I haven't been following much of Bitcoin for a while now. Is what I read true that the Bitcoin network has lots of congestion and that transactions take too long?
No, that's not true. It's FUD generated for the sake of manufacturing dissent. Bitcoin is just starting to work exactly as intended. Properly competitive fees have never stopped granting proportionate transaction priority (IE, efficiently allocating scarce resources). But fee market maturation, sufficient to ween Bitcoin off its declining block reward subsidies, is a worst-case doomsday scenario for Hearn's BIS Bankster buddies. |
|
|
|
I will no longer be taking part in Bitcoin development and have sold all my coins. - Mike Hearn Mike Hearn, if you want to work on an exciting crypto currency with a strategy for the future, DASH could be just what you're looking for. Oh dear lord please ^this^.  |
|
|
|
I think it is a bit soon to give up on bitcoin. He's just too butthurt that his XT project failed...as it should have. For once we agree. *looks outside; observes flying pigs* |
|
|
|
It is pretty funny you believe the new Bitcoin will lead to more centralised direction, yet all your post has totalitarian view with a lot of censorship suggested to keep control in what you believe to be best for Bitcoin regardless of outside support - basically a tyran description. It is very surprising here are so many people with totalitarian view when Bitcoin is meant to be libertarian project instead...
Yes, you summarised it pretty succinctly there. They will never see the incongruity of condoning censorship in 'censorship resistant' Bitcoin. Indeed, a lot of the anger displayed by the likes of iCE, brg, et al. can be explained as being a result of the mental stress they suffer from this cognitive dissonance. Who are you trying to fool? I haven't stopped grinning since hearing the fantastic news about Hearn's rage-quit and rage-dump. His Bitcoin Obituary Medium post of epic poutrage provided more schadenfreude than I can remember previously experiencing. Who is going to make the 'final call' for Gavinista vanity forks now? Garzik? I must admit that's an improvement. Hearn@sigint.google.mil (or is it Hearn@gnome.zurich.ch now?) taking his ball and going home doesn't come remotely close to making up for Core's loss of Gmax, but that won't stop me from having the shitlord's head stuffed and mounted in my trophy case. Aww, poor Mikey didn't get is way! Nobody except Galvin, Frap.doc, and Peter_R cared about his demands for blacklists, checkpoints, and contentious hard forks. |
|
|
|
Don't let the Gavinistas get you down. We stand together!  Still as true now as it was 5 months ago. Bitcoin Classic is an altcoin as far as I'm concerned. The deleted post was very obviously about this altcoin, not about any of the changes within it which might otherwise be relevant to Bitcoin.
If you disagree with me, fine. But that doesn't change the fact that this sort of software is considered off-topic on /r/Bitcoin. Take it elsewhere.
My deletion of this meta post was consistent with my past actions and policies. Since Bitcoin Classic is an altcoin, it should be obvious that it would be removed, and posts about this mod action would be off-topic and removed, similarly to how a post like "Censored: front page thread about Litecoin" would be removed. I expressed this exact policy to moderators 7 months ago. However, since some feel that this situation is somehow different, I will not delete this particular post again, and we can have a discussion about it.
Also, Bitcoin Core has no influence over /r/Bitcoin policies.
* iCEBREAKER awards /u/thermos Bitcointalk Gold* While it is technically/economically possible for a hardfork to succeed even despite controversy, this would mean that some significant chunk of the economy has been disenfranchised: the rules that they originally agreed on have effectively been broken, if they want to continue using Bitcoin as they were before. What happened to the dream of a currency untouchable by human failings and corruption? How will we know that the bitcoins we own today will be valid tomorrow, when the rules of Bitcoin have no real solidity? The 21 million BTC limit is technically just as flexible as the max block size; given this, why should anyone ever consider Bitcoin to be a good store of value if these rules are changeable even despite significant opposition?
Especially if these controversial hardforks succeed despite containing changes that have been rejected by the technical community, or if they happen frequently, I can't see Bitcoin surviving. How would anyone be able to honestly say that Bitcoin has any value at all in these circumstances?
Therefore, I view it as absolutely essential that the Bitcoin community and infrastructure ostracize controversial hardforks. They should not be considered acceptable except maybe in cases of dire need when there is no other way for Bitcoin to survive. It's impossible to technically prevent contentious hardforks from being attempted or even succeeding, but that doesn't mean that we need to view them as acceptable or let them use our websites for promotion.
