Bitcoin Forum
May 24, 2024, 08:14:56 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 [836] 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 ... 1468 »
16701  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 28, 2017, 12:48:44 AM
What im trying to understand is, how did it take so long for somebody to find out about this? I mean I understand most devs have better things to do, but we are talking about the biggest miner provider, so if I was a bitcoin developer I would be taking great attention to every single pull request on the bitmain github because these guys are always going to try to be a step ahead and try to have a hidden ace of spades that could checkmate the entire network. If this wasn't found in time, they could have made a lot of damage.

If Jihan felt cornered and about to be defeated, im sure he would go down while trying to kill the entire thing, and this was a way to do it. Remember to always think the worst.

its because gmax found a flaw in going soft last month. so now wants to double down on blaming pools for why segwit didnt activate at christmas.
and his army of followers went out looking for all excuses possible to make pools seem bad. a way to sway users into thinking that UASF should be activated to kill off pools.

but your right. if it wasn't for the desperation to get segwit activated.. people would not have cared or looked or tried to dramatise these things
16702  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 28, 2017, 12:26:02 AM
Looks like your shouting racism to avoid discussion, if you think the fact that Bitmain is Chinese isn't relevant you're crazy.

what if i told you most of the hardware was in places like mongolia..
thats like saying something canadian is american...'cos its north america'

what if i told you mining hardware is also in other places like georgia iceland etc
what if i told you jihan is just one person that cannot be at multiple farms at once.
what if i told you that jihan doesnt control 70% of hardware.

i shouted the racism card once.. yet everyone else shouted shill or insult in many post..
but i can yawn off all the people that can only reply "wrong coz ur a shill" without actually addressing the context with anything meaningful

16703  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 11:01:48 PM
It wouldn't matter if bitmain only produced 40% of the miners for Bitcoin, that's still a lot of miners being produced by 1 company and if said company is shady that's a problem.

If bitmain is blocking changes to Bitcoin to protect some secret advantage, that's a problem for ALL of us.

If bitmain has the ability to remotely kill their miners and their miners make up a significant amount of total miners in use, that's a problem for ALL of us.

It is undisputed that they have a lot of influence in the Bitcoin world.

Does it matter if bitmain is shady? The answer should be yes. It should matter a lot, at least to those who wish to see bitcoin prosper.

BTW, bitmain doesn't dispute the 70% producer of miners, why are you trying to?

funny part is now your dfending keeping PoW running because killing off 'if 40%' to If 70% would be bad...
hmmmmm
so i should quote you above everytime you mention UASF good or time to change PoW
i do find it funny that one minute mining is bad then asic mining is good

when overall its just social drama to distract the real debate of the code of the bitcoin network that wants to change the network to a cesspit of  a tier network
16704  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 10:51:17 PM
I now assume you are a shill, after all, calling critics racist is exactly what a shill would do to push his agenda. Thank you for the clarification. Smiley

call me what you like.
but now you have go all the insults off your chest
go research and try seeing the big picture from the point of view of the bitcoin network.
dont wear the blockstream defence cap.
wear the critical thinking cap.

dont read the reddit scripts. read the code and documentation
again not with the utopian dreamer blockstream defence cap

look at the big picture, the long term picture.
and be truly critical.
maybe even worth you repeating to yourself "what if hearne coded this" just to keep your critical mind on track

i will just leave you with this thought.
knowing that changing PoW requires a network consnsus upgrade to achieve it
instead of doubling down on threats just to push segwit as is but done hard.. the blockstream team and fanboys should think of plan B
if they are going to pull a pin... actually recode segwit to be 1 merkle and a proper network wide 4mb that is also dynamic and add other community desird features.
dont waste the blockstream triggered hard fork event if soft fails to activate, purely to push opposition away, use it to unite the community with proper non cesspit creating network
16705  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 10:47:54 PM
Franky on ASICBOOST exposure: All is good. Ignore temporary drama.
Franky on AntBleed exposure: All is good. Ignore temporary drama.
Franky when someone mentions SegWit: "DOOMSDAY. TEMPORARY GESTURE. BLOCKSTREAM. BOMBS."
 Cheesy

lol
lauda you make me laugh

segwit end user features that core promise and promote are the empty promise temporary gesture. but the tier network and control is less than temporary.
PS read the core code and documentation about biasedly rejecting blocks and disconnecting from nodes purely out of version bias, not out of rule validity.

