If u might be really able of abstract thinking and can for a minute analyze - not checking hashrate and speculation price ( both are related and can be manipulated dynamically esp very at some singular event) - then try to see Segwit was the fork, and the airdrop itself.
Hm
Current hash rate and price don't matter. What matters is compatibility with the legacy protocol and cumulative proof of work. Segwit is/was compatible with the legacy protocol. It doesn't matter how horrible you think Segwit is. Legacy nodes accept Segwit transactions/blocks as valid. Since the Segwit chain is the valid chain with most accumulated POW, it is the only Bitcoin chain. There is no "parallel" legacy chain; there is only Bitcoin. Shelby bizarrely believes that despite a large majority of the network enforcing Segwit, miners could successfully hard fork Bitcoin to remove Segwit simply by virtue of hash rate. The market has made abundantly clear over and over with such hard fork spinoffs: they are invalid chains. Hard forks. Spinoffs. Airdrops. Altcoins. Shitcoins. Whatever you want to call them. Not only does the whole idea ignore what the market has proven repeatedly, but it shows great ignorance of the broad support Segwit has. Segwit activation obviously catalyzed the 2017 bubble; price literally entered the vertical phase of the bubble when miners locked in. Most of the network including major economic nodes are enforcing it. Yet we are now to believe that overnight, miners alone can hard fork the network, steal half the network's wealth for themselves, and investors are just going to flock to this shitcoin because it's "the one-and-only great Satoshi's immutable protocol?" LOL, what a bunch of delusional crap. Only the most obtuse inbred retards in history could buy into this obvious crock of bullshit! This is why only tiny groups of uninformed people in their obscure chat rooms and forums buy into this bullshit. Shelby (and Craig Wright) are just exploiting a small number of peoples' great ignorance of Bitcoin's technical aspects and game theory. Shelby obviously has an even (much, much) smaller audience than Craig Wright though, making his plans all the more pathetic looking. Doesn't matter much what we think locally and at the moment. For u and some others who helped to get Segwit done (first not at all, than with 2x, and later scammed all the 2x away,...). Sure noobs and newbees still buying that crap but that potential seems to dry out with bigger industry checking out that scam. Time moves on, take ur local stand as u can, the world is not under ur control BitCoin didn't start as a ticker and didn't start with Segshit. Netscape is gone as well. We ll see |
|
|
|
I read the same news from a different bitcoin news website. However it was very funny because I did not know if it was the news of Bestmixer's shutdown or the promotion of Bitcoin SV hehehehe.
[snip]
Source coingeek.com/crypto-mixing-servic....
You should stop reading and heeding articles published on congeek, all of them are fraud. so there may be a relationship and thus disappear after the first was on sized.
Or just a matter of being cautious? We know bitblender run for how many years, bitmixer closed but they just ignore it and still operate the service, after then, Bestmixer shutdown then now they just announced for such news. Though I have a guess that one of the governments' agencies are trying to investigate or even trying to shut chipmixer but still a matter of when, or there's new processing of mixing method already trying to build or still in the experimental process, who knows. Enabling mixing is fraud, binance is fraud and telling ppl not to read critical stuff is a red flag that u might want to help hide fraud. Na. |
|
|
|
Haha, genial. Jetzt warten alle auf den heissen Godzillafurz  |
|
|
|
|
Such things and even protocol changes that are on purpose for criminal use will kill any crypto btw
|
|
|
|
There is not a single iota of logic or evidence that proves your point in those useless, rambling posts. Chock full of retarded assumptions with no basis like: I'm thinking that once the Segwit booty exceeds 50% of the total BTC in existence, that's when it will happen. If I could just mathematically model the flow into segwit somehow, I might be able to extrapolate when.
