Latest posts of: iCEBREAKER

Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 [143] 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 ... 510 »

2841

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DCR] Decred - Hybrid PoW/PoS | btcsuite Devs | Tons of New Features | Go

on: February 02, 2016, 09:53:58 PM

Quote from: _ingsoc on February 02, 2016, 10:49:14 AM Quote from: davien on February 02, 2016, 09:59:38 AM This means that many miners and pools are interested in the coin even before the launch which IMO it's a good sign It's pretty good. There are already two PoW pools close to completion - developed independently by two different people. There will be a rudimentary proof-of-concept PoS pool hosted as well. The hope is that people can then take that code, improve it, and develop their own voting pools that others can join. The project can then list all of these pools and update the information so it's accessible to anyone. That will be a good start. Let's push back another month, while we do a testnet airdrop to make sure the actual airdrop, PoS pools, and voting work as intended. _ducks

2842

Other / Politics & Society / Re: Up Like Trump

on: February 02, 2016, 09:39:03 PM

#R3KT

2843

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another?

on: February 02, 2016, 09:21:39 PM

Quote from: BitUsher on February 02, 2016, 01:46:31 PM Interesting perspective from our brothers in the east. Miners aren't that critical https://bitcoinzh.com/miners-are-not-that-critical Miners aren't that critical, original Chinese text from Bikeji.com Are we sure we want to increase to 2MB right now? I remember when XT was being pushed out, Gavin was saying if we don’t expand block sizes there’ll be all kinds problems. We haven’t expanded, have any problems appeared after all? It reminds me of an expression, I forget who said it, but most of the things you worry about just won’t happen. So even if we don’t increase, I don’t think anything major will happen to Bitcoin. At worst maybe the price won’t go up as you’d like, but that’s nothing really. We’re all 10-year, loyal holders. Actually, the reason I suggest not increasing to 2MB now is, I want to see just what is caused by blocks being full. This hasn’t happened before, so it’s a chance for us to experience whether or not it’s as critical as Gavin says. I don’t think it will be. Last time, to win support for XT, Gavin was sensationalizing and nothing more. If Bitcoin could die just like that, well then it wouldn’t be much loss. Rights & responsibilities The most frequent refrain in the block size debate has been centralization of the Bitcoin code. In fact, whatever the issue, rights and responsibilities are intrinsically linked. It’s just like with mining, CPU gives you rights, but it also gives you responsibility - to protect the network. In the same way, protecting Bitcoin’s code may appear as power, but it’s actually a responsibility. Even if the code were being centralized, this would be a result of people’s inactions at normal times. We don’t usually assume any greater responsibility, so at these critical junctures, we don’t have greater rights to a voice. This would apply in any domain. So if anyone has something to say, any suggestions, you can closely follow how the code is looked after and make contributions to the Core developers. If everyone just acts in their corporate interests, then we won’t have anything worth saying and I for one won’t be complaining. Of course, I still have my vote and can leave at any time. Although I don’t currently think there’s any problem with Core. As far as I can see, their’s is a long-sighted proposal. Who are our allies? Who are our allies in this affair? It’s often hard to tell. Like Mike releasing XT then making a run for it. I still don’t get why someone who’d sold all their coins would care so much about making a hard fork. As a bitcoin holder, I can only confirm that miners are our allies. They’ve invested real dollars. We’ve all witnessed their hashing power, there’s no faking that. But what about developers? We don’t really know whether they hold any coins or not. I couldn’t trust anyone who could support a fork at 75% consensus without regard for the miners’ interests. For the very simple reason that I don’t know whether you have skin in the game whereas with miners it’s out in the open. So if someone isn’t looking out for the interests of miners, then they aren’t an ally. That’s why Gavin fell sharply in my estimation when he released XT. Who’s the weak one? Actually Bitcoin does have a way of controlling the situation when blocks are full. If a serious bug appears, achieving consensus and implementing a hard fork is simple because everyone has an economic interest. Why is it that we’ve been arguing about block size expansion for so long but haven’t reached consensus? Because there’s no rush! If the consequence of having blocks at capacity were network paralysis, I’m sure within 24 hours the hard fork would be implemented and successfully so. But clearly, if blocks are full then blocks are just full and it’s not the end of the world. During the spam attack stress-test and over the few days when there are price bubbles, blocks are basically at capacity. What’s that you say? The user experience is terrible? New users can’t join the network? The price is depressed? Lol, don’t you want the cheap coins? Whatever way you look at this, the weak point isn’t Bitcoin, it’s us. Maybe the price will rise too slowly, if so we’ll speed up. Maybe some people are plotting to profit from the price fall, deliberately creating panic. Whatever you do or don’t do then, don’t stop hodling! Thank you for posting that! I especially like the fresh (original?) "Rights & responsibilities" analysis, as well as the point that Classic's 75% attack throws miners under the bus. This guy really gets it; it's a pleasure to observe him grokking the ethos. So much for the OP's impression that all Bitcoiners in China demand 2MB right fucking now, Because Respect. That narrative just exploded, right in Gavin's face.

2844

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Core needs to prepare a GPU only PoW - Spondoolies CEO Guy Corem

on: February 02, 2016, 08:24:50 PM

Quote from: P-Funk on February 02, 2016, 07:53:52 PM Divisiveness won't do anything but harm Bitcoin. Such process concerns belong at BitcoinObituaries.com. Nothing harms Bitcoin, which always has and always will run on drama. It's antifragile, so adversity like "divisiveness" only makes it stronger.

2845

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another?

on: February 02, 2016, 08:20:40 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on February 02, 2016, 07:55:52 PM MP is just messing with you, he is just ensuring there is just no way 2MB fork happens. ever. Ah yes the old poison pill, like my BIP1337 idea (IF max_size = 2MB, THEN target_time = 20 minutes).

