Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

Tomothy

Active Member
Mar 14, 2016
130
317
Don't know. It are snippets of a chat in core slack ... I slightly remember that Vlad Roberto, who acts as the voice of CSW, some month ago started to be intrigued by a connection between CSW and a poker / gaming mogul, and brought in that in the first version of Bitcoin there has been a decentralized poker inside ... the story gets really crazy and intriguing.
There is, (imho) 100% a connection between CA and CSW. How far back it goes is where things start getting interesting. It seems like it goes all the way back to the beginning. I'm pretty sure there are some out there already but it all blends together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Norway and majamalu

AdrianX

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2015
2,097
5,797
bitco.in
The Juicero situation points to something horribly wrong with the venture capital industry. I suspect there are big implications to this story that relate to how Blockstream got so much funding.

https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/66mo57/what_is_the_deal_with_juicero_controversy/
@awemany @Zangelbert Bingledack that Reddit link is just hilarious to read. Thanks.

It's bullish for bitcoin or crypto now that core insist on limiting bitcoin capacity.

I'm in the product development industry and I've heard all the conversations, I've been in all meeting, read the mark research, the unique selling propositions, and interacted with all the decision makers driving such projects more times than I can count over 3 decades.

This is not just a VC failure. It's multiple failures the most obvious to me is technology for technologies sake, the lack of understanding of disposable income usage in the target market, (failing to comprehend growing wealth inequality) inexperienced designers, over saturation of competitive fast moving consumer goods markets, the need to put capital to work and excess manufacturing capacity.

At every level of the development process is someone that has a salary that is dependent on not understand the greater picture.

I think it's a good sign for Bitcoin. Literally the market has solved all the needs in society but one. Sound money. We're getting to the points where competing to solve a need is increasingly more risky than just investing in the need to fix the money system. I say this from first had experiences.

We live in a world where ~60% of the global population is not needed they are outside the capitalist system (they live in poverty and can not contribute in any way) and the 20% that do all the work are fast being replace by automation, (. The result is, economic growth is not serving the vast majority of humanity and new growth is feeding not wage slavery but automation. A new all inclusive class is emerging it will be the creative class, and it needs deflation to prosper.


Understanding the solution to the problem can bee seen through the Degrowth movement (Décroissance) . They have one problem they reject free market capitalism when they actually just reject economic growth, what I expect to see with the rise of deflation typical with the adoption bitcoin is decentralized Degrowth philology propagate more widely.

I feel like there is much more of a sense in the popular culture that juicing is a scam,
The juicing craze is a symptom of the malnutrition that manifests as obesity in industrialized nations, its an appropriate reaction to a voluntary caloric restricted diet with increased nutrients. watch http://www.fatsickandnearlydead.com/ its not the sugar people are after its the nutrients.
[doublepost=1493223923][/doublepost]
@Mengerian

As long as the value of cryptos generally is increasing, that's the only way it can go, isn't it?
it's inflationary if the number of competing cryptos grows, the result is crypto will not be a good store of value.

i think there will be a swing back to bitcoin, I think the ultimate swing will be triggered by the removal of the 1MB transaction limit.
[doublepost=1493223962][/doublepost]
There is, (imho) 100% a connection between CA and CSW. How far back it goes is where things start getting interesting. It seems like it goes all the way back to the beginning. I'm pretty sure there are some out there already but it all blends together.
who is CA?
 

bitsko

Active Member
Aug 31, 2015
730
1,532
This pastebin of Guy Corem trying to reason with proponents of the contrived propagandaboost scandal provides a pretty solid overview of the problem faced, with links to the relevant medium articles. Thought I would post it here for historical reasons. https://pastebin.com/kx6ALyQr

-------------------------

@awemany, I make no claims as to the accuracy of these messages or the accuracy of people behind them, however- here is what we've collected so far...

https://pastebin.com/j7rdRQHM

https://pastebin.com/QD6vPGSV

https://pastebin.com/jace5Fvf

I don't mean to waste anyone's time who is not interested; but I am both captivated and entertained by these dialogues. So I set them here for others who may be so inclined.
 

Zangelbert Bingledack

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2015
1,485
5,585
The more I read about Juicero the more Segwit makes total sense as part of Blockstream's overengineered method of ensuring Bitcoin users get funneled into using their products. Segwit's heavy discount for witness data is like the Juicero DRM that prevents third-party juice packs. "In case there's a spinach recall..." sounds as flimsy as Greg's justifications.

And the topper is that you can squeeze the juice packs by hand (or with a simple press), but the overpriced, overengineered, company-favoring solution is preferred. Remind you of anything?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-04-19/silicon-valley-s-400-juicer-may-be-feeling-the-squeeze

If there is any promise here, competitors will offer cheap standard-size packs of minced fruits and vegetables and a $50 pressing machine without the DRM.
 