At the 50% mark, the value of BTC Core and BTC legacy will be equal which turns this into something similar to a PoS situation where the majority BTC legacy is assured control. You are laughably dumb if you eat up this sort unproven illogical garbage. These posts are nothing but empty opinions from people who are obviously completely ignorant of the economic incentives. If you are simply stating an opinion and not giving users investment advice, then please put a disclaimer on your allegations that I’m a “nut job”. I have done more research in the past 6 years about crypto than most of all you combined. Enjoy poverty. You're a nutjob, no disclaimer required. Nobody cares about your "research" because quite obviously you have nothing to show for it besides some laughably stupid Steemit links. There was no SegWit “anyone can spend” donations booty to provide the Schelling point. Now there is. Read @zoidsoft’s numbers linked above. "Oh yeah, derp derp, 50% coins in Segwit addresses? Must be time to fork to that chain nobody is going to use where we steal everyone's coins! Derp derp!" Super convincing game theory. We're all very impressed with you. LOL. You idiots haven't even bothered to discuss mining incentives as pertaining to actual users, post-fork. You've based this entire absurd theory on mining rewards at existing prices! That's beyond absurd! Miners on your shitcoin won't be mining billions in value. Who is going to put bids on exchanges for that shitcoin? It would be dumped to hell immediately and become incredibly unprofitable to mine. Somehow you've convinced yourself that airdropping coins to legacy addresses is going to create demand for your coin. Now why would that be? If Bcash taught us anything, airdrops are for dumping. Anyone who understands where Bitcoin’s monetary valuation comes from as a replacement for gold (make sure you click and look at the charts!):
Then understands that without immutability of the protocol, then the 21 million tokens limit can’t be assured and thus you will end up with a non-monetary valuation such as silver which is now entirely demonetized: How is your shitcoin immutable? You're proposing a hard fork where miners steal outputs from users on the original fork. That's the complete opposite of immutable. What you're proposing is yet another Bitcoin hard fork spinoff. What makes you think users would uninstall their Bitcoin software to install the miners fork? Half the economy with Segwit outputs is obviously strongly opposed to that. Everyone else has a strong interest in a resolution where miners don't prove Bitcoin doesn't work by stealing everyone's money. All user incentives, both long term and short, point to heavy opposition to the miners fork. Bitcoin users can wait days, weeks or longer while miners spend endless millions of dollars attacking Bitcoin and mining their worthless shitcoin chain. All users have to do is wait. Slow block times aren't going to convince Bitcoin users to go against their interests. Miners are the ones who will be squeezed financially into calling the attack off and incentivized to return to the chain where users actually are. Note to mention that SegWit and LN makes the blockchain insecure, for reasons I have explained else where and will not repeat again now. If you doubt my technological acumen, then that is your stupid mistake. Sounds really convincing! When are you actually going to say something that might prove your point? Miners will be spending massive amounts mining a completely worthless chain. Nonsense. They will be enriched with $billions of donations from idiot snowflakes. No they won't. Nobody would ever put bids up for this useless shitcoin. There will be zero bid liquidity on exchanges, zero OTC liquidity. In one move, these miners will have publicly destroyed the entire use case for their coin. It doesn't matter how big the mining rewards are since the coins will be worthless at market. Which is why miners will never engage in this. If the attack succeeded (LOL) it would only succeed in destroying trust in all the forks, and all of crypto. Exactly. All crypto except real, immutable, original, one-and-only Bitcoin. And that is exactly the way the genius Satoshi planned it to be. And so it shall be. Mark my word. Why would your shitcoin be immune? Investors are going to conclude that POW doesn't work. This is the most incredible thing about your theory. You believe investors are going to flock to the very dishonest miners who just robbed them. The truth is, they would dump your shitcoin too, especially since it was just airdropped. Not to mention that miners will control half the supply on fork day. LOL. Yeah, really attractive for investors! Where can I line up to buy some?  If u might be really able of abstract thinking and can for a minute analyze - not checking hashrate and speculation price ( both are related and can be manipulated dynamically esp very at some singular event) - then try to see Segwit was the fork, and the airdrop itself. Hm |
|
|
|
