Bitcoin Forum

It seems that certain elements in the Bitcoin community seem to think they know what's best for the rest of us.  Not unlike their cousins in political office, or sitting on the boards of large companies, they posses a degree of arrogance and narcissism that predispose them to this belief.  That would be fine if it stopped there, but when it extends to:

• DDoS attacks against people running Bitcoin nodes that conflict with their personal visions of the future
• Ad hominem attacks on respected members of the community that don't agree with them
• A refusal by other members with the same preference to disavow the above actions and shun the guilty parties

Then I find it past time to call for action.

I'm interested in hearing others thoughts on the subject, but here are a few ideas to discuss:

• Start a bounty to reward anyone who comes forward with information leading to the arrest and conviction of the individuals responsible for the DDoS attacks.
• Encourage more people to run Bitcoin Classic nodes as a way of protesting the unethical actions taken by those parties opposed to it
• Facilitate the creation of more Bitcoin Classic nodes by providing howto guides as well as prepackaged distributions ready-for-deployment on popular cloud service providers

I am prepared to fund ten Bitcoin Classic nodes myself and am presently working out the details so I can get started.

Regardless of your thoughts on block size, it is important to realize the precedent that will be set if the actions of the Bitcoin oligarchs are allowed to stand.  It will send a very clear message to the world that a small group of people will be able to take control of Bitcoin's destiny and steer it in whatever direction suits them.

If and when the DDoS attacks stop and we see concrete progress being made in the development community towards a solution to the current congestion, however temporary in nature, then it may be time to end this effort.

Sadly it's human nature. To an extent Bitcoin is an attempt to fight it but it's just as vulnerable to those pesky humans as everything else. Whether the humans involved are bright enough to try and account for this, well, the jury's out.

A bitcoin oligarchy is better than a bitcoin democracy.

A democracy is a 51% attack, 51% of people vote for redistributing your coins to them, and you`d have no say in the matter.

So lets avoid that disaster.

I think the DDoS is one of the most ridiculous way to express opinions. Let there be a fair fight! I think the better one will win the race.

I have installed the bitcoin classic node and will try to run it as long/frequenct as possible, hope this will help- and yes I have port 8333 forwarded.

Completely agree with the OP.

We definitely need the increase of blocksize like NOW! Just like what Satoshi has said, we shouldn't wait until everything is perfectly perfect.

There will always be both congestion and attacks against nodes: it's an open network where you pay for what you use. Classic doesn't solve either problem, because those problems will never be solved using the Satoshi design. (i.e. open network, pay for what you use)

You are changing the subject.

The issue is whether or not the Bitcoin community is going to stand by and allow a small, currently anonymous organization or special interest group to subvert its interests.

If so, then say goodbye to Bitcoin and hello to JPMCoin, or GovCoin, or SIGCoin.  Whoever has the money to pay for the most DDoS attacks and the most shills will either get their way, or they will attack the network so that no one else can use it.

Allowing the current attack against Bitcoin Classic to continue unanswered is setting a precedent.  If it is allowed to stand, it will be harmful to the interests of most people in the Bitcoin community by paving the way special interests.  Don't let special interest groups control Bitcoin in the same manner they control so many other pillars of our civilization.

I think the DDoS attack is for the most part backfiring, as most node operators are feeling defiant and spinning up more nodes in response.

Let them waste their money. It will make no difference.

You are right though, this is an extremely dirty tactic and it is clearly to the benefit of Core. People should be asking a lot of questions as to who is doing this and why. Keep in mind they have spent *hundreds of thousands* on this attack so far. If they keep this up, this attack will end up costing them a million $ or more. Someone is really desperate.

two things to note.
1, advocating for methods of sybil attacking is not a good way to go(one person running more then one node for no other purpose then to skew stats)
it doesnt matter if its a core fanboy or a classic fanboy. both parties should not try sybil attacks. or ddos, or transaction spam attacks

2. though classic is one implementation. there is alot of background drama involved. so what could be done better is to get the programmers of bitcoinj, btcd, and the other main implementations to go for 2mb aswell. and find a way to get blockstream to come to their senses to have 2mb aswell.

