Well, all I (or you, or any rational person) have to go on is the visible evidence. CSW has managed to build a sizable business network around himself. I can't pretende to know how he has managed this, but to deny the reality is ... irrational.


Possibly, but seemingly unlikely.


Well, without saying anything else, you are making no case.

Indeed. Those 2000T blocks can't exist without the txs to fill them. And every tx is a use of the system by a real actor with real goals getting real value out of the system. Why would anyone not want a chain that can deliver actual utility?


Not really, but I don't fear them either. Besides, end users are not yet in any danger of being unable to stand up their own fully-validating client. At least any dedicated people. Those unwilling to spend at least a tenth of a BTC to do so frankly I don't give a shit about. Why would we cripple the system in order to allow economic non-starters as first class citizens? That's flippin' stupid.


ThatWordYouKeepUnsingIt.png


There's a vast difference between dangerous centralization and not coddling dead weight.


Doubling down on your public display of ignorance, eh?


Find a source I have been 'copy/paste to [sic] many lines'. I challenge you.


Indeed. Don't trust me. This is crypto - there is no need to trust anyone.

While they don't do the system as a whole any good, they do me as a transactor some good. Without running such a fully-validating client, I would be unable to transact without a middleman.

Utterly powerless to do so. All they have the ability to do is fork themselves off the chain the miners are creating.

If instead you are speaking of the users abandoning the chain, that is another matter altogether, wholly unrelated to anything a fully-validating non mining client can do.

So... non-mining fully-validating clients provide no protective role. Got it.

And I guess 'in good time' is only in retrospect.

I never indicated that those who care to monitor things for themselves should be prevented from running their own monitoring client. I reiterate: I run a fully-validating non-mining client. Several in fact.

you disingenuous dumbass 

Deflection away from actually addressing my counterpoint is duly noted.

I will grant that one way at looking at that situation was that miners looked at statements by all those sybillable non-mining fully-validating clients, and interpreted them as a valid measure of economic support. But we'll likely never know. Regardless, the battle was never fought. Which, while being the ultimate form of victory, leaves the 'what if' question as an unsettled matter.

Are you implying that if the ETC officials ran more 'nodes', that the above described attack could not have happened?

Close but no cigar. Don't confuse the protocol with the code. They are two different things.

BSV mostly seeks to implement the 0.1 protocol. With better code than years past. Indeed, there is no other way the network could choke down a 65MB block, what with Core's (built of course upon the original satoshi) client's crappy multitasking architecture.

I don't know what you're on my case for. Are you implying that if the ETC officials ran more nodes, that this attack would not have happened? If so, you are 100% incorrect. Such fully-validating non-mining clients are powerless to stop rollback attacks made by overwhelming hashpower.

Besides, I run a fully-validating non-mining client. Several in fact. However, I am not under the widespread delusion that this provides the system as a whole any benefit.

Couldn't help myself. You're just so cute when you're being precociously petulant.

<edit> barring some breakthough in life extension technology, </edit> You'll be dead before BTC -- augmented with LN -- can onboard the world at large. At least in a trustless, permissionless manner, which is kind of central to the Bitcoin vision. FACT.


Makes me FEEL that you suffer from deluded ingroup confirmation bias.

But I know nothing I say will affect your iron will. Carry on.

Yeah, that's what squicks me.

OTOH, Ledger has some of the principals from Gemalto, who in turn are like the gold standard in enterprise mobile security.

Time will tell. No need to replace my current vault. I'll see if it stands the test of time.

Now that right there is funny - I don't care who you are.

Son, I am now working on things you'll be utterly reliant upon in five years' time. You are already completely dependent upon my work. And have been for some years now.


I am so hurt.

Here, kid - have a merit. Now go away ... you bother me. /wcf

Umm... yeah. Don't know what to think about this.

I can't help but think that adding Bluetooth to a HW wallet is anything other than another potential gaping security hole. Though it looks like the buttons may be improved.

+ physically settled
+ Seychelles
- Nefario. Huge due diligence is warranted. vvv


Indeed: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=537545.msg5938494#msg5938494

Well, he was brought aboard early for some misguided reason or another. So Coinfloor's origins are indelibly tainted.

I understand they may have cast him out of the boat fairly early (not sure - dydd). But it certainly leads one to question the wisdom of the exec team to have brought on such an immoral character as a principal.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, ... fool ... don't get fooled again. I wouldn't trust 'em with a nickel.

Tread carefully.

'Tried to recoup the funds'? Sez you. Where's the evidence of such?


Could? Newsflash: No way in hell that he would try. Lying scammers scam and then lie about it.


You'll note I did not call for 30 years in my letter. To re-reiterate:

Mr Montroll should be sentenced in line with any other common grifter who preys upon innocent bystanders. Period.

Not only. But partially. This book: https://mises.org/system/tdf/Henry%20Hazlitt%20Economics%20in%20One%20Lesson.pdf?file=1&type=document

Before this post drops to page 20, I just wanted to say this this seems provocative. I'd not before heard of this Proof of Proof thingy.

You get an invite to the Stonecutter's Lodge.

But I've 'retired'. Only vocational work I'm dong now is shepherding two standards specifications through the gauntlet. On my own dime. So no monetary upside.

So no, I'm not even shilling for the storage industry.