moli> smooth: want to see something funny?
*lulz intensify*
ceti my friend, thank you for posting that. It led me to the comedy gold at https://dashtalk.org/threads/good-thing-yall-started-publishing-dash-materials-in-russian-looks-like-irina-stumbled-on-them.7594/in which camosoul, oaxaca, and sangoku completely lose their shit (to the chagrin of the rest of the forum) in deranged, misogynistic ranting. Talk about thin skinned. I never realized the CoinJoin/DarkSend relationship was so touchy and highly controversial. Is that a Because GMAX thing?  I have no idea. At this point, it's probably best to consult the [ANN] thread for clarification. DailyDecrypt should devote an entire show to the scandalous history of Dash, with a special focus on the instamine and CoinJoin/DarkSend drama! I'd sponsor the hell out of that. PS Thanks to all DashHoles who voted to support Amanda's Monero advertisement/endorsement! Keep up the good work; decentralized governance FTW.  |
|
|
|
Okay great. Here come the big guns. Bye, bye!  There is a reason we don't use consider.it to design space shuttles...  ...but that reason is beyond the ken of Toominista contentious hard fork advocates. |
|
|
|
Mike Hearn says Bitcoin has failed meanwhile goes of to make his own blockchain  BWAH HA BWAH HAH HA HA HEE HEE EEEE HA HEE HAW BWAH AH AH HAH Mike Hearn has made himself a laughingstock for the ages. As for the OP,  Bonus points for first 1337 hax0rz (pwnd Hitler's boxen):  |
|
|
|
The core development team had more than enough time now to design a version of Bitcoin that allows scalability.
Core has already designed "a version of Bitcoin that allows scalability." They have been testing Segwit, Elements (sidechains), and Lightning since last year. _Classic is the faction trying to roll back RBF and CLTV. Oh wait, you are a Toomininsita and thus don't give a shit about exhaustive testing for new features being added to a consensus-critical distributed database. 2MB blocks "don't require much testing" so we should just roll them out Right Fucking Now, right? Thanks for reminding the good people of Yorba Linda why _Classic is #R3KT.  |
|
|
|
I'm not advocating for any third party. My interests are my own as a long time participant and investor in BTC. This is the only info I have directly from BitFury:  So you don't have the faintest idea whether or not Bitfury supports RBF/CLTV/SEGWIT/Lightning/sidechains, yet still presume their interests congruent to your own. Thank you for illustrating exactly why _Classic is already #REKT, and why Valery should stick to making low level decisions in Verilog. |
|
|
|
Because this is a consensus based community, anything that is more complex than 1+1=2 will not be able to reach consensus simply because not every participants have time to understand complex schemes. 2MB is most possible to reach major consensus right now
This does not justify the situation. I'm pretty sure that 99% of the users do not correctly know how the underlying math and hashing works yet they believe in the security and privacy (pseudo anonymity) of Bitcoin. This is why people without a IT background should not be deciding on these matters and making illogical moves. Choosing 2 MB blocks over SegWit is very redundant. Maybe you could offer your services to BitFury and talk some sense into them Lauda. They obviously know nothing about IT backgroundscaping. Please clarify whether BitFury is in favor of plain old non-segwit 2MB blocks, or 2MB tx + 6MB witness blocks. And what about RBF/CLTV? You do know which it is, right? I'm sure you would never presume to advocate for a third party's position on which you are not perfectly clear. |
|
|
|
Don't worry... The "socioeconomic majority" is standing-by to get the chiners back in line if they don't know what is best for them... capiche??? *nipple rubbing intensifies* Isn't it reeeeeally not faaaaaair that nobody can DDOS Bitcoin, but _Classic is going to be nuked with state-backed (La Serenissima) agency levels of IP fury? How terrrrrrible that anyone stupid enough to attack Bitcoin and risk $5 billion of other people's money in catastrophic consensus failure will be obliterated. UDP is permissionless? Aaaaawwwee, tough luck little fellah. Coinbase is built to withstand 100Gb/s DDOS? That's cute. MP is probably building a Starkiller Base capable of hitting all attacking nodes, Coinbase, and the rest of the Blockchain Alliance with 500Gb/s