And for his next trick, Marshall Long will attempt to destroy Bitcoin by attacking it with an altcoin named Classic:

That 4% isn't given "for free."  It's an attempt to put the risk on devs, while giving them a chance to earn back/profit from what they already put into the project.

Developing and launching a project like this isn't cheap, and this is the most fair way to deal with that fact they could think of.

Can you do better?  Great.

It's not like they launched the dCred like Evan launched Dash, IE by surprise and with a broken emission system that granted them 20% off all the coins, then made it worse by lowering the maximum number of coins.

Anyone who wants to keep checking signatures is welcome to upgrade.

I don't remember anything about non-segregated (merged?) witness being part of Bitcoin's social contract.

Segwit probably would have been in the original version if Satoshi had the benefit of what we know now.

Segwit pays off technical debt (ie malleability is history, fancy new crypto-magics are now possible) and also gives a nice right-sized bump to the tx per second.

Win-win.  

OTOH, Classic's 2MB at the cost of unpredictable fork war chaos is lose-lose.

OK Frap.doc Junior, where's the citation for your outrageous/libelous "billionaire bribed Gmax to cripple Bitcon" claim?  No rush, we'll wait.

...

...

Anyway, Lightning is one possible implementation for the general idea of a payment channel.  It's like how there's more than one kind of band-aid, but there is the well-known official Band-Aid too (and they come in different shapes/sizes/fun designs/prices/materials).

If you don't know what write caches are and why it's a Very Good Thing for your CPU, hard drive, OS, and torrent client to each have one, you'll never understand, much less like, payment channels such as Lightning.  Sorry about that.   

As for side chains, you may be able to think of them like cities or counties within a state.  They can set their own local laws as they like, as long as they do not conflict with the nation they are part of.  Your Bitcoins have to obey the local laws while they are visiting a sidechain, but can leave if they don't like it.

Good luck in school.  I recommend doing eye care; it seems cushy.  A few minutes zapping with the Lazik, a few minutes chatting up the customers, and then you can spend the rest of the day posting about how much you love buying Frappucinos with Bitcoin discounts, and how Bitcoin will surely choke to death if tx fees at Starbucks ever went above 10 cents.

If Bitcoin can be destroyed by "inexperienced bankers" it doesn't deserve to live.  If Bitcoin can be crippled by "blockstream people" it doesn't deserve to live.

Notice: When the experiment ceases to be viable (ie provide useful information), it will be terminated and replaced with a new version utilizing appropriately modulated control variables.

^That's what Guy Corem and his brothers-in-arms are saying.

We'd love for SHA-256 to keep working for our Honey Badger, but if SHA-256 turns out to be fatally allergic to bee stings or cobras then it's time for an upgrade.

Consequently, this is Bitcoin Civil War 2 melodrama is much ado about nothing.

The SHA-256 miners will keep their jobs as the diligent, hard-working, and supremely well-paid security guards of the socioeconomic majority's Most Serene Republic.

But they will cease further forays into Palace Intrigue, because they are merely the current SHA-256 PoW means to the end of distributed antifragile Nakamoto Consensus.

There's nothing very special about the SHA-256 PoW.  Not anymore than there was about 1MB at the time it was selected as the max block size.

Bitcoin is not married to the SHA-256 PoW.  If there is a 51% mining attack by Toominista hard forkers, the Holy Blockchain is already at risk of catastrophic consensus failure, so the small block militia has little to lose and everything to gain by swapping out the centralized, compromised, and failing SHA-256 PoW for a different one. 

It's no different than replacing car's broken engine.  In the framework of the Bitcoinmobile, a new (and improved) PoW engine will still do its job, which is turning energy into Power.

It doesn't really matter if it's Scrypt, Cryptonote, constellations of prime numbers, Keccak (luke-jr) or the thing GPU-only Guy is proposing (I'm calling it CoreCycle).  All it has to be is at least as good as SHA-256, but not SHA-256.

If the SHA-256 miners try to be the boss of the Bitcoin owners, they will be fired.  Because they are so exquisitely specialized and thus completely vulnerable to PoW shift, they will quickly back down.  As mining profits have been driven down to marginal rates, SHA-256 miners cannot afford to risk missing a single 1MB block because they are fooling around with "not much testing needed" 2MB ones.