its really time you took some time to read less of reddit and more of the actual details
16706  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 10:35:31 PM
You'd think that if bitmain were to cease development on minerlink, they would remove all related code, or even announce that they are working on a fix.

Great to see there are people looking out for these exploits, but I think bitmain really screwed up here.

has anyone looked at bitcoin cores DNS seed managed by mainly blockstreamers

        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bitcoin.sipa.be", "seed.bitcoin.sipa.be", true)); // Pieter Wuille, only supports x1, x5, x9, and xd
        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bluematt.me", "dnsseed.bluematt.me", true)); // Matt Corallo, only supports x9
        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("dashjr.org", "dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org")); // Luke Dashjr
16707  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 10:31:02 PM


all i read is racial slurs against a country.
now to the real debate BITCOIN network code
long term view not temporary drama that is forgotton about after minutes/days

think about the big picture
16708  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 10:02:54 PM
I need to know why are you defending bitmain and BU? I can clearly see that you have some understandings of things and are concern about bitcoin but you are always in the other side but I just say what ever I believe is fact or it's just my opinion.

im not just defending BU or bitmain. i defend anything thats not blockstream(core)
things that gets attacked or used as a distraction (point the finger at) to avoid people seeing or questioning blockstream
because although theres all this temporary drama of point the finger how A, B, C maybe, if, could, might do something that lasts 2 minutes. its just distractions from what bitcoin really is.. the code

Can we use ASIC machines for other purposes such as gaming or other computational processes other than hashing sha256?
With GPU you could use them for other things and they existed before bitcoin so unlike ASICs they weren't specifically manufactured just for mining.
Bitmain was established only to build machines focused on one thing and I call that control unless they were in computer hardware before and or now are making other hardware than miners?
ATI wont even bother to build their own GPU farms because they manufacture computer hardware and sell to the market while mining requires at least a year to ROI and that is not a guaranteed fact.

if you think it would be year ROI .. thats for end users based on RETAIL prices.
6 months based on wholesale price (bestbuy starting a mining farm themselves with their bought cost stock)
3 months based on production price(ATI starting a mining farm themselves with their manufactured cost stock)

now imagine for every gpu ATI wholesale they can make 2 gpu's meaning pass one to retailer, keep one at zero cost
meaning ATI could start getting returns instantly because the 2nd gpu which they keep is literally zero cost because the retailer covered the cost with the first gpu via the wholesale price

now imagine for every gpu bestbuy retail they can buy 2 gpu's meaning pass one to retailer customer, keep one at zero cost
meaning bestbuy could start getting returns instantly because the 2nd gpu which they keep is literally zero cost because the customer covered the cost with the first gpu via the retail price

this is where ASIC manufacturers are profiting. it does not cost $2k to make a ASIC.

We're here to convince the undecided miners to chose the best option to proceed but we have forgotten the very obvious fact that only those with enough knowledge and understanding of cryptography and code are the ones currently mining and they will manage to figure out the truth for themselves and we're just wasting our times keeping a clean image of crypto.
yp and when a dev team bypasses node consensus, and only has 33% of pools vote.. then its also devs that should figur out the truth.. that maybe they need to go back to the drawing board and do things that would unite the community.. not point fingers at blaming everyone but themselves

All we need we already have, bitfury and bitmain 2 big manufacturers and they both will keep each other in line though I wouldn't mind to have a third big company/pool to balance the power, we just need a functioning and stable network the rest are just back ground noise.
there is another asic manufacturing company, infact more then one more company.
but all this drama is prtending bitmain have 70% control. which is the illogical part of all this distraction techniques
16709  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 09:33:50 PM
So your argument is it don’t matter if bitmain is shady because they don’t produce 70% of miners? What if it was 60% or 50% or 40%, what amount would worry you? Even bitmain don’t dispute the 70% figure so why do you?

