphalt Electronic Networking & Notification System that enabled police nationwide to share detailed reports about American motorists — criminals and the innocent alike — including their Social Security numbers, addresses and identifying tattoos, as well as hunches about which drivers to stop."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-and-seize/

http://acluok.org/2013/07/aclu-of-oklahoma-calls-for-criminal-charges-and-state-investigation-in-caddo-county-drug-task-forcedesert-snow-profit-sharing-scheme/

Well, I hate to go tinfoil but whilst it is ostensibly private, it could be it is being backed by Washington behind the scenes.

 

[Norway]

Chinese company Canaan Creative is moving in to Sweden. AFAIK, they have bought GoGreenLight or their equpment and property, formerly started by KnC Miners.

https://corporate.vattenfall.com/press-and-media/press-releases/2017/chinese-high-tech-datacenter-chooses-vattenfall/

EDIT: More info here: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/chinese-bitcoin-mining-firm-canaan-to-open-10-mw-facility-at-node-pole-sweden/

EDIT2: Canaan Creative, with CEO N. G. Zhang, is the same as Avalon. Which mining pool is Avalon associated with?

 

[Peter R]

Bitcoin Unlimited Financial Report: 1 Jun 2016 to 31 Dec 2016

https://bitco.in/forum/threads/bitcoin-unlimited-financial-report-1-june-2016-31-december-2016.1818/

 

[priestc]

Memo server full spec just dropped: https://bitco.in/forum/threads/memo-server-specification.1819/

 

[awemany]

Lets not let the Blockstreamers weasel out of their deliberate fuckup: https://archive.fo/XuxvQ


EDIT: I made it Reddit submission. Adam's quote is just too perfect of a match:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5tsf44/exact_prediction_of_cores_tactics_in_june_2015/

 

[solex]

Can it be put any simpler for the small-blockers to understand?
[doublepost=1486977508][/doublepost]

Just out of curiosity, have the Bitcoin Uncensored morons put out any feelers to ambush interview @solex and/or @theZerg?

Not to me, and I wouldn't look forward to it...

 

[freetrader]

Lets not let the Blockstreamers weasel out of their deliberate fuckup: https://archive.fo/XuxvQ

I get a "host is down" from CloudFlare on that archive.fo link. Uh oh.

 

[Bagatell]

@freetrader works for me

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

Can it be put any simpler for the small-blockers to understand?
[doublepost=1486977508][/doublepost]
Not to me, and I wouldn't look forward to it...

Na, it all makes sense. We just need to be willing to do thousands of transactions ...

Currently, I'd be willing to pay something like 0.25 for a transaction on the blockchain, for example. And that gets me one transaction. So, that's a rate of 0.25 per transaction.

In a theoretical world, where a 2nd layer system like LN is functioning on top of a 1MB blockchain, I could pay something like $20 to open a channel. Now, if that let's me do 1000 transactions for a cent each (before cashing out), that will cost me another $10. Then I cash out, which might cost me another $20. So, now I've paid $50 to do 1000 transactions. That's about 0.05 a transaction.

So yes, I'm paying more per on-chain transaction, but it still makes economic sense, because I only pay 0.05 per transaction by averaging together what I can use on the 2nd layer.

 

[freetrader]

@freetrader works for me

Up again now. Curious...
Yes, I think we saw the "it's the fastest way now" tactic coming up a long time ago.

Resistance is futile, etc. Fuck expediency at this point.
They have shown it's not about anything else than getting their will pushed through, by any means.
They cannot be trusted with Bitcoin as money - period.

 

[bluemoon]

@freetrader

They cannot be trusted with Bitcoin as money - period.

The difficulty is getting the buggers to admit it or for it to be so obvious that even the rose tinted specs of the likes of DCG can't hide the brown stench.

 

[awemany]

Resistance is futile, etc. Fuck expediency at this point.
They have shown it's not about anything else than getting their will pushed through, by any means.
They cannot be trusted with Bitcoin as money - period.

Absolutely. However, I don't want a solely BU-dominant future either. Right now, we're far from that situation.But I sometimes fear (a somewhat funny fear, I know) that the whole thing is highly nonlinear: It feels that we might soon cross a threshold where so many people are so upset with all this that suddenly BU indeed becomes all the rage and we the new 'elected' leaders of the ecosystem.

I feel that this would over some time create the same problems that are in Core now. Maybe alleviated by our saner approach to internal governance (we're not the drama-run pseudo-anarchist-marxist housing project like Core is). However, I don't think we'll be long-term immune from the same kinds of characters appearing and taking over.

We'll see. Despite the recent relative loss in hashpower, I am quite bullish on BU winning all this. The stench simply can't be contained anymore and the bigger players (bitpay) etc. can't stay on the fence for much longer unless they accept the certainty of negative impact to their bottom line.

In any case, I do however want the BU signalling mechanism on blocksize to become standard now - and thus blocksize a non-issue.

I also think - although I am not proposing this and do think it will have downsides - that even if Bitcoin ossifies in all other regards except blocksize, it will have a great chance of overtaking the planet.

But maxblocksize absolutely needs to be allowed to increase in an open-ended way for that.

 

[Bagatell]

@freetrader


The difficulty is getting the buggers to admit it or for it to be so obvious that even the rose tinted specs of the likes of DCG can't hide the brown stench.

The Bitcoin feud has to be re-framed in the context of the war on cash and the demonetization of commodities. Good luck getting a straight answer out of a cental banker or their minions.

 

[throwaway]

Anyone knows anything about btcpop? They just added over a hundred Unlimited nodes:

https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/?q=Unlimited+-+https://btcpop

 

[freetrader]

There was a thread about them on BCT earlier:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1523696.0

Make of it what you will.

My best guess as to 'why so many BU nodes?' - they might want to profit off some publicity through this kind of action.

Having so many nodes at a single service provider doesn't make much sense for what seems to be a small startup company. My guess is they are just IPs on a few actual servers.

 

[Peter R]

I just published a new article: "What we're doing with Bitcoin Unlimited, simply."

https://medium.com/@peter_r/what-were-doing-with-bitcoin-unlimited-simply-6f71072f9b94