Bitcoin Forum
May 20, 2019, 11:42:14 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
1  Other / Meta / Dash spamvertising - a call to action on: February 20, 2018, 10:22:03 PM
As you can see, paid Dash shills are continuously spamming the forum with in-post banner ad signatures.

These banner ads are often put into consecutive posts, an act that manages to violate three forum rules (no in-post sigs, no in-post advertisements, no consecutive posts) at once.

Despite being asked many times to follow those rules, Dash paidshill Joel "Niburuhybrid" Valenzuala refuses the stop spamvertising and obviously enjoys the full support of the Dash community, who like having their [ANN] thread bumped to the top.

Dear NibiruHybridDesertPaidShillLynx,

Please stop including the DashSpamForce advertising banner graphic at the bottom of all your posts, as our sysop has requested.

Ads are typically not allowed in posts (outside of the signature area) because they are annoying and off-topic. It is especially disallowed to put ads or signatures at the bottom of all of your posts. Except for traditional valedictions, which are tolerated but discouraged, signatures are for the signature area only.

Once again,

Please stop including the DashSpamForce advertising banner graphic at the bottom of all your posts, as our sysop has requested.

Ads are typically not allowed in posts (outside of the signature area) because they are annoying and off-topic. It is especially disallowed to put ads or signatures at the bottom of all of your posts. Except for traditional valedictions, which are tolerated but discouraged, signatures are for the signature area only.

Please merge these posts into one and stop using the banner advert as your in-post sig.  It belongs in your signature space (where we can turn it off).

The Dash community needs to step up and ask their PaidShill to follow the forum rules against putting banner ads in Every. Single. One. Of. His. Spamvertistment. Posts.

iCEBREAKER..... I've already wasted enough time on you for today. Here is my reply. Don't take my kindness for weakness.

iCEBREAKER you're only here to troll and cause trouble. It's so sad, pathetic and desparate. You really shouldn't throw stones when you live in a glass house.

Why spend so much of your time hating something when you could be enjoying life doing something you love. To provoke such a response over such an insignificant trivial matter only exposes how weak and low you have sunk. Not one other person has complained. You're on your own and in the minority here on issue raised to no surprise. The hard truth is it makes absolutely zero difference to your daily life if that banner is posted or not. If it truly upsets you that much then there is a simple solution, leave. No one is forcing you to be here and ironically no one wants you here either.

You're just lonely and I know you only do this as you want me to respond because you have nothing else in life. Just give it up. If anyone needs reporting to moderators it's you, as your posting history on bitcointalk is just a trollfest cesspit of misery.

I genuinely don't know if I should laugh or cry for you. You've been at this for years and haven't made the slighest difference. I honestly think you need medical help. This type of behaviour isn't normal. I'm worried for your mental health. In all seriousness it might be worth considering a psychiatric assessment.

The years you have spent stalking and trolling this thread amongst others on bitcointalk is borderline psychotic. What a waste of life and sad excuse of a man you are. Like a petulant child intentionally being a nuisance craving attention.

The resentful hatred and nature of your postings reeks of disgruntled rejection. Why would an individual be so motivated to troll for this length of time is truly disturbing. It's actually beyond trolling now. It's stalking. It's proper weird and creepy. You really need help. Focus your time resolving the personal issue that led to this behaviour. Whatever happened to you whether it was a relationship breakdown, unemployment, perceived failure, depression, embarrassment or social isolation. You need to fix.

Just let it go and finally.....

I'm not sure why you cannot follow such a simple rule.  Do you think it makes Dash look good when it pays Shills like you to spam Bitcointalk?

It also makes the Dash community look bad when they refuse to ask their PaidShills to follow the forum rules against banner ads being used as in-post signatures.

That's two in a row, on the same day.  You don't need to make separate posts for each new spamvertisement.  Just edit your first one and add the second one.  No need to keep spamming the forum just to prove you can get away with it.

Ads are typically not allowed in posts (outside of the signature area) because they are annoying and off-topic. It is especially disallowed to put ads or signatures at the bottom of all of your posts. Except for traditional valedictions, which are tolerated but discouraged, signatures are for the signature area only.

Despite repeatedly being asked nicely, Dash Spam Force PaidShill NiburuHybrid continues to ignore the forum rule against using banner ad graphics in every one of his posts and the forum rule against consecutive posts.