Also, I feel like it's pretty clear that the 50BTC-forever fork was not Bitcoin by any reasonable definition, since Bitcoin has no more than 21 million BTC, so I disagree with your proposed classification scheme for that reason as well.
 |
|
|
|
 The eyes of Szaboshi are upon us. Quick, everyone look busy!  |
|
|
|
Pretty crazy to see XMR's marketcap being only 12.207 btc whilst it's ranked number 7 on coingecko.com. First coin having a lower marketcap is number 14, which is ftc. Talking about undervalued! Check it out: https://www.coingecko.com/enI think the (comparative) undervaluation is intentionally created by XMR's aggressive early emission schedule, so everyone can get a nice stack of cheap early coins and start bootstrapping ASAP. Thanks for reminding me to post this: https://monerohash.com/nodes-distribution.htmlMonero is a tiny newborn baby in terms of full nodes and global distribution (WTF Australia/India/Brazil? Get with it!).  If Szabo or another crypto-celebrity blessed Monero with just half of the public attention he's directed towards ETH, node number could easily rise by an order of magnitude or two. Even without some famous person's endorsement, we have nowhere to go but up, up, up! |
|
|
|
If classic reaches 51 percent, the rest will follow soon. The process is absolutely transparent.
That is incorrect. Due to the presence of spoofed Not_Classic and Pseudo_Classic nodes, the process is absolutely opaque. Uncertainty about the authenticity/provenance/intent of Gavinblocks creates a moment of maximized risk, at the exact time (potential) defectors from Core's socioeconomic majority most need reassurance they will not lose coins when the attacking chain is orphaned. Are you going to read OrganOfCorti's definitive study on the subject, or am I going to have to re-explain this every 6 months when the latest trendy Gavinista vanity fork fad comes along? It's like Groundhog Day, but with Gavin's Reddit Army replacing Chris Elliot Which is fine, because you goofy lolcows are almost as hilariously daft. |
|
|
|
Theymos doesn't kneel, he doesn't sacrifice and is willing to stand up for what HE believes to be true, rather than some external authority. I hold r/Bitcoin would be coddled into a cult of personality worshipping Gavin Andresen without I purposely picking Theymos for the role he has.
Would I do exactly what Theymos is doing if I was still addicted to Bitcoin and moderating that hellhole? Nope but I endorse his self-esteem and I endorse the idea of 90% of r/Bitcoin leaving its subreddit and creating new realms of thought.
This is I taking responsibility for what I can take responsibility for: Enabling Theymos to be doing what he is currently doing. No, if I did it over again I would not have gave the subreddit to a developer zealot. I would probably give it to Theymos every time because I do not know a more committed person that has a truly spiritual interest in the community.
 |
|
|
|
I think people should have a clear understanding that a fork without major consensus will double the money supply thus break the fundamental promise of limited total money supply of bitcoin, it is just self destruction. Everyone should make sure to kill it immediately when it shows up
A fork that requires 75% of the last 1000 blocks will be over pretty quickly. The <25% jump ship to the main fork or are stuck mining worthless coins at a huge difficulty for a long time before adjustment. If they survive that... they are at a constant risk of being attacked by the greater power of the 75% hashers. This is how Bitcoin works... it's there in the whitepaper. You don't know how Bitcoin variance works. Much less than an actual 75% of mining power may will inevitably get lucky and prematurely trigger a fork. But as that variance is smoothed out over time by reversion to normal distribution, the >25% remaining miners will inevitably orphan the attacking Gavinista blockchain by solving several consecutive 1MB blocks. Here is your next remedial lesson on Bitcoin Civil Wars: Please hurry and catch up to the rest of the class. You are (at minimum) 4.5 months behind.  |
|
|
|
LOL. Comical Ali from the Front National still believes that their alliance with North Korea will win the battle.