So, what would happen, in a market perspective, is that both chains would start with the same value, but the one forked by Core (technically, Core would have to rollback, to reverse the stealing of Segwit outputs Why would you assume they start with the same value? Did Bitcoin Cash start with the same value? How about Bitcoin Gold, Bitcoin Diamond, etc? This situation would be entirely different from the other forks. There was no theft when bitcoin cash, gold, etc, were forked. In the case of theft, it would be similar to what happened to ethereum. When the DAO hack happened, ethereum forked from the main chain, to reverse the hack, and the main chain (at that point) became "ethereum classic". Eventually ethereum became the main chain, gaining more value than the classic version. Easy to predict such gains in un-regulated / dark / ano / anarcho Environments , isn't it ? |
|
|
|
BSV is the clean code road map that finally removes any dev midlle men - and we will not nee to talk about boring stable protocols from now on
I explained to you upthread that adaptive block size is not trustless, decentralized. Thus neither BCH nor BSV are the original, immutable Bitcoin. And thus with BSV what you get is an exciting, mutable shitcoin akin to silver instead of gold. See the chart below for the horrible valuation of silver versus gold… BSV will totally remove the block size cap and it should not be a Consensus param anyway - All trxs should just be checked for Bitcoin relevant Consensus (double spend, inflation model,..) - a bulk cap is stupid tech dept that is already in by phsical and economical constraints. Removing that again was a no-brainer for anti-hobby node fraction anyway. Bitcoin Scalable Version is the only BitCoin accepted by global industry - due to Copyright and legal purpose. No more fancy back-loop 'read upthread' analysis needed Edit: I fully understand why now all hobby node runners and hobby analysts are screaming their lungs off - sorry. |
|
|
|
Wouldn't you guys not just create a 'dark' pool here where only dark / gray coins are getting mixxed with each other and no reasonable one will use that for anything good after ?
Privacy and/or anonymity work both ways round. - People use privacy to do bad things because good people are stopping them otherwise
- People use privacy to do good things because bad people are stopping them otherwise
In (coming?) the world wide adoption path all other Banks (except Carlton) will prefere the more transparent blockchains - so all tainted and on purpose more ano chains will be dismissed from that path. |
|
|
|
Here is a revised post from Shelby with some important edits/additions: Unfortunately the readers are ignoring what I am trying to explain to them. Let me try one more time to explain it more explicitly so hopefully their eyes will be opened? Then, he would dump one million BTC on the exchanges, for $1200 each, which would give him 1.2 billion dollars. This money he would use to pay for a 51% attack on the BTC chain. Since its illegal to dump high volumes without a notice, he is doing this notice right now, believing the decryption will succeed in january 2020. If not, he would use a second deadline by the middle of 2020, when the halving happens. Thats what I understand from his posts.
Craig will only be selling some BTC to initiate the drop in the exchange price so that there’s less mining resistance to his next move as described below. He will profit on the exchanges with a huge short position and use that to initiate a pump on BSV while the following transpires… Craig doesn’t need any additional resources to do his mining “attack”. The 3 peta-hash that they already have is sufficient to initiate the SegWit donations defense mechanism that exists on Satoshi?s v0.5.3 immutable protocol. The “attack” (actually a “poison pill” defense mechanism planted in the game theory by Satoshi) will cost them nothing and in fact generate massive profits. It will destroy the altcoin named “Bitco[ i]n Core” and only Satoshi’s immutable protocol Bitcoin (aka “real Bitcoin” which is not BSV) will survive. I have been explaining this for the past two years. Did you read the Steemit post that was linked in the following quoted comment from upthread, which explains this is more detail?[…] This is the posited SegWit donations attack, with the booty piling up high in time for May 2020: https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@anonymint/ps965cYou’re ostensibly misinterpreting what his statement means. Craig is ostensibly referring to the real Satoshi v0.5.3 protocol BTC network that will have forced the Core protocol to fork off. He means 51+% of the hashrate that was on Core’s protocol will have switched (i.e. it will not be only Craig’s hashrate given that many miners will want partake in the donations booty). He is pointing out that until all the SegWit donations are taken (since only so many can fit into a block), the real BTC miners will not be accepting other transactions […]
[…] the best solution would be to do a hard fork, locking Satoshi addresses in the forked version as soon as CSW started moving the coins stored there. This should be done before these coins hit the exchanges, and the exchanges would need to change to the forked version too. In this way, the disaster could be prevented.