Stop spamming this banner ad at the end of your posts.  Doing so is against the rules of this forum.  You've already been told this fact and asked to stop several times.

Ads are typically not allowed in posts (outside of the signature area) because they are annoying and off-topic. It is especially disallowed to put ads or signatures at the bottom of all of your posts. Except for traditional valedictions, which are tolerated but discouraged, signatures are for the signature area only.
2  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Dash Fails To Scale: Can't Even Handle 1600 Transactions Per Day on: February 16, 2018, 05:39:48 PM

Despite being marketed as 'better than Bitcoin' and hyping its 'me-too' 2mb max blocksize, Dash's core wallet fails under the light pressure of fewer than 100 transactions per hour.

The owner of a Dash gambling site (and Masternode) reports:

This report is corroborated by another site (and Masternode) owner who also can't get his Dash server to handle a meager 1000-2000 tx per day.

Incompetent Dash Core devs broke the code they copied from Bitcoin Core so badly that dashd can't even do 100 transactions per hour and has to be manually restarted every 5 minutes! Grin

That is what happens when a project prioritizes marketing (and paying shills to spam this forum) over development.

Dash  Embarrassed
3  Economy / Scam Accusations / DGB Digibyte fly-by-night operations on: June 22, 2017, 06:13:11 AM
EDIT: Problem resolved.  Smiley
4  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / "Bitcoin" Unlimited Officially #REKT on: April 06, 2017, 12:50:37 PM

The Bitcoin Civil War has suddenly come to a stunning surprise conclusion.  It's all over except for the shouting and crying.

tl;dr Bitmain is ripping off the network by secretly faking proof of work, and blocking segwit because it will stop their rent-seeking strategy of covert cheating.

[bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Inhibiting a covert attack on the Bitcoin POW function

Gregory Maxwell greg at
Wed Apr 5 21:37:45 UTC 2017

A month ago I was explaining the attack on Bitcoin's SHA2 hashcash which
is exploited by ASICBOOST and the various steps which could be used to
block it in the network if it became a problem.

While most discussion of ASICBOOST has focused on the overt method
of implementing it, there also exists a covert method for using it.

As I explained one of the approaches to inhibit covert ASICBOOST I
realized that my words were pretty much also describing the SegWit
commitment structure.

The authors of the SegWit proposal made a specific effort to not be
incompatible with any mining system and, in particular, changed the
design at one point to accommodate mining chips with forced payout

Had there been awareness of exploitation of this attack an effort
would have been made to avoid incompatibility-- simply to separate
concerns.  But the best methods of implementing the covert attack
are significantly incompatible with virtually any method of
extending Bitcoin's transaction capabilities; with the notable
exception of extension blocks (which have their own problems).

An incompatibility would go a long way to explain some of the
more inexplicable behavior from some parties in the mining
ecosystem so I began looking for supporting evidence.

Reverse engineering of a particular mining chip has demonstrated
conclusively that ASICBOOST has been implemented
in hardware.


Due to a design oversight the Bitcoin proof of work function has a potential
attack which can allow an attacking miner to save up-to 30% of their energy
costs (though closer to 20% is more likely due to implementation overheads).

Timo Hanke and Sergio Demian Lerner claim to hold a patent on this attack,
which they have so far not licensed for free and open use by the public.
They have been marketing their patent licenses under the trade-name
ASICBOOST.  The document takes no position on the validity or enforceability
of the patent.

There are two major ways of exploiting the underlying vulnerability: One
obvious way which is highly detectable and is not in use on the network
today and a covert way which has significant interaction and potential
interference with the Bitcoin protocol.  The covert mechanism is not
easily detected except through its interference with the protocol.

In particular, the protocol interactions of the covert method can block the
implementation of virtuous improvements such as segregated witness.

Exploitation of this vulnerability could result in payoff of as much as
$100 million USD per year at the time this was written (Assuming at
50% hash-power miner was gaining a 30% power advantage and that mining
was otherwise at profit equilibrium).  This could have a phenomenal
centralizing effect by pushing mining out of profitability for all
other participants, and the income from secretly using this
optimization could be abused to significantly distort the Bitcoin
ecosystem in order to preserve the advantage.

Reverse engineering of a mining ASIC from a major manufacture has
revealed that it contains an undocumented, undisclosed ability
to make use of this attack. (The parties claiming to hold a
patent on this technique were completely unaware of this use.)