Who would understand that better than Guy Corem, CEO of Spondoolies?  _{(No points if you said 'Adam Back' or 'luke-jr!')}   

Liquid is a payment channel, not a pegged sidechain.  They are completely different things.  Do you not understand how Bitcoin works?

Please advice on your exact degree of technical incompetence so we may patiently better meet your educational deficit's requirements for amelioration.  Have you ever even used a compiler or written a script?

And what is the name of this billionaire who supposedly bribed Gmax to cripple Bitcoin?  Do you have a cite for that assertion?

You really should form opinions after learning the facts, not the other way around.   

I vote for Hueristic's enigmatic submission.

"[XMR] Monero - The Future, Fungible || Mandatory: v0.9.1"

People don't know what 'fungible' means because it has several (overlapping/conflicting/contextual/technical/economic/casual/controversial/radial) definitions.

That intriguing vagueness is a good thing.

People don't know exactly why being 'fungible' is so important , but they know it's from the future and they want it!   

Yes, Classic is renowned among crypto professionals for its agile, fail-fast "not much testing needed" approach.

Have the amateur ToominClowns started signing git commits yet?



I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Go tell BitcoinObituaries.com all about this week's d0000msday forecast.  Your Hearn@signit.google.mil style hand-wringing is a better ideological fit over there.   

No, this is how you do it.

Fixed?   

"[XMR] Monero - Secure, private, untraceable, fungible.  || Latest: v0.9.1"

By context we know it's a cryptocurrency, and (100%) fungibility is a key selling point.

Those sound like things that would require friendly regulation and licensing as a money service business.  Who will pay the army of lawyers and lobbyists needed for such an act of Deep Capture?

Good luck getting Dash^® approved for that stuff in New York, the one place where it absolutely must be accepted.

Dash^® should never have abandoned the original vision of Darkcoin, which was in line with Justus R's 'only System D matters' analytical razor.


Therefore, all the Dash^® bagholder blue sky daydreams about replacing WOW Gold^® and Visa^® are useless.

That doesn't make me a "greedy banker."  Rather, it makes me one who realizes the One True Holy Blockchain can keep the bankers' potentially-useful natural greed in check, by ensuring transparent and honest financial institutions.

I've always known the destiny of private-sector digital currency (eventually/ultimately to be known as "Bitcoin) is to replace central banking, by acting as an easily auditable 'digital gold' mother-of-all-settlement-networks.

Hal Finny said so 5 years ago.  Where have you been?  Do you think Bitcoin is here to replace commercial banking?  Or make it more profitable when parasitic start-ups resell expensive, externally-subsidized blockchain real estate to impress their institutional backers?

Do you think this is about replacing fucking Apple Pay and fucking Square hipster/yuppie/Person-of-Walmart consumer quotidian bullshit?   

Compare


to


Then consider the possibility you "FREE TX 4EVA" Tooministas are useful idiots for the R3 darkside, or, GTFO n000b!

IIRC there was discussion in a Monero thread about a feature tail emission was required for, or some attack it prevented.

As long as there is some cryptonote coin with no tail emission (preserving diversity of approaches and mitigating risk) I'm fine with BBR doing it.

But absent some immediately compelling reason, I'd table the motion until BBR's 10th birthday, then re-consider.

Dash's ostensible market cap isn't comparable to fairly launched 100% proof of work coins.

It's inflated by the insta-mined (+insta-mastered) coins nobody ever worked to produce nor paid market rates to acquire.

How long to you think the resistance at 0.01 will last?

After 0.01 defense fails, it's back to the bad old days of the 0.005- 0.006 range.  Or worse.

There are 2 kind of people around here.  Those who divide the people into two groups, and those who do not.

Here's the only feedback that matters:



Looks like the instamine beneficiaries took full advantage of the Evolution pump, just like the rebrand hype-and-crash cycle.

And/or the market is rejecting Evolution because it's just a roadmap.  People were expecting a unique new technology, not a heap of vaporware including lousy 'let's make yet another Sia/Storg/Maidsafe.'

DASH isn't well funded enough to do any of the Evolution projects well enough to beat specialized/well-funded competition in each category, yet alone do all of them.

Evolution is unicorns stacked on unicorns, all the way down.

It's easy for Evan to fool his largely self-deluding cheerleader and cultist bagholders.

Fooling the market for any extended period of time is a different story.

There will reversions to quality technological innovation, such as

https://github.com/ShenNoether/MiniNero/tree/master/brief (Ring Confidential Transactions).