2846

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another?

on: February 02, 2016, 07:25:32 PM

Quote from: BitUsher on February 02, 2016, 06:39:55 PM Quote from: iCEBREAKER on February 02, 2016, 06:32:37 PM Quote from: BitUsher on February 02, 2016, 06:04:12 PM Seriously? I agree with the need to further develop an ASIC resistant PoW algo with Keccak , but anyone that is trying to promote MP's idea you cite really has no business in crypto. Well then, I guess Sztorc should leave crypto forever. Nobody who has ever been wrong about something the past should be allowed in Bitcoin, so GMAX also has to go. Oh wait, perhaps there is a difference between promoting consideration of an idea and being ready to die for it. The idea is fine in itself, as it was discussed years ago... but what MP has discovered in his "infinite wisdom" is a flawed concept of storage throughput proof of work that has already been shown to be inadequate and flawed(Specific reasons cited). Quote from: iCEBREAKER on February 02, 2016, 06:32:37 PM Well then, I guess Sztorc should leave crypto forever. I am perfectly willing to accept that talented and capable people can make mistakes and occasionally agree with dumb ideas. In this case it may be due to a cult of personality blinding the judgment of fanboi's riding MP dick.... but who knows, perhaps you have a valid rebuttal to the concerns being addressed? Thus, perhaps they would be better off working with core devs instead of circle jerking on bitcoin-assets. Let's not lose sight of the salient point: MP is now willing to eventually support a hard fork raising the blocksize, provided an improved PoW is part of the deal. The big news here isn't the exact proposal under consideration, but rather the type and character of a proposal now endorsed by a guy who represents a segment of the socioeconomic majority with veto power over other, competing hard forks. You seem to greatly resent bitcoin-assets holding such veto power, hence your homophobic ranting about "riding MP dick" and "circle jerking." But rather than petulantly attacking the source of the proposal, why not focus on improving its deficiencies? You could contribute positively to the discussion by explaining why the 20-second hacks (set nonce to zero; soft fork to uniform blocks) haven't broken Boolberry's similar Wild Keccak PoW. Is it because there are no entrenched ASICs in the BBR space, or because the market cap is too tiny to bother, or some technical difference?

2847

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another?

on: February 02, 2016, 06:32:37 PM

Quote from: BitUsher on February 02, 2016, 06:04:12 PM Seriously? I agree with the need to further develop an ASIC resistant PoW algo with Keccak , but anyone that is trying to promote MP's idea you cite really has no business in crypto. Well then, I guess Sztorc should leave crypto forever. Nobody who has ever been wrong about something the past should be allowed in Bitcoin, so GMAX also has to go. Oh wait, perhaps there is a difference between promoting consideration of an idea and being ready to die for it.

2848

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Core needs to prepare a GPU only PoW - Spondoolies CEO Guy Corem

on: February 02, 2016, 06:02:06 PM

xpost: A new challenger emerges. TLDR: it's Wild Keccak modified to be even more ASIC resistant. I'm calling it "Feral Keccak." Quote from: iCEBREAKER on February 02, 2016, 05:43:43 PM Quote from: hdbuck on February 01, 2016, 09:12:08 PM the sugar daddy of bitcoin: http://qntra.net/2016/02/popescu-offers-condition-for-accepting-future-hard-forks/ http://trilema.com/2016/the-necessary-prerequisite-for-any-change-to-the-bitcoin-protocol/ Quote Summary : All blocks must include a SHA3i-512 digest calculated over a bitfield composed out of the nonce-th byte out of every preceding block, wrapped. Rationale : The issues being resolved have been discussed at length in #bitcoin-assets, whose logs you are invited to read - right now, and in integrum. This notwithstanding, an unbinding summary is that the miner-node divisioniv is both an unintended consequence of the poor design and inept implementation of Bitcoin by its original author as well as the single known possible threat to its continued survival. This measure heals that rift, by making it impossible for miners to mine without nodesv) ; and by giving nodes a directly valuable piece of information they can sell.vi Excellent suggestion. It fixes the glaring problems with the current reward structure, which is producing malallocation of resources (centralized ASIC farms sucking up all the block subsidies) and perverse incentives (externalized node costs, hacky SPV mining). IIRC, this PoW is called Wild Keccak and has been used successfully by Boolberry for over a year. Now who is going to code it up and get it into the BIP process/hard fork wishlist?

2849

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another?

on: February 02, 2016, 05:43:43 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on February 01, 2016, 09:12:08 PM the sugar daddy of bitcoin: http://qntra.net/2016/02/popescu-offers-condition-for-accepting-future-hard-forks/ http://trilema.com/2016/the-necessary-prerequisite-for-any-change-to-the-bitcoin-protocol/ Quote Summary : All blocks must include a SHA3i-512 digest calculated over a bitfield composed out of the nonce-th byte out of every preceding block, wrapped. Rationale : The issues being resolved have been discussed at length in #bitcoin-assets, whose logs you are invited to read - right now, and in integrum. This notwithstanding, an unbinding summary is that the miner-node divisioniv is both an unintended consequence of the poor design and inept implementation of Bitcoin by its original author as well as the single known possible threat to its continued survival. This measure heals that rift, by making it impossible for miners to mine without nodesv) ; and by giving nodes a directly valuable piece of information they can sell.vi Excellent suggestion. It fixes the glaring problems with the current reward structure, which is producing malallocation of resources (centralized ASIC farms sucking up all the block subsidies) and perverse incentives (externalized node costs, hacky SPV mining). IIRC, this PoW is called Wild Keccak and has been used successfully by Boolberry for over a year. Now who is going to code it up and get it into the BIP process/hard fork wishlist?

2850

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency

on: February 02, 2016, 03:17:02 PM

Quote from: aiwe on February 01, 2016, 07:58:21 AM You are right. Maybe I spam with this chart too much. If so we can move to trello for example. Let's not make it too detailed. This bikeshed has already been painted with three coats and a gloss! Less is more. Use the oligiodynamic effect. The goal is to allow people's intuition (which they trust) to do the heavy conceptual lifting. Don't raise the cognitive load and visual complexity with a bunch of text and stuff all crammed together. That is ready to be printed on stickers for viral marketing. Enigmatic is good. We automatically ignore adverts but are drawn to puzzles. Let people figure it out. Or put a QR code for getmonero on the bottom. Hmm....the dollar bills look a little scrunched in the avatar. Perhaps just a big $ would be better for low res...

2851

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: [Crypto] BOUNTY 10 BTC - Compact Confidential Transactions for Bitcoin

on: February 02, 2016, 01:52:08 PM

Quote from: Mixles on December 22, 2015, 05:41:02 PM Quick paper update, we have 4 cases to consider with (2) and (4) being interesting options. 1) Trusted, unknown group order: Trusted party generates p*q factors Use Paillier or additive ElGammal cryptosystem. 2) Trusted, known group order (elliptic curves): Trusted party generates r in the correct range, and hands out batches of r to participants on request. We can then use the super-efficient CFT proof on a large curve. It is compact (0.4KB) for private blockchains, but is not suitable for Bitcoin. 3) Trustless, unknown group order: Generate a UFO (UnFactorable Object) like ZeroCash. Use Paillier or additive ElGammal cryptosystem. 4) Trustless, known group order (elliptic curves): I have managed to make BCDG proof more compact (2.5KB) than the original paper. As it can deal with 64 bit numbers, it is still more compact than CT, and is suitable for Bitcoin. Does RingCT fit into any of those categories? I'm guessing 3 or 4 might apply, but my parser fails at "group order."