You fucking shills crack me up  Cheesy


here is the laugh.

bitmain wont self destruct their own rigs
bitmain cant self destruct other manufactures rigs

if bitmain did, it would only affect their own hashrates
if bitmain did, it would just cause 2 minutes downtime but end up costing them $2k per unit because everyone would ask for refund/comspnsation
if bitmain agenda was to... they would have already

so its just temporary drama of shooting themselves in the foot if they did fire a gun.. logically less important then things like creating a tier network that ruins the diverse decentralised peer network ethos.

you want to scream blue murder about "if's" and maybe of hardware that can cause only a couple minutes drama.. but avoid talking about the bearded elephant in the room that actually has got deadlines but cant meet promises.. that will affect the network if allowed to continue..

you can try distracting the debate away from what core should do as a plan B by trying to make people look in the direction of mining.. but ultimately devs need a plan B
16710  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 08:32:43 PM
Who manufactured the first ASIC and mined with it? maybe we really need to change the POW to make it anti-ASIC and make it GPU compatible? that way no one could control the mining industry and influence it as much as bitmain is doing right now.
can you prove bitmain control the mining industry. or are you reading the reddit speculation

1. then its just a ATI vs Geforce.. and everyone starts pointing fingers that ATI has a backdoor efficiency gain called openCL
2. if you think hobbyists can mine in their basements. forget it. farms will buy up THOUSANDS of top end ATI's

If everyone could mine with GPU then we know who is manufacturing them and there are only 5 big companies making GPU and they have the best technology and their marketcap is much higher than crypto combined so they couldn't be bothered to get personal with the network such as bitcoin and other crypto currencies.
But question remains, who will compensate millions of dollars to those already mining with ASICs?

thirdly. there would then be arguments once ATI gpu stocks dry up of "what if ATI are holding onto stock and starting their own farms to control bitcoin"
16711  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 08:04:15 PM
Is that for real? I was under the impression that Jonald was intelligent. "I don't care if Stalin is shady I like his uniform" ... holy crap  Shocked

it would only be a worry if bitmain had a exploit against bitfury or bitfury had an exploit against bitmain..
but finding that bitmain "could" only access their own products and "if" they triggered anything they would end up with queues of refunds.. its not as big a deal as say a soft fork that bypasses real network consensus, to add code that if activated changes the network into a tier network without nodes consent/veto ability
16712  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 07:43:42 PM
On thing is certain. Bitmain reacted very professionally. They responded promptly and included good, convincing explanations.
There is small problem though, another week and we have more allegations, another discovered bug/backdoor.
I wouldn't want to work for Bitmain's PR team now.

gmax is desperate to find directions to point his fingers as to why segwit did not get activated by christmas like most blockstreamists thought would happen.

he cant really blame nodes due to his own back door of going soft, bypassed node consensus. so he has to double down on blaming the pools which HE made the only voters.. as to why they are not 95% yays..

maybe he should ask them "how should/should a 0.15 version be changed and what features should be added to make it a community wide full network uniting upgrade

the 'volume' of trying to use backdoors as an excuse, when his team used backdoors, is getting 'louder' in its hypocrisy
16713  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 07:23:48 PM
There is no source. That's the estimate that people believe Bitmain has produced so far. I doubt you could provide a source for any exact number (unless Bitmain publicizes the number of shipped miners, but even that is not enough).
so in short you have just seen the 70% nay sayer /abstainer and just named that your 70% "bitmain" estimate... (facepalm)
You don't have any proof that supports any other views. This is a reasonable estimate considering the current state of the ASIC manufacturing industry. The only one who should facepalm is yourself for your own ignorance.

