usual idiocy from the so-called financial press

1. It's a scaling debate, not a blocksize debate

2. Segwit and BIP148 are hardly on different sides of that debate, despite what the headline implies

3. 1MB is only as limited as the imaginations of those who think that's a hard limit. There's this thing in computer science called "data encoding efficiency", it's only been a thing since, I dunno, THE DAWN OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

...and yet, right here on the Press sub-forum front page is a reference to just one aspect of Bitcoin's first killer app: paying for goods "banned" by the international gangsters known by the alias "governments"... [2017-06-13] Bitcoin Is Helping the Pot Business Get Over Its Banking Problem

I say "banned", because the truth is that the politicians and corporations make money from drugs at the highest of levels of corruption, the international ban on recreational substances was always just a con to control the market and push the price/profits higher (no different to what happened during American alcohol prohibition, the same booze came from and through the same people at 4-5 times the price).

I bet Morgan Stanley know a thing or 2 about surreptitiously processing the proceeds of narcotic sales, huh Morgan Stanley? What's the problem, no Bitcoin CEO to whom you can "make an offer they can't refuse"?

spelling correction: you guys mis-spelt "floppening"


(to be fair, "o" is right by "i" on qwerty keyboards, it's probably just a typo )

I seriously doubt that much of the meat and potatoes deep state stuff happens through the CIA in the modern age.

The CIA has been getting such an increasingly bad press for all their successful cover-ups that gradually unwound over the course of the 20th century that it make little sense to do much dirty work through the CIA these days. It's probably exactly like it is on Homeland and Meet the Parents/Fockers, lol

if Gavin Andresen works for any shady organisation, we probably don't who they are, or where their HQ is. "Knowledge is power", "we want information" etc

I'm fairly sure that 10.7 won't work with Core 13.0 and higher, as 10.7 doesn't have C++11.

GENTLMNE REALLY!

I AM BUY VOXELS, VERY CRYPTOCURRNECY, WOW PROSPECTS!!!!1


(obvious shitcoin pumping posts are obvious)

bitcoin unlimited

Satoshi took the utilitarian, pragmatic viewpoint, not a political one.

He stated that Bitcoin's design makes it inherently resistant to being controlled by powerful external entities, and that that was what he tried to achieve with the overall design of Bitcoin.

Governments can do what they like: without an obscenely draconian intensity of totalitarian control of people's private lives and homes, they cannot regulate Bitcoin, it is a law unto itself. That's why we must all think very carefully when there are loud voices petitioning the Bitcoin users to change the rules. They may well be representing the views of contemporaneously powerful people or institutions (Federal Reserve, IMF, BIS etc), unhappy with Bitcoin taking their power away, and so are trying to undo the strength of Satoshi's design.

jonald_fyookball, you support reducing the number of nodes so that your fantasy of on-chain internet cash (that settles in an average of 10 minutes) can be fulfilled. Maybe you should dig that grave of yours a little faster, lol

While the computer you use to store the private keys is on the internet, then yes, your private keys are somewhere on the internet by definition: the private keys are on your machine, and it's on the internet. Letting the private keys exist on machine that is internet connected is a risk, your machine has a communications connection to other machines.

As mentioned above, you can control how exposed your private keys are much more tightly with an air-gapped machine to keep the private keys.

Concurred, cr1776

I don't even mind socialism, as an ideology. If people choose it, cool. I probably wouldn't, but there are ideas from socialism that can be applied to business models that are actually pragmatic and produce desirable outcomes, at least for those that want that.

But The Guardian subtly supports authoritarianism masked in socialism, using "expert authority" as their psychological attack vector. They do it with socialism, and the planned climate change tax totalitarianism, and yet simultaneously support the neo-fascist technology corporations (with mysterious lack of revenue or profit and strangely high stock valuations), and write unashamed reviews of the latest Range Rover in their weekend editions.  

The Guardian's definition of liberalism is no different to that of the Donald Trumps, Robert Mugabes and the Victor Orbans of this world: you can have freedom, if we deem you worthy of it. The only difference is that The Guardian choose a different elite, for different reasons.