2852

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another?

on: February 02, 2016, 01:41:45 PM

Quote from: ImI on February 01, 2016, 04:12:59 PM some part of core stands against pretty much everyone else in the bitcoin universe. miners are in favor of 2MB. community/users are in favor of 2MB. (i would estimate 80/20 in favor of 2MB) bitcoin services are in favor of 2MB. that means stamp, coinbase, blockchain.org, bitpay, etc etc so its basically a minor group of devs against everyone else. so its basically 20% of the community plus maybe 5 devs that try to force their will on everyone else. If those unsupported, evidence-free assumptions (pulled hot and fresh out of your own ass) are actually true, it's a good thing Bitcoin is not and never will be a democracy. Have fun trying to impose moral hazards like majoritarianism on Honey Badger. Watch out for the claws. And the teeth. And the bees, cobra, etc.

2853

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another?

on: February 02, 2016, 01:34:31 PM

Quote from: danielW on February 01, 2016, 09:41:03 AM @eric@haobtc You should really try to communicate with core devs over skype or better yet in person before making a decision. Too be honest I am surprised you thought Icebreaker was a dev. It suggests you do not even know who the core devs are. There must be a pretty big disconnect between the Chinese community and what is happening in Bitcoin. Please don't presume to generalize about the Chinese Bitcoin community on the basis of what one guy posts here. You might hurt yourself jumping to such a distant conclusion! Many Bitcoiners in China work closely with the core devs, and even more of them are too wise and well informed to fall for the Classic attempt to drive a wedge between Core and China by spreading rumors/memes about how 'Core doesn't respect China.' EG, https://bitcoinzh.com/has-anyone-upgraded-to-bitcoin-classic/ I don't have the stack-of-books forum flair, so it's unlikely anyone mistook me for a core dev. It was just one of my fan club that felt it necessary to use that (obvious, undisputed) fact to try and invalidate my posts.

2854

Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin's Great Schism - A Compendium

on: February 01, 2016, 10:16:26 AM

Quote from: Foxpup on February 01, 2016, 10:09:57 AM Well, we can't very well talk about Byzantine generals without talking about military action. 8/17/15 Not Bitcoin XT https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1154520.0 I thought that was quite cute. Good pick! All warfare is based on deception... The butthurt NotXT caused on the rump forums was epic. The fact the Xturds didn't anticipate and plan for spoofed version signals despite being warned only shows they are clueless amateurs. Classic. Total classic!

2855

Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin's Great Schism - A Compendium

on: February 01, 2016, 09:28:51 AM

Quote from: Erkallys on January 31, 2016, 11:47:44 AM I proposed the term "secession" to describe Bitcoin Classic, but I have to say that "Bitcoin's Great Schism" is a lot better ! Great Schism is the best because of its connotation with Byzantine generals and holy doctrinal conflict that normal people DGAF about but are nonetheless subjected to by the priest caste (resplendent in their shiny robes, funny hats, odd lifestyles, strange rituals, etc.) C'mon you guys....I need more links to flesh out this skeleton of an OP! What were your favorite skirmishes thus far? Aren't you sick of having to Search for "old" links, as we endlessly rehash the 20MB/8MB/2MB debate? And think of the benefit to future internet anthropologists! This thread should be their Rosetta Stone.

2856

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Speculation (Altcoins) / Re: [XMR] Monero Speculation

on: January 31, 2016, 05:55:42 PM

Quote from: flagel8 on January 31, 2016, 05:14:13 PM He is very offensive, but what really makes me sad is that I sort of agree with him. I think that the opportunity window for Monero's success probably closed many months ago. (If not, there is very little time left). Great technology, but there is NO Marketing, and no (Non-Techno-Geek) user friendliness. Nor does there seem to be any recognition that these factors might be important. Beta was superior to VHS. But that analogy is flawed, because those two videotapes were functionally more or less equivalent in their applications. But the Market obviously sees the potential functionality of ETH as superior to that of Monero. And again, there's a disparity in Marketing among the two. Look at their ages, and their market caps. And ETH is not yet finished either. The "NO Marketing" is intentional, because of the "no user friendliness" you also note. Monero isn't even out of beta yet. We can't really judge its success or failure until after multisig, confidential tx, and the GUI (not to mention some marketing) have given the coin a chance to gain market share.

2857

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Speculation (Altcoins) / Re: [XMR] Monero Speculation

on: January 31, 2016, 10:08:56 AM

Quote from: primer- on January 31, 2016, 10:01:25 AM Once ETH releases ring signatures dapp its over. The only chance for monero to survive is to increase adoption by a tenfold. Monero doesn't even have a GUI (not saying that would increase adoption!). Man-child developers.. Look at the blockchain, http://chainradar.com/xmr/blocks , blocks are empty of transactions.. No one is using this shitcoin.. Anyway, I'll keep exchanging xmr for ETH, most likely it won't even exist this time next year. You may borrow 20591 XMR for 2-60 Days at only 0.0040%. Some other loans are even less expensive. Why don't you short XMR, if you are so certain "no one is using this shitcoin" and it "won't even exist this time next year?" Chicken?