The devs would need to devise some backup plan for it […]
The exchanges that are following Core’s protocol rules are going to be on the Core fork after the initiation (possibly by Craig) of the said “defense mechanism” (that Satoshi wisely put in his game theory to prevent attempts to modify the protocol). Blockstream was funded to fool you, so the powers-that-be can take the BTC from snowflakes who think that “social consensus” is meaningful. I suggest reading the following on why snowflakes are destined to lose all their “talents” (i.e. money): https://steemit.com/religion/@anonymint/ethics-of-religion-money-and-bitcoin(the above is a technological and philosophical document, not just theological) Therefore the exchanges are going to be on a fork that has a cratered hashrate and thus the duration between blocks will increase so much that congestion of the mempool will be so bad that nearly nothing will be moving on the Core chain. So nothing will be coming in or out of the exchanges until difficulty can readjust and it will take so many weeks or months (or perhaps never) for that difficulty adjustment to be reached because the chain will suddenly slow down so much. Additionally all those who had stored their BTC in Core addresses that begin with a 3 instead of Satoshi’s legacy addresses with a 1 will lose their real BTC. They will only end up bagholding worthless Core fork tokens. And if they have any tokens on exchanges, they will lose all of them because this event is going to bankrupt all exchanges which are following the Core protocol. Isn’t that all of them? The miners who join Craig in mining Satoshi’s v0.5.3 protocol (which had up until that point been implicitly running alongside of Core, before Core is forced to fork off when the miners start taking the SegWit donations) will receive as donations as many SegWit addresses BTC as they can fit into each block. These are donations because Satoshi’s protocol sees the Core addresses as “pay to anyone” (aka “anyone can spend”). Of course the Core protocol will fork off, but mining Satoshi’s protocol will be so much more profitable. So Craig will be amassing his share of real BTC from these SegWit donations, along will all the other miners that join in the party to get their share. Very, very profitable. Meanwhile: "We're going to 51% attack Bitcoin and pump BSV with the Satoshi coins.....better dump your BTC and buy BSV before it's too late!"  Indeed while all the snowflakes will be buying BSV thinking that is the savior from this “attack”, Craig will be ostensibly selling BSV at the peak stupidity of greater fools, and buying the real BTC. I presume what he will do is sell BSV for Tether then later use the Tether to buy real BTC once everything stabilizes and new exchanges are created (or extant exchanges that survive do a split) that honor Satoshi?s protocol instead of Core. So everyone who is hodling their BTC in legacy addresses that begin with 1 (and if not on an exchange) are not going to lose their real BTC and also receive a free airdrop of Core shitcoins. So how to sell those Core shitcoins? The problem is the exchange won’t split your BTC into Core and Satoshi protocols fast enough. Craig will ostensibly split his BTC before loading them on the exchange, so that he is only selling Core shitcoins on the exchange. He can split them by spending them to Core addresses while also double-spending them on a private Satoshi protocol chain that mixes them with some newly mined BTC on that private chain. That private chain will become the new Satoshi chain. IOW, he will rollback the chain slightly (maybe a few days at most). Yet I presume he will be putting all legacy address transactions in those private blocks, so those who are not transacting with SegWit will not experience any rollback. To split our BTC, we need to get some BTC from a new block on that Satoshi chain. But the problem is we then can?t get our Core shitcoins loaded into the exchange because the Core chain will slow down so much. So I guess all we can do if we are not joined with Craig in his inner circle, is hodl the free airdrop (in addition to our real BTC) Core shitcoins and prepare to sell those shitcoins later if ever the Core chain difficulty readjusts. Anyone have any other ideas? You apparently stopped using reality as your benchmark. Here follows a more detailed interpretation of Craig’s recent blather: https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@anonymint/psg83pThe entire Story ( tldr) does tell us very clear - without the Need of more deep Analysis: the btc core BS Project / Experiment has faild - things are running into complexity - nobody wants to pick that up for years now ( excep BS) BCH path seems to be very similar BSV is the clean code road map that finally removes any dev midlle men - and we will not nee to talk about boring stable protocols from now on hve all a nice day |
|
|
|
I don't see how this portrays ethereum as a scam project. Whoever says ethereum is a scam when it's glaring the stability of the project.