Not sure how The Guardian can take themselves seriously publishing this.

The Guardian has been a leading voice in promoting the politics of control, but the nice control, where the controllers are just looking out for your best interests, because they're so smart (and implicitly, you're not smart and don't know what's good for you)


As soon as all this less-than-subtle anti-liberal rhetoric, such as:

• The "neo-liberalism" euphemism (it's called corporate-governmental collusion, aka fascism you fucking sycophants)
• The "top-down socialism only works when it's done 101% by the nicest & most ideologically uncompromising socialists" BS
• Subtly supporting at least 2 hostile takeovers of Bitcoin, by way of editorial policy (they published one side only of the blocksize debate, no information about the people running the Bitcoin project ever appeared in The Guardian)

......but until then, these people have no place trying to make an ostentatious show of bathing themselves in the glow of Cryptoanarchy virtue. When it comes to the real meat and potatoes of the issue, they've got Facebook, Google and Amazon to bow down to, who are having none of it.

lol

So Erik decided to change his HQ from sketchy as hell Panama? I wonder why


A leopard doesn't change his spots, and Erik was operating out of Panama, mysteriously unmolested by the US government goons (aka CIA) that have run Panama to all intents and purposes for decades. I wonder who Erik's political contact in Switzerland is

I understand the criticisms, but they are misplaced IMO.


I think the culture of running one's own personal server has yet to take off, yet I can see it happening eventually. Everyone knows the problems with free, centralised web services, and yet they also behave as if running a server is not an option. It takes more money and resources to serve your own content, but the operative word at the beginning of this sentence is "own". When we run our own servers, not unlike seeding Bittorrent content or running a Bitcoin node, it places the user in control, you own your presence or content on the web.

Ideas like Diaspora (decentralised social network alternative to Facebook) and OpenBazaar have yet to catch fire, yet the potential for them to do so is huge. Other competitors in the same markets as Diaspora and OpenBazaar (mostly Facebook and eBay) have been pushing more and more unwanted changes on their users, in an abuse of their dominant market position. They will push too hard eventually, I'm somewhat surprised there hasn't been more of a backlash yet.

And when a bunch of people put on their Bitcoin hats in 2009, 2010, 2011 etc, it changed the world forever. And will continue to do so. You're underselling the power of hats

Bitcoin does care when the economic majority are all wearing the same hat, that's what literally what makes Bitcoin what it is when using your analogy.

But you're right in one way, one whale does not an economic majority make.

It makes sense that the price will increase in the lead up to August 1st, as people will want to load up in order to speculate on the 2 forks.

After 1st August, seriously volatility should be expected, but that includes ups and downs (and maybe a few somersaults thrown in). The intensity of which will most likely be determined by the success of the level of support for the Segwit Bitcoin softfork. I'll be supporting it, in as far as I plan to be using it. But it's not the only game in town, BIP149 apparently has stronger developer support than BIP148. I guess we'll have to wait to see.

It brings Segwit, whether miners like it or not.

You make it happen by running the BIP148 version of the Bitcoin client, which you get from the link near the top of this thread. (mega.nz link at the bottom of the top post)

Don't forget that alt-Bitcoin (aka legacy-Bitcoin) might become Barrycoin-forked (i.e. Segwit 8MB) before too long also, as there it's unlikely there will be a development team working on the legacy 1MB Bitcoin software in the event of 148's success. There's already some Barrycoin coding going on, apparently.

Thanks for making this so clear, 1Ref and BurtW (nice to see you presenting a genuine appraisal of what's going on, Burt)

@jd

just install and run Bitcoin Core, then your Bitcoin Core node will add another brick of strength to Satoshi's Fortress of rules (or another watt to Satoshi's cryptographic force-field, whatever metaphor you prefer )


The privacy and security do not necessarily come for free. The best setup involves, in order:

• Most secure hardware you can get
• Most secure Operating System running on that hardware (macOS and Windows are, of course, not secure)
• Get connected to the Bitcoin network over Tor

Anyone who has anything to add to that, feel free.