2858

Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Bitcoin's Great Schism - A Compendium

on: January 31, 2016, 10:01:56 AM

Let's make a reference thread as a handy guide to the Blocksize War saga! Quote from: theymos on September 09, 2014, 01:16:24 AM Everyone knows that Bitcoin runs on drama 8/10/10 How do we prevent Bitcoin forks (or should we)? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=779 9/30/10 Re: Prioritized transactions, and tx fees https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1314.msg14750#msg14750 10/3/10 [PATCH] increase block size limit https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.0 1/3/13 The MAX_BLOCK_SIZE fork https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=140233.0 2/18/13 How a floating blocksize limit inevitably leads towards centralization https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=144895.0 3/11/13 In re Bitcoin Devs are idiots https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=152027 4/19/13 Roger Ver and Jon Matonis pushed aside now that Bitcoin is becoming mainstream https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=181168.0 5/17/13 New video: Why the blocksize limit keeps Bitcoin free and decentralized https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=208200.msg2180232 6/19/14 Bitcoin and Voting Power http://hackingdistributed.com/2014/06/19/bitcoin-and-voting-power/ 7/25/14 Share your ideas on what to replace the 1 MB block size limit with https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=709970.0 10/7/14 Gavin Andresen Proposes Scalability Roadmap and Hardfork http://qntra.net/2014/10/gavin-andressen-proposes-scalability-roadmap-and-hardfork/ 1/6/15 Looking before the Scaling Up Leap http://gavintech.blogspot.ca/2015/01/looking-before-scaling-up-leap.html 1/10/15 The Hard Fork Missile Crisis http://qntra.net/2015/01/the-hard-fork-missile-crisis 1/10/15 Fork off https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919629.0 1/12/15 Twenty Megabytes testing results http://gavintech.blogspot.ca/2015/01/twenty-megabytes-testing-results.html 1/12/15 Let's address some of the more common pseudo-arguments raised by the very stupid people that like the Gavin scamcoin proposal http://trilema.com/2015/lets-address-some-of-the-more-common-pseudo-arguments-raised-by-the-very-stupid-people-that-like-the-gavin-scamcoin-proposal/ 1/30/15 Bitcoin 20MB Fork https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=941331.0 2/4/15 Permanently keeping the 1MB (anti-spam) restriction is a great idea ... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=946236.0 2/20/15 Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg10220711#msg10220711 5/5/15 The capacity cliff https://medium.com/@octskyward/the-capacity-cliff-586d1bf7715e 5/7/15 Crash landing https://medium.com/@octskyward/crash-landing-f5cc19908e32 5/11/15 Bitcoin faces a crossroads, needs an effective decision-making process https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2015/05/11/bitcoin-faces-a-crossroads-needs-an-effective-decision-making-process/ 5/29/15 Gavin Threatens to Quit Bitcoin Development and Join Hearn's Fork http://qntra.net/2015/05/gavin-threatens-to-quit-bitcoin-development-and-join-hearns-fork/ 5/30/15 [Bitcoin-development] soft-fork block size increase (extension blocks) Re: Proposed alternatives to the 20MB stepfunction https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-May/008356.html 6/2/15 What Have The Core Bitcoin Devs Ever Done For Us? https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3bx44a/what_have_the_core_bitcoin_devs_ever_done_for_us 6/10/15 Mike Hearn: In about 1-2 weeks, Bitcoin XT will include support for 20mb blocks https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1086736.0 6/11/15 The Bitcoin Gauntlet https://medium.com/bitcoin-think/the-bitcoin-gauntlet-e9e721297aca 6/13/15 Hearn's Worst Case Scenario: Checkpoints in XT to "ignore the longest chain" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1089283.0 6/22/15 Bitcoin's Ironic Crisis https://medium.com/@bramcohen/bitcoin-s-ironic-crisis-32226a85e39f 6/23/15 How the Bitcoin experiment might fail https://medium.com/@sdaftuar/how-the-bitcoin-experiment-might-fail-7f6c24f99ecf 7/8/15 "Bitcoin" XT Status Update https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1115016.0 7/28/15 Analyzing the 2013 Bitcoin fork: centralized decision-making saved the day http://freedom-to-tinker.com/2015/07/28/analyzing-the-2013-bitcoin-fork-centralized-decision-making-saved-the-day/ 8/11/15 I ran Bitcoin Core for >3 years, and I turned it off today https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1150481.0 8/15/15 Big block support observer https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1153957.0 8/15/15 Why is Bitcoin forking? https://medium.com/faith-and-future/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1 8/17/15 Not Bitcoin XT https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1154520.0 8/18/15 Bitcoin XT has code which downloads your IP address to facilitate blacklisting https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1156489.0 8/18/15 MeniRosenfeld comments on "It's time for a break: About the recent mess & temporary new rules" https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h9cq4/its_time_for_a_break_about_the_recent_mess/cu6udfe 8/19/15 What happens when the managers and investors ignore the engineers and scientists https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4/status/634131738063581184 8/19/15 Bitcoin Battered After "Governance Coup" http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-19/bitcoin-battered-after-governance-coup 8/19/15 Adam Back Says the Bitcoin Fork Is a Coup http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/computing/networks/the-bitcoin-for-is-a-coup 8/20/15 Nuclear option of forking the codebase should only be used as a last resort https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3hp190/charlie_lee_nuclear_option_of_forking_the/ 8/26/15 Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162684.0 8/27/15 BIP101 implementation flaws http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2015/08/bip101-implementation-flaws.html 8/27/15 An XT FAQ https://medium.com/@octskyward/an-xt-faq-38e78aa32ff0 8/28/15 Why I support BIP101 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1164464 9/9/15 Measuring Decentralization http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/measuring-decentralization/ 9/14/15 Supermajority and BIP101 activation, part 2 http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2015/09/supermajority-and-bip101-activation.html 9/14/15 Adam Back on the Overlooked Importance of Full Nodes in Bitcoin http://coinjournal.net/adam-back-on-the-overlooked-importance-of-full-nodes-in-bitcoin/ 12/7/15 [bitcoin-dev] Capacity increases for the Bitcoin system. https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-December/011865.html 12/16/15 [bitcoin-dev] Block size: It's economics & user preparation & moral hazard https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-December/011974.html 1/1/16 Time for Bitcoin Users to Reclaim Their Voice http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/01/03/time-for-bitcoin-user-voice/ 