Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[Zarathustra]

North Corean agitator @jonny1000 bathing in the censored cesspool spreading BS.
Claims that the North Coreans are the good ones and Jihan the bad. #Orwell

https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6e6hnc/ny_agreement_software_being_built_to_be/


Nice answers to his BS:

 

[AdrianX]

Hey @Peter R. thank you very much for explaining my code. I guess I should copy your explanation and add it to the docs(?)

@awemany I was confused by "Author" - maybe it could say "Your member Name"

 

[awemany]

@AdrianX: Yeah I can see that this is confusing.

 

[AdrianX]

@awemany Nice, I just cast my first ballot, I was using my PC and signed from my phone - I think this tool is going to be great.

First recommendation is a plain text QR code next to the "Action string" so I can scan the text to my phone for signing.

 

[Dusty]

An interesting read with a good dose of irony:
https://medium.com/@zeptochain/the-million-dollar-bitcoin-4c108f3706b

 

[awemany]

@awemany Nice, I just cast my first ballot, I was using my PC and signed from my phone - I think this tool is going to be great.

First recommendation is a plain text QR code next to the "Action string" so I can scan the text to my phone for signing.

Good idea, please make it an issue on github so it doesn't get lost. Thanks!

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

I voted in the conventional way. I admit, I was too lazy, confused by the author / member thing, and I had the impression that the new system requires me to sign each of the many votes individually, while with the old system I just have to type in my complete votes in my sign filed and click on "sign".

BTW, what's some little pain, is that the text/block format of this forum and the client is different, which always results in that my first attempt of publishing a signed message here fails.

 

[lunar]

@csw suggested method for scaling the blocksize, sounds simple and elegant. Thoughts?

BlockSize = m*(Blockheight - marker_height)^S + Const

Const = 8Mb
S= 1.4 (moores law scaling)
m = catch up linear factor

And scale with moores law and market

 

[AdrianX]

I could live with something like that as a fork @ m=2MB even.

And moores law being 40% exponential growth per annum.

Can you explain the formula with an example as if it was implemented today as the 2Mb HF proposal?

Want does "+ Const 8Mb" mean?

 

[bitsko]

@AdrianX
"Want does "+ Const 8Mb" mean?"

I think it means that the formula starts at 8MB

 

[AdrianX]

just going to preserve this here it summarizes quite aptly what the experts (teh ones named in the white paper) are selling:

 

[lunar]

some speculation on the 1MB origin story.

https://github.com/trottier/original-bitcoin/blob/92ee8d9a994391d148733da77e2bbc2f4acc43cd/src/main.cpp#L2249

"Satoshi and Bear BOTH argued with Hal. Bear and Satoshi have (had) some very different ideas, but also very different to Hal

The 1MB limit was set at a time when many other things were going on
The original idea was flood control.
But in the days when 50,000 BTC got you a pizza....
Flood control did not work.
For the flood control in the early code to work, it needed to be valued at USD $100 / BTC or more

The last that I saw, we have well and truly exceeded this :wink:

If I was Satoshi (as a pure hypothetical here), I think it would be very likely that the role of religion as expounded by Frank Herbert could be at play.

...............​

"This led to arts and coin, trade and commerce" "

 

[freetrader]

Wow, we have a long member list, and few members of those have voted 2 days in - we have not even reached quorum on several technical issues.

Please, take some time to review new members that want to assist the project, and ask questions if you have them on the technical proposals.

VOTE IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SO ALREADY !

 

[Zarathustra]

Proof of Work: Nakamoto Consensus works! Small block miners (full block strategy miners / Underminer) are a minority within Cryptocoin.

There may be single Cryptocoin projects where stupid miners are a majority and destined to commit network suicide. But overall the stupid miners are a minority and vice versa the honest miners are the majority.

That's how it goes - and everybody knows.

........................
Blockstream's Chief Strategy Office: Underminer Activated 'Soft' Fork (UASF) -

"The Incredibles - Rise of the Underminer"

We are the Incredibles; they are the minions of the Underminer. Only one side can win. That's us!

Storyline

The game picks up directly where the movie ended, as the Underminer drills out of the ground and declares his intention to rule the world. The Incredibles prepare to battle him when Frozone arrives. Mr. Incredible orders his family to take care of the Underminer's minions while he and Frozone defeat him. The two reach the Underminer's machine, but he quickly escapes underground. Mr. Incredible and Frozone pursue him. The two discover a computer containing the Underminer's plans and learn that he has created the Magnomizer, intending to reverse the position of the earth's crust and fill the sky with extreme pollution to create an artificial underground.

Mr. Incredible and Frozone make their way to Sludge Station, where the Magnomizer is located. After defeating the Magnomizer Guardian, they reach the roof of the Magnomizer and destroy it. As the entire Magnomizer building begins to collapse, Mr. Incredible and Frozone quickly escape through a giant drill, and it falls down a deep pit the machine makes when it falls through the ground. The Underminer, aware that Mr. Incredible and Frozone have destroyed the Magnomizer, activates the Crustodian, his most powerful robot. The Underminer begins his backup plan to create 100 giant Gilgenbots to conquer the world with. Mr. Incredible and Frozone fight their way to the Crustodian, destroying three Gilgenbots in the process. The Crustodian decides to cover up its failure by destroying the other 96 Gilgenbots. After defeating the Crustodian, who escapes, Mr. Incredible and Frozone take an elevator down to an underwater plant that originally supplied power to the Magnomizer, and now powers the Corrupterator, a giant machine meant to help the Underminer further his world-dominating goals.

Mr. Incredible and Frozone encounter a friendly robot named Dug who agrees to help them save a group of scientists that are trapped in the Corrupterator. Dug sabotages the Corrupterator and opens an elevator that leads Mr. Incredible and Frozone to the scientists. They rescue the captive scientists and confront the Underminer, but he escapes in the last remaining Gilgenbot. Mr. Incredible and Frozone take an elevator back to the surface. The two battle and destroy the Gilgenbot, and the resulting explosion kills the Underminer. Mr. Incredible and Frozone escape the blast, and the rest of the Incredibles arrive just in time to celebrate saving the world once more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Incredibles:_Rise_of_the_Underminer

 

[freetrader]

PSA: Calling on all BU members who haven't voted yet to please vote! (link to online voting site)

We (the BU project) really needs your input!
Let's not have another situation where we don't get to quorum on certain issues / member applications. If you are unsure about an issue, ask for more info, and if cannot decide, please register an 'Abstain' vote so that at least we can achieve quorum.

If you have already voted, please ignore this

Online voting (all you need is your key):
https://www.bitcoinunlimited.info/voting/

Voting thread:
(can use to vote as usual, if you have difficulty with the online system)
https://bitco.in/forum/threads/voting-is-open-for-buips-26-49-50-51-52-53-54-55-56-57-60.2167/#post-39650

@adamstgbit
@bitcartel
@chriswilmer
@cryosanth
@CubicEarth
@deadalnix
@mike
@digitsu
@Haiyang
@Helvetian616
@jbreher
@marcus
@Norway
@rezzme
@Roger_Murdock
@Rogerver
@Roy Badami
@theZerg
@torusJKL
@VeritasSapere
@Wildfire.ca
@Windowly
@Zangelbert Bingledack

 

[Epilido]

@freetrader
At some point an attack on the voting method is, get enough members approved and then have a large subset of members not vote. The no consensus is obtained and any attempt to remove members looks bad from the outside... Ie headline /r/bitcoin BU ignores it's own voting mechanism they get rid of users that don't agree. Or BU pushes BUIP without voting consensus......

 

[freetrader]

@Epilido : agreed that such an attack would be possible, so I think we will see more BUIPs to make the Articles more robust against that. (members going inactive not counting towards quorum etc).

Most of those members I called on to vote, I still see active in the project or on the forum, so I guess the risk of the project becoming blocked due to lack of votes is still low.

At this point I'll do a shout out for prospective members @Joel Dalais and @painlord2k who have been very active in the big blocks cause and assisting the BU project. It would really be a terrible pity if, despite overwhelming acceptance by current voters, they don't become members because existing members don't turn out to vote.

 

[Epilido]

@freetrader “so I think we will see more BUIPs to make the Articles more robust against that. "

Right, and since I have Jonny1000 on ignore I'm sure that Jonny will say but that's censorship of the voting mechanism. Therefore BU is shit.....

Just trying to play devils advocate.

Back to my hole......

 

[awemany]

Just read (and commented) on this thread:


I think it is very important to note that 'reorg risk' is NOT a feature that is dependent on the nature of the fork (HF, SF, WF = whatever fork).

Reorg risk is pretty much simply a measure of the contention between the miners. In a very hypothetical world with a "SW-UASF" attempted at 50%, it will carry as much reorg risk as a HF at 50%.

 

[Dusty]

@freetrader
At some point an attack on the voting method is, get enough members approved and then have a large subset of members not vote. The no consensus is obtained and any attempt to remove members looks bad from the outside... Ie headline /r/bitcoin BU ignores it's own voting mechanism they get rid of users that don't agree. Or BU pushes BUIP without voting consensus......

+1

@freetrader : Democracy does not work, less than ever on a technical project, please avoid it as much as possible.