things like debunking the 12month grace hard fork contention argument, by using luke jr's proposal of a different hard fork(difficulty drop) that he feels can happily become active in 3 months after code release.(if luke thinks 3months is acceptable. then no reason to go for 12, if luke wants hiscode in april then 2mb can be in april too)

things like debunking validation issues by highlighting that libsecp256k1 offers 5x validation speeds. making total of 10,000 signatures validate in april 2016, in the same time it takes 2000 signatures to validate in january 2016. thus allowing for more then a small bit of growth

things like debunking the hard drive storage bloat, with stats that 1mb has maxmimum yearly 100% filled blocks rate of 52.5gb. 2mb=105gb 4mb=210mb
so a 2tb hard drive at $100 can store 40 years of 1mb, 20 years of 2mb and 10 years of 4mb(2mb+segwit)

things like debunking user upload speeds causing relay delays. by stating that millions of people can happily play an online game, while in a voiceoverIP group chat. while livestreaming the game to youtube or twitch, all of which are upload activities. 750kbps= ~93 kByte/s = ~56mb every 10 minutes

A Sybil Attack is defined (at least by Wikipedia) as, "an attack wherein a reputation system is subverted by forging identities in peer-to-peer networks."  I don't believe my choice to run ten Classic nodes comes close to qualifying under this definition.  Also, how many people have foregone running a classic node because they feared a DDoS attack or experienced one?  I would argue that I am trying to deskew the stats -- and let's not forget that more nodes benefits the network as well.
 

I agree with some of what you are saying here, but I don't want to digress into a technical discussion on the relative merits of the different approaches to solve the congestion problem.  It should be sufficient to acknowledge that a solution is needed, and that certain special interest groups are going out of their way to prevent the simplest and most obvious solution from being implemented.  I wouldn't mind if they were using discourse to push their agenda, but they are using cyber-terrorism to force it on the community and that should never be tolerated.

i get what you are trying to say. but take it from another angle. is 2 people running 20 nodes each beneficial to the network. knowing those 2 people only physically need to touch and use 1 of the nodes each.

or is having 20 people using 1 node each (same node count) but where 20 people are in 20 different locations and each using only 1 implementation for real purposes.

i myself could easily (financially and resource ready) run 5000 nodes. but i choose to only run one node, i would prefer to get 5000 people to run a node (if they needed to run one for its true purpose) instead.

simply because you running 10 nodes on the same datacenter adds nothing to the decentralization premiss.

dont get me wrong i do understand your motives are honourable, but from a technical side. its not really as helpful as getting 10 people to run full nodes

I am not at all saying DDoS attacks are justified, but I can understand why they feel that it is necessary to do it. Some people see <Classic> as a threat to the community. They do not want Classic to succeed and their only method to appose this, is to launch a counter attack. For every action, there is a equal and opposite re-action. The law see this as industrial sabotage and it is defined as a crime. The fight for the power to keep control, has gone to the streets. These people are risking jail time to protect their own interest or possibly even the interest of the whole community.     

Not really, no. Please provide me with sufficient data and evidence that supports the claims that people do in fact know "what's best for the rest of us". Should the janitor in my office do the engineer's job now, because how possibly could the Engineer know what is 'best' (debatable)?

So your solution is support for a contentious HF in addition to joining in on the Sybil-attack (on Amazon)?

Or, Classic supporters use DDoS among their own people and point fingers at Core? Quite simple to manipulate the people actually.

You do realize that the forum has been infiltrated by leftists, even bitcoin, which is ironic because bitcoin is exactly the 180 degree opposite to leftism.



Sabotage , propaganda and infiltration has been a weapon of choice of the leftists since the Bolsheviks.

I am also financially prepared to fund 5000 nodes with ease. But I choose not to. I also choose to host a Bitcoin Classic with my home connection. If I don't make a difference at least I could say "f*** you" to Blockstream shills and their corrupted & greedy plans.

This is what is eating the soul of Bitcoin at this hour. Greediness. Bitcoin Core greed to bank on higher fee's and on their off-chain solution offered by their father and almighty Blockstream funded with millions by Banks VC's.

Sounds simple? I wonder if they accepted the sponsorship from C.I.A VC. Maxwell actually told me they have been contacted regarding that. And yes I can show conversation with that being said.

