It is interesting to watch the poll results, until yesterday people were ready to go all in if the CIA took charge of bitcoin. Today , i see a drastic movement from the other side. Even though the number of votes are extremely low and may not reflect the opinion of the masses, i feel the masses would vote to go all in if the CIA took charge of Bitcoin. The only issue really, is that this was not the principle of Bitcoin when it was launched, it was supposed to be free of any government control or in fact any central authority. The fact that people are ready to go all in if the CIA takes over is interesting, because people feel that essentially it is a government nod for the use of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is supposed to be the currency of the free though, so its quite interesting to see how it has evolved over the years. If you put up this poll at the start of the Bitcoin lifecycle, i am sure 95% would have said "GTFO".
Pretty sure it was a joke dude. Playing off the brilliant argument that Gavin and Hearn's move to go past 2.7tps surely means they're agents. The CIA probably burns bitcoin's market cap every other day... So, ain't nobody got time for that, besides... we're keeping all the data distributed and safe for them for free. How does it not surprise me that gmaxwell resorts to exaggeration and hyperbole, to support the Blockstream agenda? Well... even it was a joke, most of the un-informed would not even be aware of what you just said. So going by that yardstick, people are of the mindset that government backing is somehow good for Bitcoin. To an extent you cannot disagree with them. If the government had an agenda and some interest in promoting the use of bitcoin, they would go all out and ensure the bitcoin boat would be steadied and the volatility would not be present. I don't see that happening any time soon either, but people are living with a false sense of security that if the government backs something, it must be good.  Bitcoin was invented, partly, to disabuse them of this notion. |
|
|
|
It is interesting to watch the poll results, until yesterday people were ready to go all in if the CIA took charge of bitcoin. Today , i see a drastic movement from the other side. Even though the number of votes are extremely low and may not reflect the opinion of the masses, i feel the masses would vote to go all in if the CIA took charge of Bitcoin. The only issue really, is that this was not the principle of Bitcoin when it was launched, it was supposed to be free of any government control or in fact any central authority. The fact that people are ready to go all in if the CIA takes over is interesting, because people feel that essentially it is a government nod for the use of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is supposed to be the currency of the free though, so its quite interesting to see how it has evolved over the years. If you put up this poll at the start of the Bitcoin lifecycle, i am sure 95% would have said "GTFO".
Pretty sure it was a joke dude. Playing off the brilliant argument that Gavin and Hearn's move to go past 2.7tps surely means they're agents. The CIA probably burns bitcoin's market cap every other day... So, ain't nobody got time for that, besides... we're keeping all the data distributed and safe for them for free. How does it not surprise me that gmaxwell resorts to exaggeration and hyperbole, to support the Blockstream agenda? |
|
|
|
This is an attempted coup alright, but it's from idiot miners who want a bigger slice of a smaller pie. If we cave on this, they will never allow our network to become competitive enough to disrupt the banksters.
Bloating the blockchain to DOA levels will disrupt bitcoin, not the banksters. Besides, 8mb blocks, or even 80mb blocks, aren't enough to scale to such levels. You'd need enormous storage (and bandwidth) per day to compete with the volume of banks and credit cards. so which is it, the increase is too big and too small at the same time? We don't need to go head to head with VISA right now. We need grown up core devs who don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Why do you need bigger blocks right now? Stop promoting this false dilemma. It's not XT or nothing.  I'm totally on board with the guy who doesn't know how to spell brakes. Obviously a Top Mind™. |
|
|
|
Nobody I can think of advocated censoring or sterilizing anything. For all we know cypherdoc himself picked up his ball and went home.
You're still as stupid ever and willing to throw loose allegations around like vomit. You're still going to lose because of all your unethical tactics. ... and here comes the compromised shill to lecture others on ethics. Have you no shame? He's always welcome on my thread even if he is the kind of pansy who messed up his own and tried to blame others for it. Cypherdoc is his own worst enemy when he flaps his gums in the presence of people smart enough and informed enough to matter. BTW, cypherdoc: Gold up, Bitcoin collapsing...thanks in no small part to your own efforts. It's all your fault cypherdoc...  The link for the years of discussions that are not fit for consumption by bitcoin speculators: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.31200 |
|
|
|
|
We've always been at war with Eastasia.
|
|
|
|
If bitcoin gets backed by the NSA is this bullish?