for weeks. When Coinbase's ISP/CDN/COLO get turned into smoking, glowing craters and Brian is told to find other providers to paint a giant target on, that's going to entail a lot of downtime. If you understand Bitcoin at all, you understand it necessarily confers all possible advantages to its defenders, and all possible disadvantages to attackers. EG: How many dollars and customers does Coinbase lose every minute it's down? How much reputation and potential business does it lose with every " Coinbase blasted off the internet!" story in the press and electronic media? I don't know, but I'm sure it's much more than Coinbase's investors want to lose in a futile, aggressive war of choice. That's right, all Toominista IPs are without regard to race/creed/nationality going to be DDOS'ed into subatomic particles. UDP is blessedly colorblind. And if you recall, Hearn is the asshat that proposed "Chinese Bitcoin" when f2pool objected to 20MB Gavinblocks. Don't even try to pin Hearn@gnome.zurich.ch's Yellow Peril Sinophobe nonsense on Team Core and the small block militia. That dog won't hunt. |
|
|
|
Give us the emails Lebowski!  |
|
|
|
I will start by examining the Cryptonote Penalty Function for oversize blocks. This is critical to understand any form of spam attack against a Cryptonote coin. From the Cryptonote whitepaper I cited above the penalty function is:
Penalty = BaseReward (BlkSize / MN - 1)2
The new reward is:
NewReward = BaseReward - Penalty
Where MN is the median of the blocksize over the last N blocks
BlkSize is the size of the current block
BaseReward is the reward as per the emission curve or where applicable the tail emission
NewReward is the actual reward paid to the miner
The Maximum allowed blocksize, BlkSize, is 2MN
The penalty is only applied when BlkSize > (1 + Bmin) MN Where 0 < Bmin < 1 In the Cryptonote whitepaper Bmin = 0.1.
The error in the Cryptonote Whitepaper was to set NewReward = Penalty
For simplicity I will define:
BlkSize = (1+B) MN
BaseReward = Rbase
Penalty (for a given B) = PB
NewReward (for a given B) = RB
The penalty for a given B becomes:
PB = RbaseB2
While the new reward for a given B becomes:
RB = Rbase(1 - B2)
The first derivative of PB with respect to B is
dPB / dB = 2RbaseB
In order to attack the coin by bloating the blocksize the attacker needs to cause at least over 50% of the miners to mine oversize blocks and for an expedient attack close to 100% or the miners to mine oversize blocks. This attack must be a maintained over a sustained period of time and more importantly must be maintained in order to keep the oversized blocks, since once the attack stops the blocks will fall back to their normal size. There are essentially two options here:
1) A 51% attack. I am not going to pursue this for obvious reasons.
2) Induce the existing miners to mine oversize blocks. This is actually the more interesting case; however after cost analysis it becomes effectively a rental version of 1 above. Since the rate of change (first derivative) of PB is proportional to B the most effective option for the attacker is to run the attack with B = 1. The cost of the attack has as a lower bound Rbase but would be higher, and proportional to, Rbase because miners will demand a substantial premium over the base reward to mine the spam blocks due to the increased risk of orphan blocks as the blocksize increases and competition from legitimate users whose cost per KB for transaction fees needed to compete with the attacker will fall as the blocksize increases. The impact on the coin is to stop new coins from being created while the attack is going on. These coins are replaced by the attacker having to buy coins on the open market in order to continue the attack. The impact of this is to further increase the costs to the attacker.
It at this point where we see the critical importance of a tail emission since if Rbase = 0 this attack has zero cost and the tragedy of the commons actually occurs. This is the critical difference between those Cryptonote coins that have a tail emission, and have solved the problem, such as Monero and those that do not, and will in a matter of time become vulnerable, such as Bytecoin.
TYVM for that. I've been (not really) looking for something to link the "Adaptive Blocksize" part of my sig to, and voila, here it is. All hail the LazyNet! |
|
|
|
He's not going to apologise and this is probably secretly what he wanted.