So yeah we need to combat the oligarchy and their threats. They are threating to dump their Bitcoins if they lose (Blockstream , Core devs, and VC's invested in Blockstream plan of Bitcoin takeover).

Bitcoin integrity has been threaten before, but now is time to fight back. So whoever can needs to install a node of Bitcoin Classic, as soon as possible.

In a brighter news. Bitcoin Core is lossing majority on nodes count everyday. Which makes me extremely happy! And again as proof that I am not greedy as Core. I don't care if Bitcoin reaches at 1$ which will never happen. But at least I fought for what is right! Freedom of choice!

So boring!!
Another thread with the attempt to influence people's opinion that core is evil. ::)
Come on is this really all you can do?!
Anyway keep on going with your parade.
SegWit is right around the corner and the roadmap is clear.
If you don't like it just fork off!

I've heard they hired poets.

Good one  ;D ;D ;D .

We need 18% more nodes and Core will lose their majority. Now that's a leverage we can get it. Since I am sure they will fail to launch SegWit on time, because that's how Core is. It required a lot of drama and a lot of meetings so they can finally put a date on it that they will not respect it.

They never and will never respect Bitcoin community opinion. We don't need this kind of people.

I am incredible happy that there are only 68% Core nodes left.

I dont see the rationale behind saying it is better when 1% decide about where Bitcoin is heading compared to majority vote. Actually supporting antidemocracy governance is not legal in democracies to keep majority of population safe from dictators who want all the power for themselves - so lets avoid that disaster for people in Bitcoin as well.

I wonder why so many despotist joined originally libertarian project. I guess they just joined because Bitcoin was so usefull for silk road and other illegal activities, I have no other explanation for such minded people here.

Isn't a bit f***** up? Like for real. These guys don't believe in democracy at all. The whole world has learned it's mistake by losses of million of lives when 1% decided the faith of humanity. We don't want that in Bitcoin that's well said.

Again we are on the verge of tacking back what is ours.

http://puu.sh/nAfeb/1750b2aded.png

Not to mention:

• Running a modified client to spoof client version and manipulate the figures (which could lead to a premature fork, which is more dangerous than a fork with consensus)
• Impersonating satoshi to discredit a fork proposal
• Dismissing all fork proposals as an altcoin

The dirty tricks campaign needs to cease.

[/list]

Stupid remark. A bitcoin democracy would apply to how the network works. It couldn't take out the coins from your wallet to spread it.

But tell us more how an olligarchy is better than a democracy ::)

Schlong the Oligarchs!






http://lidblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/huge.jpg




http://libertycitys.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/donald-trump-schlonged.jpg

It seems that people forgot about the Pseudo nodes in the 'XT drama'. As far as satoshi is concerned, we don't have evidence of it being fake nor evidence that it is real (do we?). However, the third point is debatable. Some call them contentious HF's, some call them altcoins, and such. There is no clear definition of what they are. There have been shady actions from both sides that I disagree with.

The number of nodes is an useless metric, especially since one of your biggest supporters (Armstrong) is promoting a sybil-attack on the network. It won't matter even if you had 10 million nodes on Amazon.

Said by the people who try to break consensus and keep starting "wars" and attacks on individuals(e.g. /r/btc). This does not help anyone.

Libertarianism has nothing to do with democracy, it's expressedly anti-democratic. Property rights and peer-to peer contracts are the basis of libertarianism, so you and everyone else cannot expect to make design decision s for the Bitcoin Project, because it's not yours to decide.

So, you can decide how you spend your Bitcoins, or even which cryptocoin you use, but you won't be making any design decision for the Bitcoin Project, unless your code is accepted as a pull request on github.com/bitcoin. No democracy involved. Sorry about that.  :o

Welcome to the altcoin section everyone. I hope you enjoy your stay here.

It was just a question of time.

We should try to use less politics in the ecosystem. Bitcoin is not a democracy. I have no idea how some people came up with this idea?

it happened when you and your campaigners for blockstream government decided to take to propaganda for anything not blockstream

Are you for it or against it?


You've got no right to tell me what to do, as I have no right to tell you your business. So why do you spend 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, telling the Bitcoin dev team what to do Franky? It seems you only like governance when the governors get the "right" answer.

