Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[albin]

The real victim in the end here is Adam Back, who by all appearances thought he would become celebrated as Satoshi II, but instead got roped into employing "Wikipedia" Greg, who is finally cashing in for peak community-splitting drama.

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

imho a very good summary by Emin Gun Sirer about the latest Greg-induced drama:
http://hackingdistributed.com/2017/04/05/bitcoin-drama-response/

I 100 % agree with everything he is saying.

btw, I guess some GPU's were using patented technologies back when GPU mining was a thing, giving them an unfair advantage.

I'm against patents as much as the next guy, but as long as they exist, Bitcoin has to live with them. Bitcoin lived with patents all around until now and it will continue to do so.
[doublepost=1491471992,1491470925][/doublepost]Oh well. And interesting to see, how Greg's sockpuppet army is in full arms on /r/btc.
Upvoting and downvoting like crazy.

Somebody's getting cold feet?

 

[go1111111]

I disagree with Emin here. He says:

"Some people have asserted that ASICBOOST forms a conflict of interest (CoI) that explains why Jihan Wu opposes Segwit. This is based on the false premise that everyone would adopt Segwit if it weren't for a CoI. There are many other publicly discussed reasons to oppose Segwit, based on technical and philosophical grounds."

What is concerning is that if Jihan does have a CoI, it was kept hidden. This would also be a very extreme CoI, which makes it more concerning.

It's like if we discover that a politician was secretly paid a million dollars to oppose a law. If he said "Relax guys -- there are plenty of valid reasons to oppose that law. Your belief that I did something wrong is based on a false premise!" That wouldn't be very reassuring.

 

[KoKansei]

What is concerning is that if Jihan does have a CoI, it was kept hidden. This would also be a very extreme CoI, which makes it more concerning.

It's like if we discover that a politician was secretly paid a million dollars to oppose a law. If he said "Relax guys -- there are plenty of valid reasons to oppose that law. Your belief that I did something wrong is based on a false premise!" That wouldn't be very reassuring.

I don't know if I completely agree here, @go1111111. In a universe with no SegWit, Jihan would definitely have the right to, and a strategic interest in, keeping proprietary technology secret to maintain a competitive edge while at the same time supporting Bitcoin Unlimited. Just because Jihan happens to be in a universe where some bad actors are pushing something that doesn't even completely break his proprietary technology, he is now obligated to disclose his trade secret? I might be missing something, but it seems like Jihan didn't violate either the NAP or anybody's explicit trust, so there doesn't really seem to be a moral issue. Jihan is not a politician, he is the CEO of a business.

This whole "controversy" is just more ginned up moral outrage ala Mani Rosenfeld's useful idiot rant about how Peter R was the devil for making a descriptive observation of bitcoin's governance dynamics.

 

[albin]

How would it not even be the opposite, where the corruption is Bitfury using Core to hamstring their competitors?

 

[adamstgbit]

i must say...

i feel i can no longer support BU simply because, the miners it would be working with are un-upgradeable.

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

@go1111111 Any non-ASICBOOST miner signaling Segwit has an equally large conflict of interest, since mining is zero-sum.

 

[adamstgbit]

i dont care about any other aspect then : " If BU forks off with the majority of its hash rate unable to tolerate many future changes ... meh... "

if there is a conflict of interest or hes "cheating", or his patent is bankester like nonsense is besides my point

 

[AdrianX]

The real victim in the end here is Adam Back, who by all appearances thought he would become celebrated as Satoshi II, but instead got roped into employing "Wikipedia" Greg, who is finally cashing in for peak community-splitting drama.

I don't feel sorry for Adam, he started this whorl mess, by accusing Gavin of a power Coup, while installing himself in a position of power. - He should have realized he was not an authority when his CTO called him a "dipshit" in public.
[doublepost=1491507084][/doublepost]so on that topic of UTXO scaling, this looked interesting - https://bitcrust.org/

@Justus Ranvier you've done a good job of explaining security costs and benefits in the past.
Once you have processes this I would love to here how you think this could fit into the ecosystem.

Lets take a look, discuss any concerns and see if the benefits are realistic.

 

[Mengerian]

i feel i can no longer support BU simply because, the miners it would be working with are un-upgradeable.

Even with the transaction-reodering ASICBOOST trick (which we don't have any proof they are doing), they could still upgrade to a new transaction format like FlexTrans or BUIP037. Or even Extension blocks.

The thing that theoretically screws it up is sticking the WTXID Merkle root into the coinbase transaction.

It doesn't stop all kinds of other upgrades.

 

[albin]

Breaking news:

I just found out that all the miners together are partial preimage ATTACKING the hash of the header of a candidate block over a billion billion times every single second!!!!

We need to do something to stop this pervasive attack!!!!

 

[awemany]

So much drama all around. I was just joking with @Norway that we've reached the MAX_POPCORN_LIMIT

 

[albin]

Sadly there is no BLOCKSTREAM_CORE_MAX_POPCORN_LIMIT!

 

[awemany]

Hehe. I surely hope there is. Another concept to ponder about: Did we reach 'Peak Insanity' yet?

 

[adamstgbit]

Even with the transaction-reodering ASICBOOST trick (which we don't have any proof they are doing), they could still upgrade to a new transaction format like FlexTrans or BUIP037. Or even Extension blocks.

The thing that theoretically screws it up is sticking the WTXID Merkle root into the coinbase transaction.

It doesn't stop all kinds of other upgrades.

thanks for this clarification
[doublepost=1491515050][/doublepost]can't they stick the WTXID up their ass so they remain backward compatible

 

[Norway]

I spent some time formulating this oneliner on the BU slack. Amirite, or am I confused?

"Sidechains make it possible to lock some of the global currency bitcoin into a sub currency system with the same scaling issues as bitcoin. Progression much?"

(Ok, with that font, it's a twoliner...)

 

[adamstgbit]

@Norway
not sure... but i think its not necessarily true, i think sidechains will have there own PoW and block and blocksize policy all separate from bitcoin, and sidechains have the added advantage of starting off with empty blocks.

 

[Norway]

@adamstgbit
A different PoW is not related to a scaling solution, is it?
A different blocksize policy is not a scaling solution, is it? (Well, it is THE solution if you ask me, but sidechains are not needed for this).
Being small at the beginning is not a scaling solution, is it?

 

[Mengerian]

I just found out that all the miners together are partial preimage ATTACKING the hash of the header of a candidate block over a billion billion times every single second!!!

I also heard that they are using specialized hardware specifically designed to carry out this attack!!

And they are also inflating the money supply by sneakily slipping in a strange transaction into every block they create!! They called it a "coinbase transaction" and it creates money out of thin air!!!

 

[adamstgbit]

@adamstgbit
A different PoW is not related to a scaling solution, is it?
A different blocksize policy is not a scaling solution, is it? (Well, it is THE solution if you ask me, but sidechains are not needed for this).
Being small at the beginning is not a scaling solution, is it?

i see what you mean...

but i guess sidechain in an of themselves are the scaling solution.
poeple can TX with BTC like tokens without clogging up the real BTC chain
LN is more or less a fancy sidechain.