NK is Marxist; FN opposes Marxists. Most people realize Internationalists and Nationalists do not usually form alliances. Poor Zarathustra, he knows so little about politics, history, and philosophy he must endure existing in a dimly lit fog of confusion, lashing out at his superiors. Parents, please read to your children so they don't grow up to be as colossally ignorant as pitiful ZarAss. Zarathustra  |
|
|
|
The Old English word gedæfte, which means "mild" or "gentle," is the root of the word deftly, whose meaning still has that sense of doing something both skillfully and gently, or effortlessly. So now you know.  You skillfully, gently, and effortlessly substitute XT for your real fear, which is now Bitcoin Classic. A distinction you are cautious to publicly ignore, for good reason. You, of all people, know I have been more of a Garzik guy than a Hearn guy and never was stridently supportive of XT... even during the days of the gold thread that shall not be named. If a fork happens... Mircea dumps his "gavincoins" and keeps the worthless ones, I get it. We get cheap coinz in the moment his rage is absorbed. Happy and heady days. Thanks for the copypasta lecture, but I already knew what "deftly" means, which is why I corrected your misuse of the term. My referencing of XT and the passing of its all-but-unnoticed trigger date was if anything pointed, not (particularly or remarkably) "skillful, gentle, or effortless." I have no idea, nor do I care, what your relationship with Garzik/Hearn/XT was or is. You are welcome to trade all your Bitcoins for Gavincoins. But be warned, MP isn't going to just sit back and let the Gavinistas (believe they) control the blockchain for a second longer than he wants them to.... |
|
|
|
Deftly keep referring to XT, while Bitmain, BW, (BTCC?), OKcoin, Coinbase are giving support to a simple BIP 102 type bump to Core 0.11 in the form of Classic. Have you asked MP his opinion on the Power Ranger's roadmap? Any big exchanges and miners signed on to the roadmap? (Not sure if Blockstream counts as big, is anyone using Liquid yet?) The MP suicide short is a great incentive to have fiat on the exchange when a fork happens. Like "opportunity of a lifetime" style if he has the stones to do it. (I'm doubtful anyone would take the trouble to list the <25% chain... but if they do, I bet I won't be the only one on the other end of that trade.) "Deftly?" You aren't using that word correctly. Consult a dictionary before you try to match my vocabulary. And read more books. You don't understand how the Gavincoin Short works. At minimum, all that is required is for an exchange (or merchant) to accept my Gavincoins, while my Bitcoins stay safely in the Trezor. No fiat is required. Please learn WTF you are talking about before spewing misinformation. I'm "deftly" (lol such tryhard fuckwit) referring to XT because its Jan 11 trigger date just passed, without even 1 in 1000 recent blocks mined in its favor. Don't you think XT's wimpering nothingburger of a demise is worth remarking upon? Or would you prefer everyone ignore and forget that embarrassing failure? So some large pools/miners/exchanges support a bump to 2MB, in addition to a few of the soundly defeated Gavinistas. Let's see them agree on the timing of that bump, the (contentious?) percent required to trigger its hardfork, and the algorithm (or lack thereof) for future increases.
Done? Good. Now the Gavinista-Redditurd Joint Engineering Committee must decide on whether or not to include RBF (and what flavor), SegWit, and CLTV. Good luck with that. One does not simply raise the blocksize. You should know that by now! |
|
|
|
"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.
Fear does funny things to people.
Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today? Or was that yesterday? Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event. Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be. The block size is still 1MB, and those in favor of changing cannot agree when to raise it, nor by how much, nor by what formula future increases should be governed. You are still soaking in glorious gridlock despite all the sound and fury, and I am loving every second of your agitation. We can't both be quite happy with how things are changing, because one of us keeps frantically trying to protect the status quo No comment on the XT activation date passing without so much as a single 101 block being mined? That's right, pretend it never happened. Nothing is actually changing, except for the nomenclature of [silly thing Gavinistas are hyping]. You are confusing signal and noise, just like Charlie Brown when Lucy convinces him to try kicking the football. If it push really comes to shove, which is still highly unlikely so long as Bitcoin Core continues Bitcoining without skipping a beat, MPEX's Gavincoin Short will stop _Classic just like it would destroy XT. |
|
|
|
If more and more new people start becoming aware of the fraudulent past (instamine and money supply cut)
New investors are not interested in what happened two years ago at launch. Sure, just like new Bitcoin investors are not interested in what happened 7 years ago at launch. They don't care about Satoshi's coins, right?  All investors are interested in the competence of the project leader, especially if that person is also the lead dev. Evan is so incompetent he didn't test his fork of Bitcoin (or was it Litecoin, or Peercoin?). Or he is so incompetent his testing failed to pick up on the instamine problem. And Even didn't bother to relaunch after the instamine disaster, being too incompetent to realize the instamine would forever stand out as a red flag, warning everyone about his incompetence. |
|
|
|
What I find troubling about Bitcoin Classic thus far is it appears more of a political wedge proposal instead of a technical one as people are voting on something without a BIP, whitepaper , or code available. What I like about it is there now is a competing implementation with some talented developers maintaining it which is great for our ecosystem. (BU and Libbitcoin need a lot of help, and XT has been deserted)
I will withhold judgment of Bitcoin classic's merits till at least a whitepaper is released.