You're so obsessed with 2MB blocks being some kind of magic number, that you're happy to spend every minute of every day talking about it every (im)possible way that you can with your Photoshop pictures. But if you really want your special 2MB blocks, I have the answer for you: go somewhere else.

Because this Project is not your property. Stop trying to impose your will on other people's property, and you'll actually end up with some friends (non-sock puppets of that guy working in the cubicle across form you, that is)

https://i.imgur.com/UpHTBU4.png

---

---

As long as you don't join in on the Sybil attack on Amazon it is fine. However, deploying 5000 nodes at a single house has a similar effect (the decentralization does help with the networks reliability and safety).

I missed your first post (this one) about nodes. The number of nodes is a very unreliable metric. I'm not sure what you think you would accomplish even if you had the majority of nodes.

The real question is why are people letting themselves be manipulated? I could just as easily DDoS the next service that shows strong support for Core and blame it all on Classic supporters to portray them as evil.

I`m not despotistic, and I`m absolutely 1000% anti-tyrrany.

But, you fail to see how a system that is broken is anything better than what any despot could offer.

So I`d prefer a weighted democracy, if that is what you want to call it, where you get voting % based on your bitcoin worth rather than just being a user.

So yes in that sense i support democracy but only if it's properly weighted.

The problem is that bitcoin is not a sunday picnic club, but a financial entity of 6 billion $, where our money is.

So it's logical if those that have more % ownership of the money, have more rights to decide about it.

If I`d own 5 billion $ in bitcoin, then bitcoin would almost literally be my property, and the miners and bitcoin users would only be my customers in my business.

Ok , there is no need to hide it anymore, so I say it out loud: BITCOIN IS A CORPORATION

Yes you heard it correctly. Its is a non-incorporated corporation, it may not be legally registered anywhere, but it is a corporation because those that hold most money in it, should own that % of it. And the miners and other users are just customers or employees.

So if I own X amount of BTC, that is my share in this business entity called bitcoin.

It's so shocking. It's a sad day for Bitcoin. When people that have the temporary majority scream :" Bitcoin = Corporation" , "Bitcoin = Not democracy" .  You guys have no shame at all?



Seems like that's right satoshi. Users became tyrannical. We need to kill tyranny and it will be killed in a way or other. As in history, every tyran died on his own tongue.

Blockstream can't change history. Tyrans died or have been removed. Democracy will be enforced upon you no matter what and how.

Despots and Tyrans always failed. Maybe we won't win this battle. But I am sure we will win this war.

The ignorance of Blockstream Bitcoin is huge.

They say that Hard-Fork is dangerous. Not is not. Is dangerous cause they will make it be by sabotage it. They say that 2MB will slow down the confirmations. It has been tested and no it's not dangerous. Considering that better chips have been produces and soon to be sold again this is a claim by Blockstream corporatists that is false.

They are fully delusional and came up with ideas that don't stick up on the wall.

It is a sad day for Bitcoin to declare it under control of tyrans. Yes it is!


Tyrans that are trying their best to kill any other better option of Bitcoin source code. By make it it an "altcoin" when is actually Bitcoin. Tyrans that are trying to censor any word about other option. Exactly like in a communist ERA. I lived in a communist country...in the end the tyran died. As they all did. That's my only hope.

It was worth a try.  Welcome to dismissal.  ::)

The protectionist oligarchs don't want us discussing "contentious" hardforks, so we're being swept under the carpet again.

What is so tyrranical about it? Because i`m anti tyrrany, so please point it out to me because i cant see it.

We vote on things based on balance, bitcoin is private property after all, and if I have say 50 bitcoin and you have 20, then its obvious that i should have more rights than you because i hold more stake in it.

It's as simple is that, bitcoin is nothing more but a share/stock in this business, and if you have more you should have more rights.

---

It's not coercive by any means, and its totally voluntary.

Don't like it? Sell your coins and join another coin that is managed by other means, if you can find any.

The obvious truth is that leftist guys like you deny private property, and it's you who should be ashamed.

You thinking is flawed. Tyrany? You don't see it? Bitcoin Classic is diss'ed as an ALTCOIN and not BITCOIN. On every corner the tyrans are trying to shut down information about Bitcoin Classic so people will not be aware , so people will not have the right to choose! You don't see tyrany ?

When Leuda says : "Bitcoin is not democractic" . This doesn't sounds you like a tyranic? Not at all?

I think you should go read Bitcoin whitepaper and you can see that actually Bitcoin Core became an altcoin since it's much far from the initial project and roadmap.

Yeah I will be happy to dump my 500 coins if Bitcoin Blockstream Core wins this battle. Sadly they are controlling all media channels were people can inform themselves and choose. So this will be a hard battle.


bitcoin is supposed to be public consensus, not a group of elites getting togheter like Bilderberg Group trying to decide the faith of world. That's tyrany. That's against the freedom that Bitcoin has been promoted since it was born!

If Bitcoin fails due to "greediness" then I think it was doomed from the start anyways.

This is like blaming the failures of government on greed. Greed will always exist, we just need to stop giving it the vehicle within which to thrive. I'm talking about centralization (the state) vs de-centralization (the free market).

We know that greed/power can best be limited through free market competition and that greed/power concentrates with the existence of a state.

It is quite possible that BTC simply wasn't as inherently decentralized as we all wanted to believe. If that's the case then ultimately the the worlds nation states will dominate it and use it to control to an even higher degree than they can with the existing financial system.

I think my opinion is that if we're counting human altruism vs greed to steer BTC down the right path, then it's already not de-centralized enough and will fail. That's where we vote with our money and move to an alt-coin, probably one that doesn't exist yet.

I'm not sure if the blocksize debate is an issue of centralization vs decentralization though. Perhaps both options are good enough, at least for a few years or decades. I see a lot of fear and panic by big block advocates, but I see the concern about chinese miners having to much power. I also see the guys with Millions invested as deserving more say because they have the most at stake.

Can it simply be categorized as greed to want to protect your investment? Call this a dictatorship if you want, but how is democracy any different. You can still end up with a 51 - 49 split. Democracy is a tyranny of the majority. What happens if the voters decide the opposite of those big investors and ultimately causes the to lose $Millions? Those investors and all that expertise will just leave for somewhere else and BTC will die a slow death anyways. Ever read Atlas Shrugged? If you treat capital poorly it will leave and all that will remain are those leeches that tried to vote it away from them out of good intentions.

That being said, I'd probably vote for a 2mb increase immediately followed by Segwit, etc. later. Part of me would like to see a big shakeup just for the sake of keeping things exciting. I'm curious to hear how much it costs to setup a Classic node in my home.

To add to my last post... I'm not entirely agreeing with this. Tyranny refers to excessive government control. In the physical world that achieved through force or threats of force. Government can force fiat currency on us through law. Crypto-currencies are changing that however, because they allow us to bypass the system (opt out completely). The hope is that because of the nature of crypto, it will be impossible to control. We can still choose a better alt-coin if one exists. The whole Crypto ecosystem is what prevents tyranny, not just Bitcoin.

Believe me, I will be sad if Bitcoin fails to achieve the ideals of decentralization (100% control of your own wealth, 100% privacy, etc). I have big stakes in it as well, but we must not become too emotionally attached. Keep your eyes open and be ready to abandon ship if necessary. That's not to say BTC will fail soon, or even in the next 10 years. I believe the price is going much higher yet.

Can you tell me what are costs, necessary hardware, etc. for me to setup a node at home? Thanks.

You always have the right to choose, there are 700+ coins out there, each one with different specs. If you dont like bitcoin's structure, then create a democracy coin , nobody stops you from doing that.

He is right, bitcoin is not democratic, it's a business, and the more money you have invested in it, the more dominance you have over it.

I have no problem letting the bitcoin elites vote for me with the condition that when i become rich others should honor this privilege too.


I dont like to talk about technical aspects of bitcoin because i honestly tell you that i`m not expert in them.

However, you dont have the honesty of admitting that the majority of bitcoin users arent experts either, but you would like them to decide over it's faith.

It's like letting 5 year olds building a nuclear powerplant.

I dont think you have 500 bitcoin.