I dont think there is much of a "secret" about it. Its not a conspiracy or anything, its just really hard to assume that he had no idea about short/midterm consequences of his actions. Unless he is really just a butthurt manchild who performed a ragequit without much of a backthought. Mike Hearn's blog post is the absolute perfect example of a raging narcissist throwing a fit. His post will go down in time as one of the stupidest acts made by someone with his intelligence and influence. We will be reading and laughing about him for decades to come. We will be reading and laughing about him for decades to come. So say we all. Hearn@sigint.google.mil has set the bar for whiny rage quitting so high, we shall not see his like again.  |
|
|
|
I appreciate Mike Hearn a great deal. Stopped reading right there. |
|
|
|
 Blockstream/Core supporters seem to be encouraging DDOS attacks on Classic Nodes Aaaawwwe, are you inconsolably despondent over the fact _Classic is not and never will be antifragile like Bitcoin? DDOS Attacks! FUD! Lying! Threatening! Intimidation! *nipple rubbing intensifies*  Isn't it reeeeeally not faaaaaair that nobody can DDOS Bitcoin, but _Classic is going to be nuked with state-backed (La Serenissima) agency levels of IP fury? How terrrrrrible that anyone stupid enough to attack Bitcoin and risk $5 billion of other people's money in catastrophic consensus failure will be obliterated. UDP is permissionless? Aaaaawwwee, tough luck little fellah. Coinbase is built to withstand 100Gb/s DDOS? That's cute. MP is probably building a Starkiller Base capable of hitting all attacking nodes, Coinbase, and the rest of the Blockchain Alliance with 500Gb/s for weeks. When Coinbase's ISP/CDN/COLO get turned into smoking, glowing craters and Brian is told to find other providers to paint a giant target on, that's going to entail a lot of downtime. If you understand Bitcoin at all, you understand it necessarily confers all possible advantages to its defenders, and all possible disadvantages to attackers. EG: How many dollars and customers does Coinbase lose every minute it's down? How much reputation and potential business does it lose with every " Coinbase blasted off the internet!" story in the press and electronic media? I don't know, but I'm sure it's much more than Coinbase's investors want to lose in a futile, aggressive war of choice. |
|
|
|
bad or not bad,Coinbase is used by the most US bitcoiners  I agree. And Wal-Mart sells a lot of smartphones. But they don't tell Apple and Samsung how to design them.  ~ Companies like Coinbase and Circle need to stick with retailing, and let core focus on design unmolested. Retailers should retail, miners should mine, and core should develop. Or they could contribute back to the community like Red Hat, since they have $100 million to run a business built on FOSS that other people wrote for them. |
|
|
|
Wouldn't you say that the proposal sounds a little more reasonable now that Hearn is gone though? I'm still surprised that prominent miners show support towards "Bitcoin Classic" despite the fact that it hasn't been developed yet.
Eschewing modern features which form the foundation for scaling (RBF/SEGWIT/CLTV/Lightning/Sidechains), in favor of a trivial TPS increase and catastrophic consensus failure, is not in any way "reasonable." Not even a little bit! |
|
|
|
To be fair, he never said it was "dead". Here's what he said:
But despite knowing that Bitcoin could fail all along, the now inescapable conclusion that it has failed still saddens me greatly. The fundamentals are broken and whatever happens to the price in the short term, the long term trend should probably be downwards.
Right now, I agree that the fundamentals are broken as long as there is a civil war going over scalability. However, that can change and it can change quickly. How quickly is up to us. The now commonplace, everyday miracle that is Bitcoin works fine, great even. Your FUD about 'zomg borken fundurrmentals' is ridiculous. Controversy is orthogonal, if not congenial (because Bitcoin runs on drama), to network health. Idiot Gavinistas, Tooministas, and Buttcoiners (is there really a difference?) whining loudly does not affect the system's integrity. |
|
|
|
As a well known belligerent and long time cheerleader here... You've lost the right and legitimacy to ask for or demand anything.
See how that works?
No. You even had me down as a "Cryptsy apologist" and have seen fit to band that accusation liberally around bitcointalk when I'm on record both here and on BTCe trollbox as having made some some of the earliest registered adverse appraisals of their exchange integrity. Maybe you should get in touch with your pal, bigrcanada because the sh*t that comes off your keyboard could fertilise his vineyards for a whole year so you might be able to put it to some good use It was your decision to bandy about BigVern's rebuttal to Coinfire, which you characterized as him "firing back" - thus invoking a frame that entailed him having metaphorical ammunition in the form of valid points. And we all know how that turned out. Downplay your white knighting and water-carrying for Big Vern's scam exchange all you want. But Pepperidge Farm will remember, and so will all those who lost coins to Craptsy. |
|
|
|
I am buying validated/active accounts for github, bitcoinclassic.consider.it, and bitcoinclassic.com. PM offers and help my Sybil (counter)attack! Time to infiltrate Camp_Classic and spread mayhem by loudly supporting the less popular side of their most controversial issues.  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