Last edited:

Mengerian

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 29, 2015
536
2,597
Juicero - Instead of buying juice directly, buy a more expensive bag of pulp to make juice in a complex multi-stage process

Segwit/LN - Instead of transacting in Bitcoin directly, set up a Lightning Network channel to transact in Bitcoins in a complex multi-step process

Juicero - Requires that consumers purchase artificially expensive pulp bags and pressing machine to make business model work.

Segwit/LN - Requires consumers pay artificially expensive on-chain transaction fees, created through on-chain capacity limits, for business model to work.

Juicero - Must be connected to internet to work.

Segwit/LN - Must be connected to network to make sure funds aren't stolen from the Lightning channel

Juicero - Over-engineered, needlessly complex, more expensive and less useful than pre-existing methods.

Segwit/LN - Over-engineered, needlessly complex, more expensive and less useful than pre-existing methods.
 
Last edited:

xhiggy

Active Member
Mar 29, 2016
124
277
Greg Maxwell is an ideal villain for Bitcoin, he knows enough on the topic to challenge Satoshis design choices and implement a modern alternative. The knowledge market surrounding Bitcoin is not fully developed. It's hard to imagine a time in the future when there would be such a one sided exploitation of it, than the one occuring via Blockstream/Core/Segwit-Lovers-Anonymous. Development reaching the masses will be a critical juncture for Bitcoin going forward and it needs to be handled well. Giving performance effecting parameters to the miners is the only way forward if bitcoin is going to be truly decentralized in all respects, it's a great insight and the next logical step for Bitcoin to grow.

We need a marketplace for developers to list their patches or versions. Ethereums corporate funding is helping them reach developers. However, Bitcoin's governance model cannot afford that luxury, and must make up the slack with it's opportunity for massive scale.


I wonder why Gavin left the project as he did, once this is all over I'd love to hear his recounting of the decision.
 

albin

Active Member
Nov 8, 2015
931
4,008
/r/btc getting heavily heavily heavily brigaded.

Obviously the same thing as the one time I went to /r/bitcoin to drop a polite comment asking people not to start edit wars on a Linux distro wiki, because it will make us all look stupid to the outside world, and I immediately got permabanned by BashCo for "brigading", received wall-of-text mentally ill PM's accusing me of all manner of character sins, and then like a passive-aggressive bitch was informed that I would be singled out to not have the ban reversed simply because I didn't kiss his ass hard enough responding to the ban. /s

For real, I've had borderline personality ex-gf's back in the early 20's that were more upstanding, reasonable individuals than Princess BashCo!
 

go1111111

Active Member
Following antbleed before the story broke,
When exactly did you scrape this info? And when exactly do you think the story broke? There are people in the /r/btc thread claiming that this was taken after the story broke, and no one in the thread has given any reason to doubt that.

On a related note, is anyone here actually concerned about the antbleed thing? Just because you dislike Core doesn't mean Bitmain isn't also sketchy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Norway

lunar

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2015
1,001
4,290
@go1111111 just a copy from reddit. I agree, it's not objective, but at this point the circumstantial evidence, that there is a dedicated smear team of trolls and professional character assassins is overwhelming. It's the same MO every time, and effective because it takes magnitudes more energy to disprove than to create.

Mike-blacklists, Gavin-CIA/CSW, XT-altcoin, Classic-amateur devs, Coinbase-evil/incompetent, BU buggy, untested game theory, Roger altcoin shill/doesn't understand code, Now antminer asicboost/antbleed.

That list basically sums up the last 3 years of bitcoin censorship enforced development. There comes a point where a rational persons first response is to assume anything coming from these guys is a outright lie, mixed with just enough shit to stick. The crowd are easily manipulated, because bitcoin is such a huge leap in understanding that as xiggy says, the knowledge market is not fully developed, virtually no one understands all areas, myself, very much included.

 

AdrianX

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2015
2,097
5,797
bitco.in
I learned the name for an old phenomenon. It's called psychological projection.

Bitmain makew globally distributed mining equipment. Are accused of centralized control and forcing client to mine on their service.

Bitfuey make centralized managed mining equipment. Actually mine with the equipment for customers on their services. (I wonder how much bitfury equipment is not signaling Segwit)


Chinese miners are accused of cooperating with governments.

Bitfury actually cooperate with governments, and use government funding.

Blockstream discuss the idea of locking hardware as the future.

Bitmain introduces a requests features to lock hardware. And are vilified.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/67t7f2/if_bitmain_can_insert_miner_locking_firmware_then/
 
Last edited: