Hot search keywords

Hot search keywords

Op-ed:Why Bitcoin won’t hardfork like Ethereum

Note: Jiang Zhuo’er released an op-ed to refute the words that Bitcoin might split like Ethereum. He said in the end the market will determine the fate of minority chain.

TL;DR
1. The minority fork of BTC needs to burn 200 million Yuan to survive.
2. The mining industry has the motive, determination and ability to kill the minority fork.
3. If necessary, the mining industry will adopt a more moderate transition method.
4. Change POW = ostrich policy, change the POS algorithm = Taiwan to give up the seats in the United Nations.
5. Essentially the market, not the mining industry, decides to kill the minority fork.

btc fork

There is no doubt that the emergence of two coins is not in line with the interests of all parties. Once there is a minority fork, almost everyone will acquiescence or agree that the mining industry should kill the minority fork. The conduct is legit and well justified. Mining industry is like the military force in the realm of Bitcoin. US army burned hundreds of thousands of lives in the Civil War and the Chinese army spilled the blood of over one million people in the liberation war. Only some electricity will be consumed in the war of Bitcoin mining industry.

Many people are afraid of hardfork, which was originated from the fact that ETC survived from the ETH hardfork. However, BTC may not split into two coins. Just like computers, the blue screen pops up on Windows system; it doesn’t mean the same thing will happen to Mac OS. The fundamental difference between BTC and ETH in terms of technical parameters and communities will definitely kill the minority fork.

In the realm of BTC, user’s sunk costs are calculated in minutes – if necessary, they can dump their coins in a matter of minutes while sunk costs of miners are calculated in years. When the Bitcoin price crash, every stakeholder could find a way out, but miners couldn’t. However, it is the mining industry that chooses to hardfork with more and more support from mining pool. Right now users are afraid of hardfork, what goes wrong?

Simple reasons:
1. The huge sunk costs of mining industry force them to make decisions based on long-term development of Bitcoin. They need to consider the number of users and price in the following years rather than the immediate price fluctuations.
2. The mining industry understands the relevant mining technology and is aware that the minority chain needs to overcome some impossible hurdles to survive, which is not known by common users.
These hurdles include:

1. The minority fork of BTC needs to burn 200 million Yuan to survive

There is a fundamental difference between BTC and ETH: difficulty adjustment interval. BTC adjusts difficulty every 14 days and ETH’s difficulty is adjusted by block (s) or second(s). Such adjustment is to allow sustainable block generation when there is a drastic hashrate change. For example, if the ETH network hashrate drops 90%, the first block will be generated in tens of seconds instead of the usual interval. Then difficulty will be reduced in the next block. It only takes a few minutes to adapt to a 90% hashing power change. So when ETH hard forked with 99% hashing power joining the new chain, the remaining 1% of the hashing power can still maintain the normal operation of ETC.

However, the design in BTC is different. (Suppose there is a hardfork) 90% of hashrate is with the majority chain and the remaining 10% is with the minority chain. Then it will take 100 minutes for the minority chain to generate one block and 140 days to enter the next difficulty adjustment cycle. In this 140 days or 5 months, the 1M block size that is already very congested will be like being cut to 0.1 M (per 10 minute). Besides it will take 10 hours to get 6 confirmations, which makes the minority chain extremely difficult to use.
But the most fatal blow is that the theoretical output of the majority chain and the minority chain is the same in the first difficulty adjustment cycle, or 2016 blocks. As miners get the same payout on both chains, a rational miner will point his hashrate to the fork with higher price. That is to say that scenario described above will not happen. No rational miner will stay in the fork with lower price for 140 days and wait for the difficulty adjustment. All miners will switch to the chain with higher price instantly.
A. Of course someone would argue that there are small group of miners that support the minority chain. Then we may do some math to calculate the cost. Judging from the case of ETH and ETC, the price of the minority coin is assumed to drop to 20% of the majority coins. If the price of majority coin is 10,000 yuan, then the miners stay with the minority coin will lose 8,000 yuan for one coin. During the whole difficulty adjustment cycle, a total of 201.6 million yuan will be burnt in the 2016 blocks (2016 * 12.5 yuan per block * 8,000 yuan per coin = 201.6 million yuan).
B. Then someone may argue that there are plenty of speculators who are willing to put their bets on the minority chain. They could afford 200 million yuan to maintain the network. The fact is that there isn’t such a thing. It’s a common land tragedy issue. Who, among the speculators, will pay for the cost and fine a supplier of hashing power so that others may enjoy a free ride?

C, Some may argue that there might be a big speculator who bought 200 million worthy of minority coins, and then willing to burn 200 million to maintain the network so that the minority coin could rise 5 times.
It’s a good question, which leads to the second major obstacle when the 200 million one is overcome.

2. The mining industry has the motive, determination and ability to kill the minority fork
There is no doubt that the emergence of two coins is not in line with the interests of all parties. Once there is a minority fork, almost everyone will acquiescence or agree that the mining industry should kill the minority fork. The conduct is legit and well justified. Mining industry is like the military force in the realm of Bitcoin. US army burned hundreds of thousands of lives in the Civil War and the Chinese army spilled the blood of over one million people in the liberation war. Only some electricity will be consumed in the war of Bitcoin mining industry.
If the price ratio is 75:25, the hashrate distribution will be 100:0 instead of 75: 25. The winner takes all. This is the rule designed by Satoshi Nakamoto and insurmountable for the split parties. If some big speculators want to breach that rule by maintaining the operation of the minority chain so that they could speculate for profit. Then the mining industry will never sit and watch.

The so-called killing of minority chain is not simply a few 51% attacks, but a more thorough repression. From the first block of minority chain, no transaction will be included in the block generated and any block contained transactions will be orphaned. Therefore no transactions will be confirmed on the minority chain. The cost of such depression depends on the speculator’s input. If speculators manage to mine N blocks, then the mining industry only needs to generate N+1 blocks to overwrite the speculator’s chain. If speculators cease to burn money, then the mining industry will stop as well. You may find the body of speculators’ money for every cent that the mining industry burn.
This is another winner-take-all fight. There won’t be any third option but winner and loser. Speculators may be wealthier than the mining industry, but they can never possess more hashrate, determination and benefits than the mining industry. The outcome is self-evident.

3. If necessary, the mining industry will adopt a more moderate transition method
There is no doubt that mining industry is the one who desires price rise most. When it is necessary, mining will choose a more moderate approach to complete the hardfork to avoid panic and volatility in the market. There are many options in this respect, for example synthetic fork is a good project.
In simple words, synthetic fork is to implement a soft fork before a hardfork when BU hashrate is in dominant position. The Softfork will change the validity of blocks from “Core and BU blocks are both legitimate” to “only BU block is legitimate”. Blocks generated from the mining pools that still follow the Core chain will be orphaned. At this time, Core-based mining pool has two options:
a. Direct fight. Core-based mining pool may launch another Softfork, which defines BU blocks as illegal. However, with the dominant position of BU hashrate, all users that doesn’t follow the softfork will treat the BU chain, the longer chain, as the legal one. Without support from exchanges, users and communities, any minority chain that split from the main chain has no chance to survive.
b. Obedience: Mining pool vote to follow BU but actually intend to follow Core-based chain after the hardfork is launched. But the synthetic fork period could persist long enough for every market participants to realize that 100% hashrate is with BU. Then the market agrees to end the conflict to evolve to large blocks. Even mining pool continues to follow Core-based blockchain, the impact and support of which is so minor that the possibility of blockchain split could be ignored.

In essence, the synthetic fork is to divide “one step hardfork” into two “half step”. The first “half step” is to unite hashrate and then implement hardfork. The first “half step” taken by BU is like to place a knife on the throat of Core. By then, Core will face a dilemma.

4. Change POW = ostrich policy, change the POS algorithm = Taiwan to give up the seats in the United Nations

Of course, Core also has another option to threat of the mining industry: change POW. But for those who have a little understanding of mining business, it is a joke. Is it safer to switch from the largest ASIC type to a smaller one? Is there any minority chain that couldn’t be killed in the GPU-based mining industry?
The total hashrate of the GPU-based market (ETH + ETC + ZEC + XMR are counted) is equal to around 840,000 pieces of RX480 graphics card, the total value of which is around 1.45 billion yuan. If Core hard fork to change POW, which is a direct refutation to their claim that “no scaling because of danger of hardfork”. Such behavior will be unanimously condemned by the community and significantly reduce their support rate. Assuming that the price of minority coins after the POW-changing hardfork is one tenth of Big-block coins(can’t be more than that), the daily output of is worth 12.3% of the whole GPU-based mining industry, or 180 million yuan in equipment value.
Such scale of hashrate protection could be easily compromised by some major mining farm alone. Also there is fundamental difference between BTC mining farm and GPU mining farm. BTC mining farm could only be operational on the Bitcoin network while GPU mining farm serves no loyalties to any coins. It’s viable to rent GPU hashrate to attack Core-coin while profiting from shorting the Core-coin on the market.
As for the change to the POS algorithm, like I said before, Core is welcome to switch to POS algorithm. Core will not be the same Bitcoin as Satoshi Nakamoto has invented. The only way that Core want to survive with POW is to rename as CoreCoin. I would be happy to see that the Core find their way out and freely practice the idea of small blocks, rather than kidnapping the Bitcoin which , as indicated clearly by Satoshi Nakamoto, should evolve to big blocks.

5. Essentially the market, not the mining industry, decides to kill the minority fork

Someone may have noticed that all of the above inferences are based on an assumption that the majority hashrate (large block) fork has a higher price. Why wouldn’t a minority hashrate(small block) fork have a higher price? Of course it is possible, but if so, the mining industry will not initiate a hardfork otherwise the mining industry will face all the dilemmas described above. So in essence, it is the market rather than the mining industry that kill the minority fork.
Some people spread rumors around, saying that the mining industry will control Bitcoin if BU wins. This is obviously a fallacy, no one can fight against the market unless he possess more money than the market. What the mining industry is doing is in response to the scaling demands of the market, preparing for a hardfork (or synthetic fork) and wait for the market to make a decision. Only the market has the power to determine the price of big-block coins. Only the market has the power to push the button to initiate a hardfork and pull the trigger to kill the minority chain. After the market had made its decision, the mining industry will kill the minority chain ASAP to end possible confusion.
Currently the verbal debate on which fork should be name as BTC is meaningless. Market will endorse the “BTC” to the fork that owns more users and higher price. Right now the market name the forked Ethereum chain as “ETH” and the original chain as “ETC” simply because the forked chain has more users and high price.

Talk is cheap,

Show me the price.

COMMENTS(65)

  • hl5460
    9 months ago hl5460

    Note: Jiang Zhuo’er released an op-ed to refute the words that Bitcoin might split like Ethereum. He said in the end the market will determine the fate of minority chain.TL;DR1. The minority fork of BTC needs to burn 200 million Yuan to survive.2. The mining industry has the motive, determination and ability to kill the minority fork.3. If necessary, the mining industry will adopt a more moderate transition method.4. Change POW = ostrich policy, change the POS algorithm = Taiwan to give up the seats in the United Nations.5. Essentially the market, not the mining industry, decides to kill the minority fork.http://news.8btc.com/op-edwhy-bitcoin-wont-hardfork-like-ethereum

  • NorrisK
    9 months ago NorrisK

    And what do you think the market will decide? People will be harassing the exchanges to credit them their fork coins and allow trading of them. People stand to make a percentage of additional money when they get credited both forks coins as the sum of their value will likely be higher than the preforked bitcoin.

  • BitcoinHodler
    9 months ago BitcoinHodler

    good article, i liked it.my opinion which i think is worth mentioning here is that the mining industry is not stupid enough to fork without consensus, meaning without the majority of hashrate supporting a single thing. it is simply way too risky move to do. imagine a split happens and one of the chains’ coins be worth a lot less. this simply means they are losing 12.5BTC to 14.5BTC (depending on fees) worth of revenue. and depending on how low that price would be, they can potentially lose a lot of money on each block. now considering they mine multiple blocks each day this loss is also multiplied each day and sums up to a big enough $$$ number that will definitely make any person with smallest of brains think twice.

  • franky1
    9 months ago franky1

    dynamic nodes and pools wont trigger unless there is safe majority of three things1. node acceptance2. merchant acceptance3. pools keeping the data secure by high chainwork (laymens combination of hashrate and height)howevercore could release their rage (BIP9 at lower than 95%, UASF or change of algo) and make a contentious attack against dynamic implementationsthis is why all the brands which have the ability to accept blocks over 1mb have refused gmaxwells invitation to split away. because the dynamic block implementations will only trigger when there is consensus.this is why all the brands that have the ability to accept blocks over 1mb have not set any deadlines. not bribed the community with txdata twisting code using new keypairs and blockdata structures to offer discounts, not included nuclear banhammer code to make threats. they have instead for the last couple years just plodded along allowing the community to freely choose or not choose the many diverse implementations that allow over 1mb base block.and thats what scares core the most to feel so threatened by the community that they needed to avoid community consensus by going soft and avoid a node vote.. but also shooting themselves in the foot by giving just pools the vote. but pools are smart enough to wait to see (unofficially) what the nodes want to do.(pools wont vote unless clear high node/merchant flags are being waved)

  • BitcoinAllBot
    9 months ago BitcoinAllBot

    Here is the link to the original comment thread. Or you can comment here to start a discussion. Author: 8btccom

  • TotesMessenger
    9 months ago TotesMessenger

    I’m a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

    [/r/0x7b1dea01] SECURITY – Op-ed:Why Bitcoin won’t hardfork like Ethereum
    [/r/totalcyberwar] Total Cyberwar – Op-ed:Why Bitcoin won’t hardfork like Ethereum

    If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don’t vote in the other threads.(Info/Contact)

  • hbhades
    9 months ago hbhades

    There are plenty of ways to prevent this hardfork from bringing one or both chains to a halt.

    A scheduled fork just before the difficulty adjustment would reduce the time to adjust to just one block. In essence, forming the Genesis block of the new chain.

    These people working on bitcoin are developers. Expert problem solvers. I doubt things will be even close to how bad they predict.

    Fork already…It worked for eth to remove our cancer.

  • jonald_fyookball
    9 months ago jonald_fyookball

    (possibly).Very interesting article.https://medium.com/@peter_r/on-the-emerging-consensus-regarding-bitcoins-block-size-limit-insights-from-my-visit-with-2348878a16d8#.hih385etiI was surprised to see this idea  that if a small minority wants to fight the emerging consensus of bigger blocks, the majority will stop them with their hashpower.I know people will take this out of context and scream “Bu wants to 51% attack bitcoin” but the idea is eliminate replay risk and a split network, whichwould be bad for everyone.  So it makes sense.This is why Core floats the idea of changing their PoW to keep a minority chain alive. (also makes sense)Ok, let the flaming begin.  Go! 

  • Holliday
    9 months ago Holliday

    Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 24, 2017, 12:00:45 AM
    (possibly).Very interesting article.https://medium.com/@peter_r/on-the-emerging-consensus-regarding-bitcoins-block-size-limit-insights-from-my-visit-with-2348878a16d8#.hih385etiI was surprised to see this idea  that if a small minority wants to fight the emerging consensus of bigger blocks, the majority will stop them with their hashpower.I know people will take this out of context and scream “Bu wants to 51% attack bitcoin” but the idea is eliminate replay risk and a split network, whichwould be bad for everyone.  So it makes sense.This is why Core floats the idea of changing their PoW to keep a minority chain alive. (also makes sense)Ok, let the flaming begin.  Go!

    They have to try and kill it. Their Emergent Chaos design doesn’t have any wipeout protection. If another chain becomes the longest, the entire BU chain just vanishes!

  • Killerpotleaf
    9 months ago Killerpotleaf

    Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 24, 2017, 12:00:45 AM
    (possibly).Very interesting article.https://medium.com/@peter_r/on-the-emerging-consensus-regarding-bitcoins-block-size-limit-insights-from-my-visit-with-2348878a16d8#.hih385etiI was surprised to see this idea  that if a small minority wants to fight the emerging consensus of bigger blocks, the majority will stop them with their hashpower.I know people will take this out of context and scream “Bu wants to 51% attack bitcoin” but the idea is eliminate replay risk and a split network, whichwould be bad for everyone.  So it makes sense.This is why Core floats the idea of changing their PoW to keep a minority chain alive. (also makes sense)Ok, let the flaming begin.  Go! 
    I didnt realize synthetic fork was going to be utilized.

  • aarturka
    9 months ago aarturka

    China is very big and powerful country and if it wants to take over bitcoins it would be easy for them to get some asics. So hashpower won’t matter. Bitcoin must protect itselves by any means necessary. Though I dont think that BU seriously threaten Bitcoin now. It’s just a bunch of Ver’s shills and altcoin guys most of them don’t even have bitcoins they go into alts and now they want bitcoin to die, for their altcoins to grow in prise. Ver says that he sells his bitcoins for the BTU, buy he already sold and bought dash and eth so I doubt he have any amount of bitcoins.But you may countinue to post what your china daddys tell you.

  • jonald_fyookball
    9 months ago jonald_fyookball

    aarturka, that is pretty funny… but i wish you had an avatar so i could also have some fun! 

  • Vitalikmybuterin
    9 months ago Vitalikmybuterin

    Best write up I’ve seen .. all makes perfect sense from a motivational and economic incentives perspective..

  • iamnotback
    9 months ago iamnotback

    I guess @Peter R is being paid off well. Analogous to how the Japanese paid our best engineers to transfer our technologies some decades ago.Quote from: aarturka on March 24, 2017, 12:35:25 AM
    China is very big and powerful country and if it wants to take over bitcoins it would be easy for them to get some asics. So hashpower won’t matter. Bitcoin must protect itselves by any means necessary. Though I dont think that BU seriously threaten Bitcoin now.

    Still complacent I see…Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 04:35:05 AM

    Re: Why Bitcoin won’t hardfork like EthereumQuote from: http://news.8btc.com/op-edwhy-bitcoin-wont-hardfork-like-ethereum

    Some people spread rumors around, saying that the mining industry will control Bitcoin if BU wins. This is obviously a fallacy, no one can fight against the market unless he possess more money than the market.

    As if the market will have any other choice. That was a nice lie.Now that Bitcoin is at least 51% mined from China, prepare for future regulations to be enforced on all transactions. The reference to Taiwan a subliminal warning to Westerners of their future ass kicking humiliation.The BU mining cartel admitted it can and will 51% attack when required to.I warned you all last year. And you all said I was spreading FUD.When you guys are serious about decapitating the centralized power of the miners, come talk to me.

  • numismatist
    9 months ago numismatist

    Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 24, 2017, 12:00:45 AM
    This is why Core floats the idea of changing their PoW to keep a minority chain alive. (also makes sense)Ok, let the flaming begin.  Go!
    Changing the PoW would render all mining investments worthless. The nuclear option that would nuke Bitcoin.There are not so many possibilities to render the first mover approach worthless. This is one of them.

  • jonald_fyookball
    9 months ago jonald_fyookball

    Quote from: numismatist on March 24, 2017, 04:49:39 AM

    Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 24, 2017, 12:00:45 AM
    This is why Core floats the idea of changing their PoW to keep a minority chain alive. (also makes sense)Ok, let the flaming begin.  Go!
    Changing the PoW would render all mining investments worthless.  

    That is what I thought at first, but now I think they can probably change the PoW without changing the basic hashing function.  For example instead of 2 rounds of SHA-256, there’s 3 rounds.  Or something like that.  Might only need a small software tweak…but I’m not an expert. 

  • anonymoustroll420
    9 months ago anonymoustroll420

    If they do actually attack the chain then it’s very likely the hashing algorithm will get changed to sha-3. The Chinese miners have said they will attempt to sue the devs if that happens (lulz).Here’s how I see it play out:Chain splitsMiners learn that BTU is worth less than BTC because it has a much smaller economy, and they are earning less money by mining itThey switch back to the original chainOr:They try to attack the original chain to force the users to switch to BU and bring up the priceThe hashing algorithm gets changedMiners are fucked and all their ASIC’s are worthless bricksIt would be so awesome if the hashing algorithm was changed to Cuckoo or something like that that was GPU/ASIC resistant, so that we could bring Bitcoin back to it’s roots and people could mine on their own computers and end mining centralization. I don’t think that will happen though as it’s been discussed for years and we can’t decide on a new algorithm. SHA-3 is mostly agreed upon in case of attack only. Besides Cuckoo is very new and untested.

  • jonald_fyookball
    9 months ago jonald_fyookball

    Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 04:44:37 AM
    I warned you all last year. And you all said I was spreading FUD. 

    You were spreading FUD. lol. (imo anyway).You were saying crazy stuff like all bitcoiners are going to end up in jail.  You were also a perma-bear on the price and all around consistent pessimist.   No?

  • Kakmakr
    9 months ago Kakmakr

    Whomever are behind any attack against Bitcoin, is not FOR Bitcoin. Why would you want to destroy the technology, if you do not win the war? It reminds me of the days when I was a kid. We would play in the park with the other kids and one kid would have brought his ball, but when things did not go his way, he would take his ball or someone would kick the ball onto a roof so that nobody can play. ^hmmmmm^This is Childish indeed. ^grrrrrr^

  • dinofelis
    9 months ago dinofelis

    Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 24, 2017, 12:00:45 AM
    (possibly).Very interesting article.https://medium.com/@peter_r/on-the-emerging-consensus-regarding-bitcoins-block-size-limit-insights-from-my-visit-with-2348878a16d8#.hih385etiI was surprised to see this idea  that if a small minority wants to fight the emerging consensus of bigger blocks, the majority will stop them with their hashpower.I know people will take this out of context and scream “Bu wants to 51% attack bitcoin” but the idea is eliminate replay risk and a split network, whichwould be bad for everyone.  So it makes sense.This is why Core floats the idea of changing their PoW to keep a minority chain alive. (also makes sense)Ok, let the flaming begin.  Go! 

    So essentially, BU has now become a bilateral split.  They are not backwards compatible any more if they require BU signalling.  Good.  Simplifies things.  Now, if people think that this imposes the absence of a fork, they are deluded.  The real reason why there will not be a fork, is not technical.  It is the bitcoin brand name.  That’s all.As long as that name is worth something (and for the moment, it is worth the whole of bitcoin’s market cap, because as an alt coin, bitcoin is worthless: launch a new “bitcoin” altcoin and nobody is going to buy a single token, not even the dev), nobody will want to be the fork without that name.

  • dinofelis
    9 months ago dinofelis

    Quote from: numismatist on March 24, 2017, 04:49:39 AM

    Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 24, 2017, 12:00:45 AM
    This is why Core floats the idea of changing their PoW to keep a minority chain alive. (also makes sense)Ok, let the flaming begin.  Go!
    Changing the PoW would render all mining investments worthless. The nuclear option that would nuke Bitcoin.There are not so many possibilities to render the first mover approach worthless. This is one of them.

    It is very simple.  If you want to get rid of the miners, don’t implement PoW.  Seems so trivially logical, that I wonder how people miss it.  PoW = miner cartels.  Unavoidable.   Don’t want that ?  Don’t use PoW.  Switch to PoS.  Bitcoin could, right now.(apart from the fact that it can’t and will remain bitcoin, as long as the name means something).

  • anonymoustroll420
    9 months ago anonymoustroll420

    Quote from: dinofelis on March 24, 2017, 05:37:22 AM
    Switch to PoS.
    PoS on it’s own is very broken and insecure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-stake#Criticism

  • jubalix
    9 months ago jubalix

    Quote from: anonymoustroll420 on March 24, 2017, 05:46:39 AM

    Quote from: dinofelis on March 24, 2017, 05:37:22 AM
    Switch to PoS.
    PoS on it’s own is very broken and insecure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-stake#Criticism

    yeah nah, xem and eth are using is and dash will go pos…..I thinkyour views?

  • AngryDwarf
    9 months ago AngryDwarf

    Quote from: jubalix on March 24, 2017, 08:44:59 AM

    Quote from: anonymoustroll420 on March 24, 2017, 05:46:39 AM

    Quote from: dinofelis on March 24, 2017, 05:37:22 AM
    Switch to PoS.
    PoS on it’s own is very broken and insecure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-stake#Criticism

    yeah nah, xem and eth are using is and dash will go pos…..I thinkyour views?

    Why would Dash need to go POS? Evan’s extensive masternode network already has the miners paying them tax.Quote from: dashwebsite
    In return for providing this services, one masternode is selected by the network to receive a part of the reward of each mined block.

  • jubalix
    9 months ago jubalix

    Quote from: AngryDwarf on March 24, 2017, 08:50:22 AM

    Quote from: jubalix on March 24, 2017, 08:44:59 AM

    Quote from: anonymoustroll420 on March 24, 2017, 05:46:39 AM

    Quote from: dinofelis on March 24, 2017, 05:37:22 AM
    Switch to PoS.
    PoS on it’s own is very broken and insecure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-stake#Criticism

    yeah nah, xem and eth are using is and dash will go pos…..I thinkyour views?

    Why would Dash need to go POS? Evan’s extensive masternode network already has the miners paying them tax.Quote from: dashwebsite
    In return for providing this services, one masternode is selected by the network to receive a part of the reward of each mined block.

    The masternodes are effectively pos though i’m not accross it but I think they areas for the nothing at stake argument on the wiki link, all that get u is a diferent chain being mined and who cares, it just mean you get effective sort of *merged mining* going on, and you have coins on all the chains

  • 8btccom
    9 months ago 8btccom

    So hardfork, if planned well, is safe?

  • 8btccom
    9 months ago 8btccom

    Thanks for the compliment.

  • spartacusrex
    9 months ago spartacusrex

    Maybe a good fist fight 51% attack IS the only way for this to be resolved..Maybe everyone having their say, big or small, and seeing what’s left at the end of the ensuing carnage is the only FAIR way of proceeding.. Yes – it’s dangerous, yes – could kill bitcoin, yes – we could be kissing a million dollar bitcoin goodbye.but maybe not.WE ALL WANT A WORKING BITCOIN.. we just have different opinions about how to get there.. and maybe that’s enough for ‘something’ to ’emerge’.I hope it is.(If nothing else we’ll learn a lot from the experience, a $20Billion lesson.. better be good)

  • franky1
    9 months ago franky1

    Quote from: spartacusrex on March 24, 2017, 09:50:03 AM
    (If nothing else we’ll learn a lot from the experience, a $20Billion lesson.. better be good)

    there is no $16B-$20B dollars!thats the speculative bubble number based on a few thousand coins being stired around in exchanges to have a $1000 ‘price’ and the multiplying it by 16mthere are not 16-20 billion actual dollars sitting in bank accounts.i can make an altcoin tomorrow with 5,000,000,000,000 premined coins. get just 1 coin onto an exchange and sell it to myself for $1.. and instantly have a $5trillion market cap.so stop talking about the speculative bubble number.. its meaningless. all the holders of the 16m coins of bitcoin are not promised or guaranteed $1000 if they all cashed out today. its not a ‘valuation’ .. its a bubble number of multiplication

  • leopard2
    9 months ago leopard2

    Weird, and onedimensional rant from 8btc IMHOAs if the mining industry would be able to 51% attack the smaller chain forever…..LOLThey would have to permanently keep tabs on the smaller chain, putting their larger chain at risk. Also who would stop the smaller chain from changing the algorithm to something else? POS? Or anything besides SHA256?Then the miners are fucked and would be stuck with their inferior BUcoin and expensive hardware forever.I guess all this bullshit will just make ETH, PPC, DSH, XMR and LTC prices explode if the shit really hits the fan  

  • hl5460
    9 months ago hl5460

    Quote from: jonald_fyookball on Today at 12:52:07 AM

    Quote from: leopard2 on Today at 12:34:06 AM
    Weird, and onedimensional rant from 8btc IMHOAs if the mining industry would be able to 51% attack the smaller chain forever…..LOLThey would have to permanently keep tabs on the smaller chain, putting their larger chain at risk. Also who would stop the smaller chain from changing the algorithm to something else? POS? Or anything besides SHA256?Then the miners are fucked and would be stuck with their inferior BUcoin and expensive hardware forever.I guess all this bullshit will just make ETH, PPC, DSH, XMR and LTC prices explode if the shit really hits the fan  

    The majority’s goal wouldn’t be to 51% attack the smaller chain forever, just shut them down temporarily sothere’s not a confusing network split.  Minority would be forced to change Pow.I imagine the PoW could be changed in some small way but still remain SHA256, so their ASICS would still be used. 

    I think PPC survive with pow+pos algo.

  • jonald_fyookball
    9 months ago jonald_fyookball

    Quote from: leopard2 on Today at 12:34:06 AM
    Weird, and onedimensional rant from 8btc IMHOAs if the mining industry would be able to 51% attack the smaller chain forever…..LOLThey would have to permanently keep tabs on the smaller chain, putting their larger chain at risk. Also who would stop the smaller chain from changing the algorithm to something else? POS? Or anything besides SHA256?Then the miners are fucked and would be stuck with their inferior BUcoin and expensive hardware forever.I guess all this bullshit will just make ETH, PPC, DSH, XMR and LTC prices explode if the shit really hits the fan  

    The majority’s goal wouldn’t be to 51% attack the smaller chain forever, just shut them down temporarily sothere’s not a confusing network split.  Minority would be forced to change Pow.I imagine the PoW could be changed in some small way but still remain SHA256, so their ASICS would still be used. 

  • mining1
    9 months ago mining1

    Any project is welcome to rival existing ones because competition is extremely important. Do not forget the stagnation days when names mentioned and wallet releases were considered pump& dump reasons. Most bitcoiners still don’t understand why ethereum is increasing in value because they were sold the motto bitcoin is digital gold and their narrow mindset will transform them into bagholders. Something similar to what LTC is today, nobody cares about ltc, nobody is using it, but chinese asic miners have a place to dump their worthless coins. Because the bagholders find it hard to sell their tokens at a 50-90% value loss.

  • dfd1
    9 months ago dfd1

    Do it, show them all!Just be sure you not coding it on javascript or any other meme language.

  • thejaytiesto
    9 months ago thejaytiesto

    As you know, I am willing to give you a fair chance, since you have been here for years and seem to be onto something. Of course, the natural skeptic on me and also the experience of seeing endless scams in the altcoin world by people that claim to have the next big thing makes me wait to see the code and how experts react to it before I get excited about being an early adopter and future multi millionaire of the “next bitcoin”, I think this is understandable specially for someone that isn’t an experienced coder so aren’t 99% of people so we can’t simply sit back and read the code, we will have to rely on peer reviews from trusted coders.About BTC going south… well, in my case that wouldn’t be good. How im supposed to invest in your project if I lose my money? my entire portfolio is on BTC right now because BTC is the best way to buy into any other project in this field (problem is, no other project is really worth risking BTC at thus far). Yeah ETH is considered as a short term hedge, but ultimately ETH doesn’t solve any of the fundamental BTC problems and has added risks so I don’t have confidence in moving there.I don’t want to go into fiat, because as soon as I do, i’ll get raped by taxes and not only that, but the added risk of account confiscation since more and more banks are blocking transactions linked to bitcoin.To be frank this is a clusterfuck since I’ve got this decent 5 figure wealth in bitcoin which is not much but for me is a lot, and I don’t know what to do with it. Nothing feels safe, and even under the storm of the Jihan Wu hard fork attack, bitcoin still feels like the safest option since the possibility that ultimately there is no HF is also real (or BUcoin getting instadumped and BTC recovering quickly by all the people that has been dreaming about getting in the bitcoin train cheap jumping in aka FOMO)

  • mining1
    9 months ago mining1

    BTC is extremely risky at this point. Worst case 0$, best case 1300-1500$ usd. But the scaling problems and the impossibility to implement them (segwit, LN) will still remain, for the same reasons they haven’t been already implemented.Crypto world is changing, aiming to become and being a flawed payment system is still not enough and BTC brand is fading. And a project for each specific use other than payment systems won’t work either ( see namecoin, soon to be wiped out by ENS on ethereum ).

  • NeuroticFish
    9 months ago NeuroticFish

    Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 12:11:34 PM
    It will not be an ICO. The distribution will be mined by the users without any PoW.It is just time.

    I’m not sure how can this be made to not be abused (single user mining 10k addresses, VPN, whatever), I hope that your design handles that.Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 04:12:20 PM
    Also my post can be interpreted as an attempt to influence Core and BU to compromise and stop messing up the nice rally we had going.

    Good luck with that. While I still hope myself for a good compromise, somehow I believe that they are past that point

  • the_weegie
    9 months ago the_weegie

    You’ve been about this forum a lot longer than I have and I’ll be honest your knowledge of all things crypto is way above mine. So while I’d be cautious of anyone making any sort of claim as to the bitcoin killer, you do generally provide evidence for anything you say, and your posts are more than just FUD and hype (certinaly can’t think of an instance of you hyping anything).You certainly seem convinced you can do this so given there’s no ico, and no premine and I can get on board on day 1, yeah, I’ll say (tentatively) I’m in. I’d want to see an actual product with a clear roadmap before getting started though.

  • miscreanity
    9 months ago miscreanity

    Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 12:11:34 PM
    I have a “blockchain” (aka hash chain) consensus design which eliminates PoW, is not nothing-at-stake (i.e. is not PoS nor Tendermint’s Byzantine agreement) which puts the users of the system back in charge. It eliminates the waste of electricity and it remains decentralized regardless the level of whale concentration of the token supply.It is ultimately deflationary (i.e. the money supply shrinks later) so that is even better for investors than the 21 million coins limit.

    A deflationary, perpetually-divisible unit is exactly what’s necessary for both hodlers and adopters. Ripple had an interesting take.Quote from: Kakmakr on March 24, 2017, 06:08:19 AM

    Re: Do miners really think destroying Bitcoin will make them rich?

    Quote from: Kakmakr on March 24, 2017, 05:51:42 AM
    Even the mere fact that it is possible, would scare away investors. These miners has had enough power and leverage over the rest of the people using Bitcoin and I for one would welcome any change in the code to eliminate that power. These SonsAbitches are killing Bitcoin for their own profit and they want the rest of us to sit back and take it up the a$$. They seem to forget that Bitcoin has no value, if nobody wants to buy or use it, so the power is not in their hands.

    From my observation, a shrinking percentage of Bitcoin users understand how the system works. If government points and says “approved” to Bitcoin, it won’t matter what the miners have done. They (either faction) will have handed the world over to bankers and lawyers on a silver platter.Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 12:11:34 PM
    I’ll be shipping this technology with unlimited TPS scaling and instant (sub-second) block confirmations.It will not be an ICO. The distribution will be mined by the users without any PoW.It is just time.Feel free to give me any feedback in the comment section below. Are you with me on this if I deliver the goods and it is all verified to be legit?

    Rhetorical question? That’s like asking whether an investor is on-board if a deal makes sense…Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 12:11:34 PM
    I’ll also appreciate my edification about any dangers of doing this and other information which might be helpful for me to gauge the landscape that lies in front of me.I’ll presume good developers will come join and help. They can earn a lot of money for doing so.

    My biggest question so far: what is the extent of intergration/interoperability with external platforms and services, not just blockchains? I’m assuming that’s the focus on developers for apps, but do they need to recreate functionality or can data be utilized from existing sources? I think leveraging what exists is critical.Is there a minimum viable participation level necessary to keep the system functioning? One node, a hundred, etc?

  • wiked1
    9 months ago wiked1

    Quote
    “Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.”“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”
    I like this & as I am a feeble and pathetic loser it helps my self esteem.

  • ETFbitcoin
    9 months ago ETFbitcoin

    How about you make new BIP (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal), release the source code at GitHub and make sure most bitcoiner can understand how it works.With my limited knowledge, i think unlimited TPS is quite impossible without risking decentralization and block orphan since it’s confirmed instantly.

  • amacar2
    9 months ago amacar2

    Article is in detail but looks like one sided but love this part;Quote
    1. The minority fork of BTC needs to burn 200 million Yuan to survive.
    Talking about 51% attack, miners can’t keep attacking minority chain forever like what happened to ETC. Attack stopped after few hours/days.

  • RAJSALLIN
    9 months ago RAJSALLIN

    Will follow this

  • iamnotback
    9 months ago iamnotback

    Quote from: http://news.8btc.com/op-edwhy-bitcoin-wont-hardfork-like-ethereum

    Some people spread rumors around, saying that the mining industry will control Bitcoin if BU wins. This is obviously a fallacy, no one can fight against the market unless he possess more money than the market.

    As if the market will have any other choice. That was a nice lie.Now that Bitcoin is at least 51% mined from China, prepare for future regulations to be enforced on all transactions. The reference to Taiwan a subliminal warning to Westerners of their future ass kicking humiliation.The BU mining cartel admitted it can and will 51% attack when required to.I warned you all last year. And you all said I was spreading FUD.When you guys are serious about decapitating the centralized power of the miners, come talk to me.

  • Kakmakr
    9 months ago Kakmakr

    Quote from: amacar2 on Today at 04:36:05 AM
    Article is in detail but looks like one sided but love this part;Quote
    1. The minority fork of BTC needs to burn 200 million Yuan to survive.
    Talking about 51% attack, miners can’t keep attacking minority chain forever like what happened to ETC. Attack stopped after few hours/days.

    Even the mere fact that it is possible, would scare away investors. These miners has had enough power and leverage over the rest of the people using Bitcoin and I for one would welcome any change in the code to eliminate that power. These SonsAbitches are killing Bitcoin for their own profit and they want the rest of us to sit back and take it up the a$$. They seem to forget that Bitcoin has no value, if nobody wants to buy or use it, so the power is not in their hands.

  • iamnotback
    9 months ago iamnotback

    Why the Bitcoin whales must have small blocks. This is very important. It also relates to the OP in a very important way.

  • ekoice
    9 months ago ekoice

    Wish you Good Luck

  • Gilf
    9 months ago Gilf

    Quote from: ekoice on March 25, 2017, 05:23:52 PM
    Wish you Good Luck
    I’m just shocked by such statements. Is it really the same to people that it will be with bitcoin or maybe they are not interested in how the financial situation can improve in the future due to the growth of the bitcoin price. Incredible. Everyone talks about the collapse of bitcoins. But this is stupid.

  • xmasdobo
    9 months ago xmasdobo

    you are giving people fake hopes of getting rich with your coin when you didn’t even release a whitepaper. come back when you have functional software. if you make us rich then you are a legend if not you will dissapoint after all this talk so get to work.i think you cant beat bitcoin, bitcoin too strong. bitcoin will recover from this, uasf will kick miners out if they dont behave. uasf serve as a way to put pressure on miners.bitcoin still best coin, best system, best network effect, best everything. good luck trying to beat it.

  • Pettuh4
    9 months ago Pettuh4

    Quote from: dfd1 on March 24, 2017, 02:53:40 PM
    Do it, show them all!Just be sure you not coding it on javascript or any other meme language.

    Yeah we challenge you to do it and let’s see the outcome of your work.

  • favours
    9 months ago favours

    No thank you.

  • iamnotback
    9 months ago iamnotback

    I have a “blockchain” (aka hash chain) consensus design which eliminates PoW, is not nothing-at-stake (i.e. is not PoS nor Tendermint’s Byzantine agreement) which puts the users of the system back in charge. It eliminates the waste of electricity and it remains decentralized regardless the level of whale concentration of the token supply.It is ultimately deflationary (i.e. the money supply shrinks later) so that is even better for investors than the 21 million coins limit.I am going to STFU and finish implementing this system. Just want to let y’all know that the mining cartel is (actually both of the opposing cartels are) going to lose and we (and that can include you the reader) are going to become insanely wealthy while solving the problem that Satoshi didn’t.Quote from: Kakmakr on March 24, 2017, 06:08:19 AM

    Re: Do miners really think destroying Bitcoin will make them rich? If you look at the way things are going now, you might realize that miners have lost the plot. They are sabotaging the whole Bitcoin experiment, because they want to make more profit and if they cannot do this, they will attack the minority chain to achieve their goal. Satoshi had hoped that this will never happen, but it is happening now….Let’s change our mindset and show these miners who makes up Bitcoin. ^grrrrrrr^

    Quote from: Kakmakr on March 24, 2017, 05:51:42 AM
    Even the mere fact that it is possible, would scare away investors. These miners has had enough power and leverage over the rest of the people using Bitcoin and I for one would welcome any change in the code to eliminate that power. These SonsAbitches are killing Bitcoin for their own profit and they want the rest of us to sit back and take it up the a$$. They seem to forget that Bitcoin has no value, if nobody wants to buy or use it, so the power is not in their hands.

    I know you guys want to fight back and win. I know you aren’t willing to give China Inc. control over our Internet.Blockchains are about more than just payments. Let’s make it so.I’ll be shipping this technology with unlimited TPS scaling and instant (sub-second) block confirmations.It will not be an ICO. The distribution will be mined by the users without any PoW.It is just time.Feel free to give me any feedback in the comment section below. Are you with me on this if I deliver the goods and it is all verified to be legit?I just want to know if you guys are ready or not. Then I’ll leave you alone so I can go code it finally. Or are you Bitcoin maximalists going to continue to try to stay with a brand name that has an insoluble consensus paradigm? (Note I have wanted and continue to want Bitcoin to remain viable, so that doesn’t change but reality is reality)I’ll also appreciate my edification about any dangers of doing this and other information which might be helpful for me to gauge the landscape that lies in front of me.I’ll presume good developers will come join and help. They can earn a lot of money for doing so.The Art of War by Sun Tzu“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.”“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”
    Quote from: aarturka on March 24, 2017, 12:35:25 AM
    China is very big and powerful country and if it wants to take over bitcoins it would be easy for them to get some asics. So hashpower won’t matter. Bitcoin must protect itselves by any means necessary. Though I dont think that BU seriously threaten Bitcoin now.

    Still complacent I see…Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 04:35:05 AM

    Re: Why Bitcoin won’t hardfork like EthereumQuote from: http://news.8btc.com/op-edwhy-bitcoin-wont-hardfork-like-ethereum

    Some people spread rumors around, saying that the mining industry will control Bitcoin if BU wins. This is obviously a fallacy, no one can fight against the market unless he possess more money than the market.

    As if the market will have any other choice. That was a nice lie.Now that Bitcoin is at least 51% mined from China, prepare for future regulations to be enforced on all transactions. The reference to Taiwan a subliminal warning to Westerners of their future ass kicking humiliation.The BU mining cartel admitted it can and will 51% attack when required to.I warned you all last year. And you all said I was spreading FUD.When you guys are serious about decapitating the centralized power of the miners, come talk to me.

    Edit: a mining cartel has an incentive to violate the 21 million coin limit. Why wouldn’t they?Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 11:36:23 PM
    Satoshi designed the system to be immutable (or die, i.e. a poison pill protection)….Appears to me that Satoshi wanted Bitcoin to either be replaced by something better or die. Bitcoin was the pot-of-gold he put out to incentivize the free market to find a better mouse trap than he could accomplish. It was a masterful strategy.

    Quote from: ebliever on March 22, 2017, 03:20:25 AM

    Re: Chinese Central Bank Requiring Extreme Customer Verifications at Exchangeshttps://news.bitcoin.com/chinese-central-bank-requiring-extreme-customer-verifications-at-exchanges/I know we’re talked about endless rumors and fake news of China “banning” bitcoin, but short of an absolute ban this sort of thing looks like a step in the direction we have long feared they would take. A big step.The PBoC is apparently requiring every customer to write out how they got their bitcoin, among other things, such as explaining why they are withdrawing whenever they want to convert to fiat. Very, very intrusive stuff. The question is, how will Chinese buyers respond? Is this just business as usual when dealing with their government, or is this the sort of thing that will dry up the Chinese market for bitcoin? Or something in between?

  • iamnotback
    9 months ago iamnotback

    Also my post can be interpreted as an attempt to influence Core and BU to compromise and stop messing up the nice rally we had going. Although I am fairly certain they don’t take a post like this seriously. Refer the “Art of War” quotes in the OP.@thejaytiesto, I like skepticism and smart people who verify before jumping (that’s usually necessary for survival from the top of tall things). I hope you’ve hedged your BTC but not to fiat, so that you can take advantage of any rise overall in cryptos (thus you must hedge by buying an alt).I don’t intend too post much in this thread. I’ll be reading. Technical replies will happen else where.

  • iamnotback
    9 months ago iamnotback

    Note the OP edit:Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 12:11:34 PM
    Edit: a mining cartel has an incentive to violate the 21 million coin limit. Why wouldn’t they?

    I presume it is of interest to reply here on the deflationary point.Quote from: miscreanity on March 24, 2017, 05:02:00 PM

    Quote from: iamnotback on March 24, 2017, 12:11:34 PM
    It is ultimately deflationary (i.e. the money supply shrinks later) so that is even better for investors than the 21 million coins limit.

    A deflationary, perpetually-divisible unit is exactly what’s necessary for both hodlers and adopters. Ripple had an interesting take.

    Some argue that deflationary is bad because the capitalist can just sit on their capital and not invest it. But the capitalist who is investing doesn’t want the ecosystem growth to be siphoned off to who ever is receiving the minted coins. And the capitalist is competing against their cohorts who invest and amplify their relative gains. We must distinguish between a consistent and low-level of deflation from a debt-deflation Minsky Moment implosion:Quote from: http://budgeting.thenest.com/effect-deflation-debt-30505.html

    When prices drop on everything, consumers and businesses start to pull back on spending, waiting for even lower prices.

    Although in a time-cost-of-money analysis, loans are hypothetically viable in deflation, with a decentralized blockchain then loans can’t be backstopped by a central bank with a senioriage monopoly thus making loans unscalable to the large economies-of-scale indebtedness of our current fateful juncture in history. So funding would shift more to investment and crowdfunding, which I think is precisely where our knowledge age economy is headed.I think it is important to understand that deflation just doesn’t work in an economy of fungible workers, but that economy is archaic and going away. See the follow criticism for why deflation wouldn’t work with the archaic debt-based democracies and fungible industrial age laborers and merchants:Quote from: http://dollarsandsense.org/archives/2003/0703dollar.html

    Once begun, deflation can weaken an already tottering economy in three ways. First, because the wealthy save more of their incomes than the middle classes, a redistribution from borrowers to lenders in itself depresses spending. Second, deflation encourages people to postpone large purchases in anticipation of lower prices in the future. Third, when prices are falling, money grows in value even when it sits around a shoebox or a zero-interest checking account. Hence, pools of saving are less likely to find their way into the financial markets where they can be borrowed and spent. All of this can exacerbate an economic downturn and, in turn, generate greater deflationary pressures.

  • iamnotback
    9 months ago iamnotback

    Quote from: xmasdobo on March 26, 2017, 01:11:35 AM
    uasf will kick miners out if they dont behave

    I already agreed in my prior post. And are you satisfied with the UASF being in centralized control?Do you know who is the $billionaire leader of (or leading spokesman for his cohort whales who comprise) the UASF?http://trilema.com/2015/if-you-go-on-a-bitcoin-fork-irrespective-which-scammer-proposes-it-you-will-lose-your-bitcoins/Here is more about him.Here is one quote from him:Quote from: iamnotback on March 25, 2017, 08:40:05 PM

    Quote from: http://trilema.com/2014/hey-stupid-women-we-need-to-talk-smart-women-dont-want-to-be-with-you-anymore/

    I wouldn’t really have even bothered with this article if there wasn’t a third paragraph there, because contrary to what the stupid imagine, I don’t use them for dissection material in order to hurt and humiliate them.It’s not about them, I couldn’t care less about them, they’re not human as far as I’m concerned. Just like I’m all in favour of butchering a million or a billion, or however many cute fluffy bunny rabbits, be it for making medicine, or cosmetics, or music out of their cries of agony, or whatever else – I’m equally in favour of torturing, mistreating and abusing the stupid in absolutely any way. That’s what they’re here for, after all, and if that’s what gets you off by all means, who cares.It doesn’t really do anything for me, but nevertheless I will dissect them, with no regard to their own whatever bullshit, if I figure I could use the parts to teach, illuminate and instruct people about stupidity. And so here we go, check out the spots on Miscreanity’s liver.

    Quote from: iamnotback on March 26, 2017, 10:46:21 AM

    Quote from: rpietila on March 26, 2017, 06:38:55 AM
    Shelby; If you would need to assess the relative seniority of me and Mircea Popescu, which criteria would you use?

    Hi Risto. Please excuse my atrocious ignorance, naivete, and cluelessness w.r.t. the underworld of darkhigh finance. This is a strange new terrain for me. I feel like a child who is struggling to take his first steps without stumbling onto my face.In particular I would really like to understand what is different if anything about your perspective/approach compared to MP’s economic philosophy and assessment of the value of humanity. MP seems to think those with the most wealth should be in control of the monetary system yet he hates democracy and mass marketing because he sees those as ways of enslaving the stupid masses in a farcical, house-of-cards, debt-based economic system. Perhaps it can’t be any other way? My technological approach with my attempt to find an improvement to Satoshi’s design, has been to try to find a design in which nobody is in control.So I would judge your ability to enlighten me on these issues—either in public or private communication—as the critieria.Without publicizing any specific event, your actions indicate you are wealthy.He wrote about you:Quote from: http://trilema.com/2013/valiant-prince-mp-explores-the-mother-of-all-echo-chambers-a-saga-of-our-times/

    Quote from: jalopybrown
    Assuming your the real MP what are your thoughts on the wacky Finnish ‘supernode’ guy?
    Pretty good job.Quote from: jalopybrown
    Mircea Popescu is the owner of MPEX which is pretty much the buttcoin stock exchange, he’s famous for lasting longer than most bitcoin businesses without failing and hiring an ex-spammer to do PR on bitcointalk despite her having the same level of charm and interpersonal skills as Josh.
    No, actually, most recently I’m famous for fixing the price of Bitcoin back in early April, muchly humiliating Max Keiser in the process, and for leading the MtGox collapse by about two months. The rumour du jour at the Google I/O sloppy seconds conference thing they’re doing currently is that in fact Gox’ demise was pre-arranged and then announced privately to a secret group during my private and at the time secret conference last month.Before that I was famous for calling various other “news” and “shocking & surprising developments” a month or two in advance, the girls are keeping a list somewhere.Quote from: Russell William Thorpe
    I work with poor people from a third world, Spanish speaking island called “Holyoke, Massachusetts”. If they have Internet, it’s through their phones, because they can’t afford that and a modern pc, cable Internet, or a car, etc. How the hell are they supposed to download a 10 gigabyte block chain? I guess they could give out the block chain on DVD or Blu-Ray. Ok, to use this currency, first you need a copy of every transaction anybody has ever made…
    I’m pretty sure nobody involved actually cares about these guys you work with, or poor people in general. This is a little like asking “but how are the thirld worlders from Holyoke Mass going to handle their own private jets”. Well… they aren’t.Quote from: Lucy Heartfilia
    1) Butts don’t scale up at all.2) Because of 1, decreasing mining rewards, greed and mining being ruled by an oligopoly transaction fees will skyrocket.3) Butts are inconvenient.4) Butts are insecure.Why bitcoins will ultimately go down:2) Exchanges are run by idiots. This is where the government already intervened.3) Everyone who uses butts is either an idiot (largest proportion), scammer or otherwise criminal and oftentimes both at the same time. This is the case because non-dumbs and people with legal transactions can easily use other services.4) This is a long shot, but I believe in the future all transactions will have names attached to them and cash will be phased out. It’s just a matter of adoption and convenience now.

    Apparently you’re unaware who exactly you’re talking to, which is chuckle worthy. Here’s a thought : at the last count I was worth something north of 3/4 million Butts. Now what ?(Yes, your numbered list consists of nonsense, most of it self-defeating, some of it self contradictory etc. But that’s neither here nor there, what’s a list these days, anyone’s got one.)

    In the last statement quoted above, MP is referring to the fact that what the USG.MIT mass media is painting onto Bitcoin is not what Bitcoin really is. Behind the curtain are whales who are changing the world from a debt-based industrial age to a more meritocratic knowledge age. Again I more than concur with MP’s logic on this facet, and I even wrote my Rise of Knowledge, Demise of [Usury] Finance essay several years before the first instance of a similar elucidation I’ve found from him on his blog (of course he may have had those ideas much earlier, ditto for myself).Perhaps I don’t have the same valuation of humanity as he does. I don’t entirely devalue the poor. Maybe he has similar logic to mine and just isn’t communicating his ideas effectively to me. Essentially my major disagreement with MP seems to revolve around the mathematical fact which MP also derived, that is essentially Taleb’s anti-fragility. It seems that MP punts to a hierarchical system of control, e.g. Satoshi’s PoW ledger. But what if instead we had a way to encode the laws of physics into a monetary ledger such that nobody was in control, i.e. not a winner-take-all power vacuum of non-resilience? Wouldn’t that be preferred?Quote from: http://trilema.com/2013/valiant-prince-mp-explores-the-mother-of-all-echo-chambers-a-saga-of-our-times/

    Quote from: zylche
    What do you think about the developers frequently receiving threats by bitcoiners? Or the guild and certain developers trying to push for a centralised validation services?
    Bitcointalk is a collection of mostly poor, mostly uneducated, mostly bizarre folk you wouldn’t have on your lawn/daughter/whatever. The various shit they do is representative of Bitcoin in the sense Jeremiah Wright is representative of xtians or Cornel West is representative of academia. Specifically about threaths… I get threatened all the time on teh Interwebs. I’ve never managed to care (yes I’m aware “the FBI takes internet threats very seriously”, but I’ve never managed to care about that, either).People will always try to push for centralised something or the other as long as they figure they’ll have more market share of the centralised thing than they do now. As various failures are pushed aside to rot into irrelevance they’re certain to try and find some sympathetic ear to enforce protectionist measures for them too (que Winklewhoever doods ranting about “regulation”). That topic is best served here.In short I don’t think either are suprising or important.

  • hl5460
    9 months ago hl5460

    Quote from: Kakmakr on March 24, 2017, 05:51:42 AM

    They seem to forget that Bitcoin has no value, if nobody wants to buy or use it, so the power is not in their hands.

    Exactly, value really relies on market response.

  • housebtc
    9 months ago housebtc

    Quote from: hl5460 on Today at 05:43:33 AM

    Quote from: Kakmakr on March 24, 2017, 05:51:42 AM

    They seem to forget that Bitcoin has no value, if nobody wants to buy or use it, so the power is not in their hands.

    Exactly, value really relies on market response.
    I think this is the reality that this miners don’t understand, Bitcoin derived its value through demand, if users decided to opt for another token, the demand will reduce and the value will move towards zero. Miners don’t want to see the big picture here and there are ways to accommodated. Non of these miners can claim to have funded any developmental project on Bitcoin

  • Amph
    9 months ago Amph

    in the end what really decide the fate of bitcoin, is not either the dev the miners or exchange, but the investors, if investors keep dumpiing in fear of what will happenit can possibility scare the mienrs and force them to do the less disastrous choise, and attaccking the minority chain is one of those things

  • Sapin
    9 months ago Sapin

    I clearly hope that we will not hardfork. Some will argue that Ethereum recovered, but this coin always had strange price movements and its reputation is now badly tainted.

  • andrew24p
    8 months ago andrew24p

    While I do agree that a fork would be a terrible idea for maintaining both chains, I think BU might fork just out of spite/ they really believe that they will get the majority.

  • numismatist
    8 months ago numismatist

    Quote from: NorrisK on March 23, 2017, 10:48:56 AM
    And what do you think the market will decide? People will be harassing the exchanges to credit them their fork coins and allow trading of them. People stand to make a percentage of additional money when they get credited both forks coins as the sum of their value will likely be higher than the preforked bitcoin.

    According to http://xtnodes.com/#all_nodes charts where one can see a clear majority for core nodes being run, I got the impression that all other node types are not distributed at all but merely in the hands of some single entities.That’s where the people are with their hearts.Now watching the craze on Bitfinex or Hitbtc regarding split token exchanges … you are right, that’s where their money is. Less emotional habits developing.I have no doubt the masses of people will rush into straigt direction to biggest revenue promises, in a bee line. Whoever telling them the biggest riches will win.

  • mmo_online_1981
    8 months ago mmo_online_1981

    Dear allI do not like hardfork in any way!

  • Dorky
    8 months ago Dorky

    I believe Bitcoin will hard fork into Bitcoin China and Bitcoin ex-China.They talk about the market, but who/what represent the market? Us? Me? Well, I have no idea how to determine the fate of minority chain.

  • sportis
    8 months ago sportis

    There are fundamental differences between the bitcoin and ethereum. These differences are certainly related to the protocol of each cryptocurrency like as the reason of their existence. It’s sure that all of these will influence the way of a hardfork so it is wrong to compare each other. But the most important between bitcoin and not only the eth but all the altcoins is the network effect of the leader. So if the big base of users which supports the bitcoin and maintains this effect ceases to exist due to hardfork and the price crashes then people who caused it will understand that maybe there was not any reason for the scaling debate because the remaining bitcoin users will be very few to full the blocks with their transactions.

  • mmo4me.2016
    8 months ago mmo4me.2016

    Because all people like BTC! Not like hardfork

Please sign in first