It's a business, if you want your voice heard, build a big bitcoin company or get 1,000,000 bitcoins so that you have the leverage necessary to make your opinion heard.

This is correct. It's not Bitcoin that will necessarily stop abuses of power, but rather the choice to stop using it, which the mathematics of Cryptography have now given us. We now have the option to freely choose our currency and have 100% control over our wealth. The choice we all have to leave Bitcoin is what will necessarily keep it from becoming the ultimate tool of tyranny. Now the question is, who will be fooled and how much will people put up with before they leave? Those of us who value privacy will be watching, and we'll be long gone I think if it ever becomes an issue.

github.com/bitcoin  is not necessary Bitcoin. It is just one of Bitcoin full node implementations - Bitcoin Core, previously Bitcoin QT and Satoshi client. Bitcoin Core should finally move to github.com/bitcoincore and the github.com/bitcoin  can be used as a gateway to all Bitcoins full node implementations - this would be more realistic description of what github.com/bitcoin is. Wladimir should grow up and do the change, it is very important for decentralization of Bitcoin development.

Most of them are in cold storage :) I do have 51% on a ledger. And no Bitcoin is not a corporate play toy. It wasn't meant to be that. Since that's direction is heading then ...as you said I'll try to search a better uncontrolled by seceretive Elite Groups cryptocurrency. Thanks for your 2 bits of wise words. But still Bitcoin is controlled by tyrany that's why people don't know about this debate. Because that's what they are trying to hide , specially the Bitcoin Core group. You can see that this topic was moved to altcoins. And they did many faul moves just to hide this debate as much as possible.

Will a print screen satisfy you ?

http://puu.sh/nB1wX/cb5a1c9988.png

Gotta love how this thread was moved to altcoin discussion. Just goes to show how out of touch the people running this forum are!

Yes. This is for keeping people out of info. They are 100% aware that people will go on Bitcoin Classic. They are certain. Bitcoin Classic gain 25% of Bitcoin nodes with all this supression. Imagine without supression. Just imagine. They are aware that they are the lossing part if they don't use their force to stop spreading the word about Bitcoin Classic or any other alternative to Bitcoin code itself.

Well anyone can photoshop that, only a signed message from that address can prove that it's yours.

But to be honest I dont care how much bitcoins you have.

---

But if you really have a lot of bitcoins it's in your interest too to not have bad code implemented in the software, otherwise you can lose a lot of money.

A few newbies leaving on the other hand is really no big deal.

Regardless of whether or not they're out of touch, it's now in the one of the most popular sections of Bitcointalk. I'm actually glad it's been moved because I hardly wander out of the altcoin ghetto. :)

The same way that the forum administration "was 100% aware" that people will go to Bitcoin XT?  ::) This is a privately owned forum. It seems that people fail to understand what this means.

There is no public property, it's a contradiction, everything essentially is private or a coalition of private property.

But socialists cant comprehend this. Either there is private property or there isnt. If there is, then everything is private, otherwise it's a logical contradiction.

Yes Lauda, we all know the admins on this forum are biased heavily for Core. No one is saying the forum isn't privately owned. We knew that already.

Who owns the atmosphere we breathe.

Everyone owns a proportional % of the air, that he consumes. But since the air we breathe is so abundant, it's hard to quantify.

And because of the abundance, the price is infinitessimal, tending towards 0, and it's rounded down, so it's effectively 0.


But you cannot say that it's a public property, because the word "public" has really no meaning when you assign it to the word "property".

To say that something is public, means that there is no owner of it, which is bogus, because everything has an owner.

That's like saying that I'm biased because I don't like you bring potentially dangerous stranger into my house. The logic isn't sound. Alternative implementations are welcome, contentious HF's aren't.

That's taking things a bit far, but okay. Additionally, it is interesting how some people think "freedom of speech" means that the moderators aren't allowed to delete their posts.  :D

Well just think about it: property = something that has an owner  , public = that there is no owner , therefore public property is an oxymoron, a logical contradiction by itself.

So the only logical way to interpret 'public property' is if we say that it's owned by everybody, which means that everyone owns a % share of that item, which can be either weighted % or flat %.

So if we say that bitcoin is "public property" that means that I own as much % share of bitcoin, that I have in my balance.