it's probably CIA. more bullish is if the Hearn-Andresen PanoptiCoin social attack gets rekt. and btc earns extra kudos as independent money. Is that with a compromise to 2-4MB blocks in core to measure effects? or 1MB4EVA or bust? |
|
|
|
i'm starting to think we might just quickly recover from this flash crash, sure some dumb shit sold us down to 166 but 234 is still pretty much 3 month low, a fucking good price if you ask me, when i saw this starting to slip i thought 240 would prove to be support but the dumbbear whale just fucking blew his load too fast. fuck
Dumb? They're farting through silk atm. |
|
|
|
Damn, somebody made my day!  Had a bunch of orders just sleeping at 175 What can i say... thanks?! Trollish doom posts by night while sleeping on some lowball bids... heh. Even the trolls love Bitcoin. Why else would they waste so much time? |
|
|
|
|
New Poll Request: Was the Bitfinex flash crash the bottom? Yes, No
|
|
|
|
Twas a margin call whale ballet like I've never seen on finex today... hory shet. Has all the other exchanges scared shitless too, and why not... scary fork happenings, over-levered bulls, the bitcoin fora becoming like north korea... Perfect. Looks like a classic capitulation, except the volume was not anything like January, not good. Either you're getting a sale right now, or this is the preview for the double digit extravaganza sale. Shows it never hurts to have some lowball bids sitting on the books. Wish I knew. But then I wouldn't tell you.  I am seeing some despair-ish comments around. That's usually not a bad time to pad a stash. As ever, there are some pros in this market with the funds to make it happen. I wonder what his shorts executed at on the exit, he definitely didn't get much in the 160's  while covering. I'm sure they're not complaining. What a day... being long I took a nice hit, but I have cold stuff I'll hodl to the very end, there isn't another market like it. |
|
|
|
Wow $2m in longs closed and nearly 10k in shorts opened...
Yep, that entire drama candle could almost be chalked up to longs closing and shorts adding, for a about a $3 drop. Not saying that was the bottom, we are far from seeing a conclusion on the max_blocksize argument, but longs adding while shorts closed would have been a much uglier scenario. |
|
|
|
10k 5 min candle  |
|
|
|
Wonder where we'd be without the benevolent bullwhale(s) support around $250. I don't see XT as likely to result in a mass migration to XT and the death of Core, but it is a non-trivial way to vote for the direction you would like Bitcoin to develop. Hopefully it lights a fire under the core devs to come up with their own solution. Once core has some kind of scaling solution (not in 2020) I could see a majority of XT nodes switching back. The "moderation" going on is frankly disgusting. How the hell can any compromise happen if you use force to make the opposing side of the debate just shut up? Meni Rosenfeld has been added to Jeff Garzik in the Voice of Reason camp. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h9cq4/its_time_for_a_break_about_the_recent_mess/cu6udfe |
|
|
|
point is this forum and r/bitcoin are called after bitcoin. not bitcoinxt.
hence i suggest people stfu with this pathetic whining and altcoin shilling.
So it's settled then. We kneel at the feet of your overwhelming insight. |
|
|
|
Voice of reason.  |
|
|
|
Dyslexia confirmedBeware the power of the butthurt. I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism. Turns into He also thinks we need to HARD fork bitcoin to enable (direct? ...implied) "decentralized" full node compensation?
So... what's the incentive? |
|
|
|
Sigh, if satoshi expected max_blocksize to stay at 1MB to infinity, as important as the distribution curve. He should have damn well said so when he was here.
I'm beginning to have concerns about your reading abilities. Where, in the comment, did Satoshi take any position in regard to the block size? Satoshi has come to writing "pretender-Bitcoin". He also thinks we need to HARD fork bitcoin to enable (direct? ...implied) "decentralized" full node compensation? Hopefully his solution against "full" node farming will arrive shortly? That whole implicit-explicit thing is troubling you? |
|
|
|
So brg444 thinks those were the words satoshi has waited so long to tell us. How about you iCE?
He always rose above the political BS
Sure, except for that one time when he gave "political BS" the starring role in the very act which created Bitcoin. Of course the Gavinistas are never going to accept even the slightest possibility it is him seeing the butthurt induced by his comments.
Confirmed. The genesis block refers to some sort of impetus for Bitcoin's existence. One I completely agree with, as btc's characteristics are of a somewhat political nature. That said, you must admit this tone is something else. The email, despite the double spaces, reeked of politics, the kind both of us are guilty of... something distinctly out of character for satoshi, he would have been more objective, more technical. One of us is talking silly. That it called out politics and attempt at governance does not make it "reek" of politics. How was he not objective? Would he not be expected to object at different attempts to bastardize his "vision"? Sigh, if satoshi expected max_blocksize to stay at 1MB to infinity, as important as the distribution curve. He should have damn well said so when he was here. |
|
|
|
So brg444 thinks those were the words satoshi has waited so long to tell us. How about you iCE?
He always rose above the political BS
Sure, except for that one time when he gave "political BS" the starring role in the very act which created Bitcoin. Of course the Gavinistas are never going to accept even the slightest possibility it is him seeing the butthurt induced by his comments.
Confirmed. The genesis block refers to some sort of impetus for Bitcoin's existence. One I completely agree with, as btc's characteristics are of a somewhat political nature. That said, you must admit this tone is something else. The email, despite the double spaces, reeked of politics, the kind both of us are guilty of... something distinctly out of character for satoshi, he would have been more objective, more technical. One of us is talking silly. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