1/2/16 Bitcoin's Elegant Upgrade Mechanism: Miner Voting https://medium.com/@barmstrong/bitcoin-s-elegant-upgrade-mechanism-miner-voting-66faa35d27af 1/2/16 bitcoin "unlimited" seeks review https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1312371.0 1/9/16 Analysis and list of top big blocks shills (XT #REKT ignorers) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1318519 1/14/16 Why Bitcoin's Decentralization Matters http://bluematt.bitcoin.ninja/2016/01/14/decentralization/ 1/14/16 The resolution of the Bitcoin experiment https://medium.com/@octskyward/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experiment-dabb30201f7 1/14/16 A Bitcoin Believer?s Crisis of Faith http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/01/17/business/dealbook/the-bitcoin-believer-who-gave-up.html 1/16/16 ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1330553.0 1/16/16 Whiny Ragequitting https://medium.com/@bramcohen/whiny-ragequitting-cab164b1e88 1/18/16 Hearn: 8MB "obviously wasn't based on any kind of scientific analysis" https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=mike_hearn&next=10921219 1/18/16 KEEP CALM AND BITCOIN ON https://medium.com/@BitFuryGroup/keep-calm-and-bitcoin-on-4f29d581276 1/23/16 Lesson learned from the Classic coup attempt or why Core needs to prepare a GPU only PoW https://medium.com/@vcorem/lesson-learned-from-the-classic-coup-attempt-or-why-core-needs-to-prepare-a-gpu-only-pow-6a9afe18e4b0 1/26/16 How to Use Open Source and Shut the Fuck Up At the Same Time https://hueniverse.com/2016/01/26/how-to-use-open-source-and-shut-the-fuck-up-at-the-same-time/ 1/27/16 Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1343716.0 1/28/16 The Governance of Anarchists https://medium.com/@PanteraCapital/the-governance-of-anarchists-blockchain-letter-january-2016-798842f468de 1/29/16 Hard Fork Risks and Why 95% Should be the Standard http://bitledger.info/hard-fork-risks-and-why-95-should-be-the-standard/ 1/29/16 A trip to the moon requires a rocket with multiple stages or otherwise the rocket equation will eat your lunch... packing everyone in clown-car style into a trebuchet and hoping for success is right out. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/438hx0/a_trip_to_the_moon_requires_a_rocket_with/ 2/2/16 Scaling Bitcoin: The Great Block Size Debate https://blog.coinbase.com/scaling-bitcoin-the-great-block-size-debate-d2cba9021db0 2/5/16 [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Increase block size limit to 2 megabytes http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-February/012358.html 2/8/16 PSA: Clearing up some misconceptions about full nodes https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/44rx5k/psa_clearing_up_some_misconceptions_about_full/ 2/9/16 Why My Faith in Bitcoin has Been Restored http://bravetheworld.com/2016/02/09/faith-bitcoin-restored/ 2/10/16 A Call for Consensus https://medium.com/@bitcoinroundtable/a-call-for-consensus-d96d5560d8d6 2/11/16 Hard Fork Conspiracy Treacherous http://www.riddellwilliams.com/blog/articles/post/hard-fork-conspiracy-treacherous 2/11/16 Ed Felten: What does the White House think of cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin? https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-White-House-think-of-cryptocurrencies-such-as-bitcoin 2/12/16 Double Billing is not ?Healthy Competition? https://medium.com/@bramcohen/double-billing-is-not-healthy-competition-b698c345b11e 2/16/16 I disapprove of Bitcoin splitting, but I?ll defend to the death its right to do it http://fieryspinningsword.com/2016/02/13/i-dont-want-bitcoin-to-split-but-ill-defend-to-death-its-right-to-do-it/ 2/20/16 Bitcoin Roundtable Consensus https://medium.com/@bitcoinroundtable/bitcoin-roundtable-consensus-266d475a61ff 2/22/16 Peter Todd Disputes Claim That 75% Majority Hard Forks are Safe http://coinjournal.net/peter-todd-disputes-claim-that-75-majority-hard-forks-are-safe/ 2/22/16 Segregated Witness and Hardware Wallets https://medium.com/@Ledger/segregated-witness-and-hardware-wallets-cc88ba532fb3 2/22/16 Lesser known reasons to keep blocks small, in the words of Bitcoin Core developers https://medium.com/@elliotolds/lesser-known-reasons-to-keep-blocks-small-in-the-words-of-bitcoin-core-developers-44861968185e 2/22/16 Coinbase CEO Rejects Proposal for Bitcoin Hard Fork in 2017 http://www.coindesk.com/coinbase-ceo-rejects-bitcoin-hard-fork/ 2/23/16 Bitcoin Roundtable Consensus: Wladimir Says ?I?m All For It? http://coinjournal.net/bitcoin-roundtable-consensus-wladimir-says-im/ 2/25/16 Blocksonly mode BW savings, the limits of efficient block xfer, and better relay https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1377345.0 2/26/16 MIT Media Lab Director Joi Ito Speaks Up on Bitcoin Technical Development Environment http://www.nasdaq.com/article/mit-media-lab-director-joi-ito-speaks-up-on-bitcoin-technical-development-environment-cm585158 3/4/16 What Happened At The Satoshi Roundtable https://medium.com/the-coinbase-blog/what-happened-at-the-satoshi-roundtable-6c11a10d8cdf 3/4/16 Coinbase CEO: Core Team is a "Systemic Threat" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1387667 3/4/16 Boycott Coinbase to stop the attack against Bitcoin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1387457.0 3/14/16 A date with Sybil https://medium.com/@laurentmt/a-date-with-sybil-bdb33bd91ac3 3/15/16 BTCC's Samson Mow on Block Size: The Bitcoin Community Must See Through Manipulation, Keep Calm and Write Code https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/btcc-s-sampson-mow-on-block-size-the-bitcoin-community-must-see-through-manipulation-keep-calm-and-write-code-1458061357 3/21/16 Contentious Blocksize Wars https://medium.com/@slush/contentious-blocksize-wars-6fd7c07f9d90 3/22/16 A Closer Look at Reddit Vote Manipulation About Bitcoin https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/a-closer-look-at-reddit-vote-manipulation-about-bitcoin-1458682699 3/31/16 BTCC Funding, Development Report, and Hard-Forks https://petertodd.org/2016/btcc-funding 4/2/16 Clearing the FUD around Segwit http://www.achow101.com/2016/04/Segwit-FUD-Clearup 4/7/16 Bitcoin Hard Forks May Become Safer With User Voting https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-hard-forks-may-become-safer-with-user-voting-1460040031 4/12/16 Peter Todd Worried About Those Willing to ?Fork Bitcoin at All Costs? https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/peter-todd-worried-about-those-willing-to-fork-bitcoin-at-all-costs-1460475488 4/14/16 The Power of Schnorr: The Signature Algorithm to Increase Bitcoin's Scale and Privacy https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/the-power-of-schnorr-the-signature-algorithm-to-increase-bitcoin-s-scale-and-privacy-1460642496/ 4/15/16 Bitcoin Core 0.12.1 Released, Major Step Forward for Scalability https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-core-released-major-step-forward-for-scalability-1460762378 4/18/16 Supporters of 2 MB Bitcoin Blocks Unable to Convince Miners to Hard Fork in Beijing Meeting https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/supporters-of-mb-bitcoin-blocks-unable-to-convince-miners-to-hard-fork-in-beijing-meeting-1461004264 4/20/16 Bitcoin scaling tradeoffs with Adam Back https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEZAlNBJjA0 4/29/16 Roger Ver tries to intentionally spend unconfirmed bitcoins from a zero fee transaction, which fails, and then blames failure on technology. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4h3agw/roger_ver_tries_to_intentionally_spend/ 5/2/16 FYI, @gavinandresen's commit access just got removed - Core team members are concerned that he may have been hacked. https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/727078284345917441 5/6/16 Dazed and confused, but trying to continue https://laanwj.github.io/2016/05/06/hostility-scams-and-moving-forward.html 5/11/16 Gavin Andresen is Not Giving Up on Bitcoin Classic http://coinjournal.net/gavin-andresen-not-giving-bitcoin-classic/ 5/12/16 5/15/16 An Anatomy of Bitcoin's Great Scaling Debate http://www.coindesk.com/anatomy-bitcoin-scaling-debate/ 5/16/16 Almost half of the Classic nodes just disappeared https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4jo15f/almost_half_of_the_classic_nodes_just_disappeared/ 5/20/16 Mike Hearn: Bitcoin's "Young, Unripened Democracy" Suffers Under Authoritarian Developers https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/mike-hearn-bitcoin-democracy/ 5/23/16 Antpool Will Not Run SegWit Without Bitcoin Block Size Increase Hard Fork https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/antpool-will-not-run-segwit-without-block-size-increase-hard-fork-1464028753 5/24/16 Ethereum is the Forefront of Digital Currency https://medium.com/the-coinbase-blog/ethereum-is-the-forefront-of-digital-currency-5300298f6c75 5/25/16 Bitcoin Protocol Role Models http://gavinandresen.ninja/bitcoin-protocol-role-models 6/1/16 Original vision of Bitcoin http://blog.oleganza.com/post/145248960618/original-vision-of-bitcoin 6/14/16 Rick Falkvinge on Segwit: I think it's a dead-end. It's over-engineering. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4nzona/rick_falkvinge_on_segwit_i_think_its_a_deadend/ 6/14/16 The Big-Blocker Fallacy https://medium.com/@rextar4444/the-big-blocker-fallacy-dd5c67ad6c12 6/28/16 Time to End the Block-Size Blockade https://fee.org/articles/time-to-end-the-block-size-blockade/ 8/8/16 Segregated Witness and aligning economic incentives with resource costs https://segwit.org/segregated-witness-and-aligning-economic-incentives-with-resource-costs-7d987b135c00 9/14/16 Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1616856 10/23/16 A Future Led by Bitcoin Unlimited is a Centralized Future https://blog.sia.tech/a-future-led-by-bitcoin-unlimited-is-a-centralized-future-e48ab52c817a 11/21/16 The artificial block size limit https://medium.com/@bergealex4/the-artificial-block-size-limit-1b69aa5d9d4 1/19/17 Why Segregated Witness will make 2017 Bitcoin's best year yet https://segwit.org/why-segragated-witness-will-make-2017-bitcoins-best-year-yet-527e391c93cb 1/21/17 The SegWit Debate https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5pcar2/the_segwit_debate/ 1/27/17 How Bitcoin Unlimited Users May End Up on Different Blockchains https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/how-bitcoin-unlimited-users-may-end-different-blockchains/ 2/1/17 Why Bitcoin Unlimited?s "Emergent Consensus" Is a Gamble https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/why-bitcoin-unlimiteds-emergent-consensus-gamble/ 2/5/17 Happy Bitcoin Coder https://medium.com/@nicolasdorier/happy-bitcoin-coder-2def905d5929 2/9/17 Money, blockchains, and social scalability https://unenumerated.blogspot.jp/2017/02/money-blockchains-and-social-scalability.html 2/10/17 Scaling Bitcoin: Reflections from the DCG Portfolio https://medium.com/@DCGco/scaling-bitcoin-reflections-from-the-dcg-portfolio-35b9a065b2a4 2/11/17 The DCG is not Bitcoin. You are Bitcoin https://hackernoon.com/the-dcg-is-not-bitcoin-you-are-bitcoin-c57e2d2ce846 2/12/17 Complete Review on SegWit vs. Bitcoin Unlimited: Arguments and Clarity https://cointelegraph.com/news/complete-review-on-segwit-vs-bitcoin-unlimited-arguments-and-clarity 1/21/17 The SegWit Debate https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5pcar2/the_segwit_debate/ 1/27/17 How Bitcoin Unlimited Users May End Up on Different Blockchains https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/how-bitcoin-unlimited-users-may-end-different-blockchains/ 1/29/17 bitcoin.com loses 13.2BTC trying to fork the network: Untested and buggy BU creates an oversized block, Many BU node banned, the HF fails https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5qwtr2/bitcoincom_loses_132btc_trying_to_fork_the/ 1/30/17 LOL! Miners running latest BU need to set their max block size lower than Core to avoid mining invalid blocks https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5qxrnt/lol_miners_running_latest_bu_need_to_set_their/ 1/31/17 So who the hell is still supporting BU? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1771911.0 1/31/17 Statement regarding excessive block by Bitcoin Unlimited software 29 Jan 2017 https://bitco.in/forum/threads/buir-2017-01-29-statement-regarding-excessive-block-by-bitcoin-unlimited-software-29-jan-2017.1790/ 2/3/17 Bitcoin Market Needs Big Blocks, Says Founder of BTC.TOP Mining Pool https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-market-needs-big-blocks-says-founder-btc-top-mining-pool/ 2/3/17 Segregated Witness (SW) vs Bitcoin Unlimited (BU) https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5rs55l/segregated_witness_sw_vs_bitcoin_unlimited_bu/ 2/4/17 Gavin Andresen supporting an attack on the minority chain in case BU fork with majority hashpower https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5s2c2z/gavin_andresen_supporting_an_attack_on_the/ 2/7/17 Capitalist View on a Bitcoin Hard Fork https://alistairmilne.com/2017/02/07/capitalist-view-on-a-bitcoin-hard-fork/ 2/10/17 Scaling Bitcoin: Reflections from the DCG Portfolio https://medium.com/@DCGco/scaling-bitcoin-reflections-from-the-dcg-portfolio-35b9a065b2a4 2/11/17 The DCG is not Bitcoin. You are Bitcoin https://hackernoon.com/the-dcg-is-not-bitcoin-you-are-bitcoin-c57e2d2ce846 2/12/17 Complete Review on SegWit vs. Bitcoin Unlimited: Arguments and Clarity https://cointelegraph.com/news/complete-review-on-segwit-vs-bitcoin-unlimited-arguments-and-clarity 2/20/17 Why Bitcoin Will Get Scaling Without Segwit or Large Blocks https://medium.com/@jimmysong/why-bitcoin-will-get-scaling-without-segwit-or-large-blocks-772799fab021 2/22/17 BTCC's Bobby Lee: Why Chinese Bitcoin Miners Are Not Happy With SegWit https://cointelegraph.com/news/btccs-bobby-lee-why-chinese-bitcoin-miners-are-not-happy-with-segwit 2/23/17 Understanding the risk of BU (bitcoin unlimited) https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5vo5wi/understanding_the_risk_of_bu_bitcoin_unlimited/ 2/25/17 Moving towards user activated soft fork activation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1805060.0 2/26/17 The Bitcoin Balance of Power Poster https://medium.com/@AudunGulbrands1/the-bitcoin-balance-of-power-poster-91271ab31b86 2/27/17 Why Bitcoin Transaction Capacity Doesn’t Really Matter https://medium.com/@jimmysong/why-bitcoin-transaction-capacity-doesnt-really-matter-fddcc0c9f021 3/1/17 Bitcoin: no need to keep talking http://bravetheworld.com/2017/03/01/bitcoin-talking/ 3/1/17 The Bitcoin Filibuster https://medium.com/@beautyon_/the-bitcoin-filibuster-c12231f6feb3 3/2/17 Why I'm resigning as a 'moderator' of /r/btc https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5x3x7r/why_im_resigning_as_a_moderator_of_rbtc/ 3/3/17 The Core Development Scalability Roadmap https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5xa5fa/the_core_development_scalability_roadmap/ 3/4/17 The Origins of the Blocksize Debate https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5xg7f8/the_origins_of_the_blocksize_debate/ 3/6/17 Bitcoin Realism or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love 1MB Blocks https://medium.com/@jimmysong/bitcoin-realism-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-1mb-blocks-c191c35e74cb 3/7/17 MIT Expo Spotlights Bitcoin Tech Concerns http://www.coindesk.com/save-the-nodes-mit-bitcoin-expo-spotlights-tech-challenges/ 3/8/17 Economic Implications of Chain Splits and Resolution https://medium.com/@alpalpalp/economic-implications-of-chain-splits-and-resolution-539c5fd0bc0c 3/8/17 Chain Splits and Resolutions https://medium.com/@alpalpalp/chain-splits-and-resolutions-d3398bddf4ab 3/9/17 How Bitcoin Unlimited ( $BTU) will be erased https://medium.com/@WhalePanda/how-bitcoin-unlimited-btu-will-be-erased-169977ecb3bb 3/9/17 Coinbase, Bitfinex Would List Bitcoin Unlimited As “Altcoin” After Soft Fork: Mow https://cointelegraph.com/news/coinbase-bitfinex-would-list-bitcoin-unlimited-as-altcoin-after-soft-fork-mow 3/10/17 Bitcoiners, get your priorities straight. https://medium.com/@thepiratewhocantbenamed/bitcoiners-get-your-priorities-straight-a2297b870095 3/10/17 On the recent bout of malleated transactions https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5yojyp/on_the_recent_bout_of_malleated_transactions/ 3/10/17 Reflections on Scaling and Bitcoin Protocol Development https://cryptoinsider.com/reflections-scaling-bitcoin-protocol-development/ 3/11/17 Nobody Understands Bitcoin (And That's OK) http://www.coindesk.com/nobody-understands-bitcoin-thats-ok/ 3/12/17 Bitcoin Miners Signal Revolt Amid Sluggish Blockchain https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-13/bitcoin-miners-signal-revolt-in-push-to-fix-sluggish-blockchain 3/12/17 Flag day activation of segwit [shaolinfry] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-March/013714.html 3/13/17 The Road to One Megabyte https://medium.com/@bergealex4/the-road-to-one-megabyte-b3912a9dee3e 3/13/17 How to destroy bitcoin in 8 steps: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5z4l3e/how_to_destroy_bitcoin_in_8_steps 3/13/17 Ways to enhance Post-fork withering of Core chain [/u/gavinandresen] https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5z7wzj/ways_to_enhance_postfork_withering_of_core_chain/dewynk0/ 3/14/17 Divisive ‘Bitcoin Unlimited’ Solution Crashes After Bug Discovered https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-15/divisive-bitcoin-unlimited-solution-crashes-after-bug-exploit 3/14/17 CoinDesk Explainer: The Bitcoin Unlimited Debate http://www.coindesk.com/coindesk-explainer-bitcoin-unlimited-debate/ 3/14/17 Bitcoin is. And that is enough. https://medium.com/bitcoin-think/bitcoin-is-and-that-is-enough-e3116870eed1 3/14/17 Why Bitcoin Node Statistics Aren’t Trustworthy https://medium.com/@jimmysong/why-bitcoin-node-statistics-arent-trustworthy-5882d9a9d2bf 3/15/17 Why Bitcoin Unlimited should be correctly classified as an ‘attempted robbery’ of Bitcoin, not a fork https://medium.com/@Coinosphere/why-bitcoin-unlimited-should-be-correctly-classified-as-an-attempted-robbery-of-bitcoin-not-a-9355d075763c 3/15/17 Someone Wants to Stick a Fork in Bitcoin https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-16/someone-wants-to-stick-a-fork-in-bitcoin 3/15/17 Community Reacts to Bitcoin Unlimited Bug, Calls For SegWit Activation https://cointelegraph.com/news/community-reacts-to-bitcoin-unlimited-bug-calls-for-segwit-activation 3/15/17 'Super UASF': Could a Clever Idea Break Bitcoin's Scaling Deadlock? http://www.coindesk.com/could-the-super-uasf-break-bitcoins-scaling-deadlock/ 3/15/17 Cypherpunk tears are shed for Bitcoin https://keepingstock.net/cypherpunk-tears-are-shed-for-bitcoin-86e32ea61757 3/15/17 Bitcoiners: make no mistake! Even though it is very likely that BTU is now going the same way as XT and Classiccoin the re-centralization attempts will not stop. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5zgt72/bitcoiners_make_no_mistake_even_though_it_is_very/ 3/15/17 A Fork in the Road https://vinnylingham.com/a-fork-in-the-road-70288fd3c046 3/16/17 Bitcoin's Scaling Debate is Devolving Into an All-Out Twitter War http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-scaling-debate-devolving-twitter-war/ 3/17/17 Bitcoin Exchanges Unveil Hard Fork Contingency Plan http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-exchanges-unveil-emergency-hard-fork-contingency-plan/ 3/17/17 Adam, Greg, Core Devs and big blockers.. Now is the time for compromise. [maaku7] https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5zxjza/adam_greg_core_devs_and_big_blockers_now_is_the/df275yk/ Coinbase responds to industry letter. 3/18/17 https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/606fot/coinbase_responds_to_industry_letter/?sort=controversial Why Coinbase didn't sign the industry letter 3/18/17 https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6060i2/why_coinbase_didnt_sign_the_industry_letter 3/18/17 How can we solve replay attacks in the event of a hard fork https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6065id/how_can_we_solve_replay_attacks_in_the_event_of_a 3/19/17 BIP for the mandatory activation of segwit by shaolinfry https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/60a8ya/bip_for_the_mandatory_activation_of_segwit_by Jihan Wu's latest Weibo post looks like an offer to negotiate 3/20/17 https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/60gem4/jihan_wus_latest_weibo_post_looks_like_an_offe 3/20/17 What happens to my bitcoins in TREZOR after a hard fork? https://blog.trezor.io/contingency-plan-bitcoin-hard-fork-b6ce85cde028 3/20/17 My name is Meni Rosenfeld and I support Bitcoin Core. https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/60jf4p/my_name_is_meni_rosenfeld_and_i_support_bitcoin 3/20/17 What would happen for Ledger hardware wallet users in case of a Bitcoin fork https://medium.com/@Ledger/what-would-happen-for-ledger-hardware-wallet-users-in-case-of-a-bitcoin-fork-3b955a065d57 11/13/18 Bitmain No Longer Under Influence of Jihan Wu, Says Lawyer https://bitcoinist.com/bitmain-jihan-wu-no-influence/ 2/12/19 cypherdoc: "i think BU is dead. i don't say that with glee as i helped conceptualize and financially supported it. i just think they're exhausted." https://bitco.in/forum/threads/gold-collapsing-bitcoin-up.16/page-1359#post-88359 2/19/19 Mining Giant Bitmain Posts $500 Million Loss in IPO Financial Filing https://www.coindesk.com/mining-giant-bitmain-posts-500-million-loss-in-ipo-financial-filing LMK your favorites and I'll update the list! We need entries for Oct/Nov/Dec 2015. There's a blank space there, but I'm sure plenty of notable events occurred in those months.

2859

Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Estranged Core Developer Gavin Andresen Finally Makes Sensible 2MB BIP Proposal!

on: January 31, 2016, 08:50:55 AM

Quote from: ATguy on January 31, 2016, 08:25:28 AM ...people realized Bitcoin Core main plan is basically stop possibility of further Bitcoin adoption... You must have missed the #ScalingBitcoin conferences. TLDR: Coffees will return, Bitcoin adoption future so bright better wear shades! https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/43dlkp/can_anyone_explain_why_people_dont_believe_segwit/czieadu Quote [–]adam3us There is also lightning which should come online pretty soon now (before IBLT & weak-blocks say). And a number of incremental things that can be soft-forked much faster into seg-wit with it's new extensibility. Like schnorr multisigs that compact 2 of 2 or n of n multiSigs into the space of a single signature. We should be able to estimate the throughput boost from that based on the multiSig ratios that go into the 1.75-2MB estimate. There are other things also like elidable pubkeys so miners can choose to tradeoff validation cost (from loss of batch verifiability) for more compact space. The elided public keys can be reconstructed with a small CPU cost. Some other things are possible also. People should just calm down and talk with developers. All in there is a fantastic roadmap for scale and layer2 things coming online that really move the needle even for new high scale transaction use cases. Not a time to be doing ugly bandaids that actually make scale worse mid-term and risk alienating the people with the expertise to make the scale happen. Quote from: ATguy on January 31, 2016, 08:25:28 AM ...bad intentions... Only the code matters. Speculation about motivations is not code. Quote from: ATguy on January 31, 2016, 08:25:28 AM ...worse for Bitcoin than Mike leaving... https://medium.com/@WasintMe3/everything-you-never-wanted-to-know-about-blockstream-s-new-boss-pricewaterhousecoopers-716d46d3257b#.fqfokdtvk ...damage for Bitcoin... Hearn@gnome.zurich.ch leaving was great for Bitcoin (although he'll return eventually, like herpes). Bitcoin leans into damage and emerges stronger. That's why we call it "antifragile." I'm happy to see how hard you are pushing the weak 'ZOMG PwC' FUD. Scraping the bottom of the FUD barrel like that tells us the latest bout of insurgency is almost over, and we can relax until the next time contentious hard forking and governance coups are hot on Reddit. PwC is an ideal opportunity to demonstrate the transformative power of Bitcoins and blockchains. They will show the world what it looks like when "everyone gets to benefit from sane and non-inflationary financial instutions whose sanity and honesty are ensured by the holy blockchain."

2860

Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another?

on: January 31, 2016, 07:41:26 AM

Quote from: BitUsher on January 30, 2016, 11:43:21 PM To give Garzik a little bit of credit , he attempted to raise the the threshold to a slightly better number of 80% but was shutdown by Olivier Janssens in a couple minutes with support of the ~~lead~~ classic dev https://twitter.com/_jonasschnelli_/status/693461617296678912 https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/pull/60#issuecomment-177162092 It doesn't appear that Classic will budge to the concerns to the miners wanting at least 90%. Thanks for the reconnaissance about the predictable, yet still hilarious, internal division at Classic HQ. I suspect the optimally bad 75% is being enforced for reasons which are not yet public. Perhaps like XT, Classic is only a probing attack, not intended to succeed but only for gathering info on the Core Defense Network and small block militia. Garzik, as you note, has a brain, so he seems like a bad fit over there. Who is this Olivier Janssens assclown, and why would he have "final call" authority above Garzik's? Oh I see, he's some toxic, bigoted, ratfucking VC schmuck that plays sugar daddy to the anti-Core insurgency. I look forward to seeing his head mounted in Mircea's trophy case, right next to Hearn's.

Pages: « 1 ... 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 [143] 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 ... 510 »