So long as Bitcoin isn't broken, there is no problem for the (increasingly abstruse) universe of Gavinista vanity forks to fix. Bitcoin_Classic is vaporware, so people may project whatever properties they desire onto its nebulous cloud of anti-cyberpunk tropes. That approach didn't work for Unlimiturd, and _Classic is likewise an imaginary solution in search of a problem. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin classic = 2mb?
Um OK, let's do it.
There still isn't clarity if this is a 2MB kick the can proposal, and 2MB immediate, and 4MB later proposal , or and 2MB immediate and doubling every 2 years BIP 101 style proposal. (We are also unaware of the specifics to the hardfork transition) Since the normal BIP process isn't being followed and no whitepaper exists I cannot give my opinion on Bitcoin Classic. I would suggest that I do find it backwards and disheartening that so many are ACk'ing a proposal that isn't even clarified formally in either a whitepaper, BIP, or code which should all come before people judge it, IMHO. Voting for this at this moment appears to be more of a political anti-vote against core than any technical vote upon the merits of the proposal. Here, I'll clarify. 2MB immediate + 4MB later then stop = Bitcoin Pro Bitcoin Pro + double block limit every 2 years forever = Bitcoin Platinum Platinum + 90% trigger = Bitcoin Tournament Edition BTE - RBF + SegWit - CLTV = Bitcoin Coin of the Year Collectors Pack BCotYCP - checkpoints + TOR blacklists = Bitcoin XT Klassic Limited Edition BXTKLE + unlimited blocks right now + 42 million coin total emission - halvings = Gavinista Peoples' Front Bitcoin Christmas Bonus Special Offer of the Month Club Is that clear now? |
|
|
|
 Important System Notification
Phishing Attempt:: There is a phishing attempt going around prompting users to go to a cryptsy-refund website. Do not go to this website or give your login details on any website other than the official Cryptsy website. There were two avenues of the Phishing attempt. One was via SMS, using our provider Twilio and gained entry into our logs and sending ability via a weak password on that account. The passwords on this account have been secured. The other avenue was via email using the same mailing service we use (Mailgun), but was not sent using our account. It is uncertain where the email list for this Phishing attempt was attained from, as we do not show any unauthorized access to our Mailgun account nor our internal systems. We are still investigating this matter. If you were a victim of this phishing, you should log into your account at Cryptsy immediately and do the following: 1. Change your password and enable 2fa if you don’t already have it enabled. 2. Check your pending withdrawals, we currently have withdrawals disabled so if you see one that shouldn’t be there you can request to have it cancelled. Regarding other issues that have been apparent at Cryptsy for the last couple months, I will be making another post to explain what has been happening in the next couple days. BigVern UNTIL WE ARE ABLE TO DETERMINE EXTENT OF THE PHISHING ATTEMPT, ALL WITHDRAWALS ARE PAUSED
 |
|
|
|
"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.
Fear does funny things to people.
Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today? Or was that yesterday? Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event. Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be. The militant small block comedians already decided to raise the limit before the halving date, to 4 MB (to get 1.5 MB). Aww, so gullible. The Gavinistas think they're the only ones capable of manipulating public opinion via false narrative headfakes. It's like Charlie Brown and the football. Lucy outwits him. Every. Single. Time. |
|
|
|
And you're saying Marechal Le Pen is like a “guru or a mystic”? Waouh! I really want to vote for her now, let's all vote for the great guru Marechal! I see no difference between those people and the godwin point or Donald Trump for example, they're quite similar in fact. Such awful reading comprehension. Le sigh. *I* didn't say MMLP is like “guru or a mystic.” Although I did slip in a Joan d'Arc allusion earlier (just to tweak you Trotskyites, lel). The phrase was (as may be confirmed by placing your mouse cursor over the graciously provided link and clicking) reported by the The Guardian. That Manchester newspaper, which is functionally if not yet officially Labour's house organ, hates FN with the fury of a million supernovae. Please, continue to slander the increasingly large percentage of France's voting populace that resists your cultural Marxism. The more you misuse Socialist Worker bullet words, the less effective they become. That's why the howls of mainstream media protest have not, and will not, stop the FN steamroller. MMLP's good looks (plus the unrelenting migrant invasion and concomitant violence) don't hurt either.... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