i guess you missed my subtly in the other post where i said i hope im not too subtle. you may want to re-read it
16714  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 07:18:15 PM
There is no source. That's the estimate that people believe Bitmain has produced so far. I doubt you could provide a source for any exact number (unless Bitmain publicizes the number of shipped miners, but even that is not enough).

so in short you have just seen the 70% nay sayer /abstainer and just named that your 70% "bitmain" estimate... (facepalm)
16715  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 07:10:52 PM
proof of claim?
and dont quote reddit / twitter
Estimations based on reasonable assessment of the ecosystem. Does that even ring a bell for you? Almost ALL of your posts don't have any sources, yet you keep asking for them in nonsensical situations. Please give me the huge list of current ASIC manufacturers (who sell to individuals in normal quantities).  Roll Eyes

i canaan should mention a few, but ill leave you to ebang your heads against a wall to show your "estimates" and "assessments" claims. also i am not gonna get baited into the loaded questions of useless hardware such as USB devices. so i will just let you get a bitfuryous about me not spoonfeeding you the data, and instead wait for you to show where you lot got your 70% figures from.

too many people are quoting 70% so i want to see your source

hopefully i have not been too subtle
16716  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 05:56:42 PM
bitmain (with 70% of miner production and largest mining pool)

proof of claim?
and dont quote reddit / twitter
16717  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 04:24:46 PM
it's freaking pathetic to see what r/btc has become. i started off checking there sometimes and then rapidly found myself rolling my eyes at almost every thread. at this point it's beyond redemption.

same goes for r/bitcoin

best advice just stay away from reddit... its just like fox news
16718  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Blockstream/Core lost. It is only a matter of time now. on: April 27, 2017, 04:13:55 PM
This BTC Core vs BU thing is very stupid and border on playground politics. Let's say for one moment ONE of the two sides win this and the other

side {no matter who they are} stop supporting Bitcoin... Who will be the winner then? We will see one HUGE rage quit from a lot of people and

the support that we have been working on for years will be halved. We should make compromises on both sides and concentrate on finding a

better solution for a scaling solution. { because both of them suck }  Embarrassed

Cheesy finally someone gets it
16719  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Blockstream/Core lost. It is only a matter of time now. on: April 27, 2017, 03:40:46 PM
pie charts of nodes but doesnt show proof of backing (no ip lists) - result, ignore it and trust bitnodes as better source

"community measure" weighted to exaggerate results. where some of the advocates are just consultants that dont need nodes, or have listed their 3 subsiduaries as 3 separate votes even though its the same 'team' in all 3 votes..
also only a small selection of bitcoin merchants - result biased limited overview

questionnaire of 61 people, hmm who got told where to vote - result biased by spamming link to only one side



also if pereira4 is not around billy bob will daily spam the same biased stuff..
if billy not around lauda will

each day the same stuff is posted but none of them even think about researching behind the numbers. they just post it


P.S
want to see the narrative control


P.P.S
question 4 (as advertised by lauda and other) is
do you want MINERS to activate BU

..
if the question was "do you want community consensus to activate BU" results would be different
this is where people need to learn CONTEXT and source of data
16720  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 03:04:59 PM
I think it is obvious that the backdoor is purposely included, although most likely there is no plan to use it. However, this is still a betrayal of the trust of everyone using the antminers. a node

FTFY and now you are talking about the bip9 node bypass backdoor Cheesy

PS even gmax and luke both admit that using the 'anyonecanspend' is a backdoor to go soft. and intent to make it easier to do things soft in the future by opening the backdoor wider which they did exactly that with bip9 and UASF and more things to come

now imagine this
what if hearne did what blockstream devs did.. (the only way to possibly get blockstreamists to think outside of the box)
Pages: « 1 ... 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 [836] 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 ... 1468 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!