they will say scam when don't gotten profit. it's old cassete with new arransement. don't be such anything, be calm down and still wacth your eye with eth project How many d you think Profit really in the end ? umba average Joe ? There is good reason for consumer protection law and enforcements Or You wanna see more of this shit smearing entire crypto to death ? _____ The SEC clamps down on Kik, an ICO it alleges failed to comply with rules ICO tokens – are they securities or are they something else that does not require strict compliance with SEC regulations, designed to protect investors and force full disclosure before any capital changes hands? In its last annual report, the SEC vowed to step up its activity in this arena, driving fear through the hearts and minds of ICO promoters and their teams of legal advisors, as the long arm of the law threatened to reach back into history. |
|
|
|
we know that now ETH is very far from the word scam. even today, so many people use ETH as a platform to develop their products. the price has also improved. in fact, at present many investors are trying to reinvest in ETH.
ETH is a non regulated security and a medium to generate more such unregulated security in masses i.o. to mostly scam ppl. What is your stand to proper consumer fraud protection here? ETH is a big SCAM - stay away from it. SEC must and will shut all that down any time soon. |
|
|
|
|
Wouldn't you guys not just create a 'dark' pool here where only dark / gray coins are getting mixxed with each other and no reasonable one will use that for anything good after ?
|
|
|
|
future
lol  With PoS this will worsen a lot - and trapped for ever .. nice for the oligarchs isn't it ? |
|
|
|
They discuss copyright law in the ‘anarco-capitalism’ section of reddit? That’s quite contradicting
Human with fear can focus way better to learn. Even law what might be hated #1 |
|
|
|
I like how Craig Wrights starts the post with "We (I)"... It makes me think that he believes in himself to be the GOD of bitcoin,the ultimate crypto dictator. Freakin' megallomanic... Anyway,his plans to ruin btc went in the trash. Have a check 18months later |
|
|
|
Afaik transaction malleability breaks LN. So Segwit is necessary for LN as it fixes transaction malleability. Also BIP 114 for MAST requires Segwit.
I think that the malleability bug is separate from the segwit. I think segwit required the fix in order to work. So segwit in on itself is not required for LN. This is an important difference if true. Can anyone confirm/deny? Segwit was one of multiple potential transaction malleability fixes, but it was often billed as the fix. Take a look at Bcash. They fixed transaction malleability without segwit. It's basically the same thing with LN. Segwit made bitcoin capable of handling LN, but there were other ways to implement lightning without segwit. you don't want those coffee purchases clogging up the main chain. Yes I do. I specifically want coffee purchases clogging up the main chain, in fact. And anything else people care to use it on. That is the entire point of bitcoin. Anyone can send any amount to anywhere at any time without needing the permission of middlemen such as yourself. Bitcoin was not meant to be a transactional currency. It was meant to be a store of value. Read: https://twitter.com/danheld/status/1084848063947071488Any other use case, such as buying coffee, is outside the scope of Bitcoin's core use case. That's basically why we'll need 2nd layer solutions (or altcoins) for buying coffee. U ll soon learn that malleability is a feature, never was a bug. |
|
|
|
The problem with metals, besides that I can't buy a jug of milk with it, is that tyrannical states can and will just take it. Metals are for the rebuilding phase, not the purge phase. And bitcoin is for getting a safe distance while it all blows over.
Get off the drugs. It's far easier for the state to make Bitcoin unusable than metals. And confiscating metals is even less feasible than confiscating guns. Even Shlomo Nakamoto says Bitcoin is useless vs state actors. Then you don't understand the tech, or politics, or both. Bitcoin is global. Somewhere is going to be fine with it, even if your local corner of the world ain't. And if you are not willing to leave a soviet-level state, then that's entirely on you. Because it's so useful if the G7 or G20 banned Bitcoin but someone in North Korea has a 486 with the magical ledger of imaginary, valueless tokens on it! The state can easily destroy and prevent the use of Bitcoin because running a police state in the digital world is cheap and cost effective (see Facebook, Twitter, the nation of China) while running a police state in the physical world requires orders of magnitude more resources. Pretending it's harder to stop Bitcoin than metals is a flat out lie. They require the govt's own infrastructure to even work at all. Martin Armstrong has been talking for years about people getting harassed for transporting precious metals across international borders, or having the PMs confiscated. PMs are almost completely useless, aside from international settlements and reserve holdings. Agreed, it is a dumb cult... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