On the above basis the potential for covert exploitation of this
vulnerability and the resulting inequality in the mining process
and interference with useful improvements presents a clear and
present danger to the Bitcoin system which requires a response.

If you’re a longtime Bitcoin user this should piss you off.

It doesn’t matter whether you’re a “big blocker” or “small blocker”—a silly distinction in my book, in the long run everyone admits we’ll need bigger blocks, it’s just a matter of when we’ll get there.

They have purposefully misled the Bitcoin community, championing false causes just to keep their temporary mining advantage at the expense of necessary upgrades to keep Bitcoin competitive.

"You fought in the Blocksize Wars?"
"Yes, I was once a Bitcoin Wizard, the same as your father."

5  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Politicizing mining is about the single most dangerous thing that can happen on: March 06, 2017, 10:31:30 PM

Bringing the Community Back Together

Eric Lombrozo
to Roger
Mar 31, 2016


I’m glad we’ve started talking a bit more recently - I feel like for far too long too many parts of the community failed to really talk to one another. It deeply saddens me to see the path things took last year - it’s very unfortunate, we’re all Bitcoiners…we all want the best for Bitcoin. We still face many threats from the outside, if we’re fighting each other from within we don’t stand a chance.

As per our earlier chat, the problems we’re currently facing are rooted not so much in technical disagreement but in personal issues and deep misunderstanding. If we are to make progress in solving these issues, the first thing that needs to take place is we need to stop assuming bad intentions on the part of others - I sincerely believe we’re all trying to do what we think is best for Bitcoin. But there are some serious issues we need to address…and it won’t be easy for everyone. Big mistakes have been made all around and fixing the problems will require accepting this. We must set our ego aside and focus on what’s best for the community and our future.

As a longtime contributor to Bitcoin Core, I see the very hard work and dedication of these guys first-hand - often unappreciated - that ensures the Bitcoin network continues to operate securely and robustly, 24/7. Not only is it very challenging engineering work - it also carries significant responsibility as billions of dollars' worth of other people’s assets rely on all this work. I think I can confidently state that there are a very, very tiny number of people in the world qualified to do this stuff. Furthermore, having worked together with many of these guys for years, we’ve come to know one another well…it’s a very strong team with at least a few dozen highly active contributors.

After the collapse of the Bitcoin Foundation, these guys were left without any political support, without sustainable funding, without capable public relations. Other than MIT DCI, Blockstream, Ciphrex, ChainCode Labs, and perhaps one or two others, NONE of the major companies in this space stepped up to contribute very much. In fact, things went in the exact opposite direction…with a bigger and bigger rift growing between much of industry and the Core devs.

There were numerous discussions by the Core devs on a few technical forums on issues. In particular, there was a super long thread in the mailing list on the issue of increasing the block size in which different views were expressed by a bunch of different people. Unfortunately, it seems much of the industry remained oblivious to this discussion as they were not following and Core lacked proper representation to make sure views got heard.


The issue most of the Core devs had was never really about whether we should increase the block size - but how we should do it.


Gavin, unfortunately, followed Mike down this very dangerous path which politicized mining.

Politicizing mining is about the single most dangerous thing that can happen to Bitcoin! I CANNOT EMPHASIZE THIS ENOUGH! This issue is SOOO much more of concern than whether blocks are full or fees are high. A key component of Satoshi’s design was that it should be very hard for anyone to be able to control a majority of hashpower lest they attempt to do hostile things to the rest of the network. I would imagine someone like yourself would be very emphatically opposed to doing things in a way that gives entry to hostile entities who want to usurp control over the network. The part of Core that did not include Gavin and Mike was overwhelmingly very much *against* opening up such attack vectors as a matter of principle…and unfortunately the block size issue was thrown in as the wedge.

Bitcoin Core is committed to near-term AND long-term scalability - committed to both on-chain AND off-chain ideas. The reason that many of us got so excited about making segwit the centerpiece of the Core roadmap was because it gave us a way to increase block size while addressing some of the validation cost issues AND solved many important issues with Bitcoin unrelated to block size (i.e. malleability, commitment extensibility, script replacement, perhaps even fraud proofs) AND allowed us to deploy it as a soft fork in many ways quite similar to how we deployed BIP16 meaning there would be no flag day and deployment could proceed incrementally. It seemed like a win-win…everyone gets what they want and we avoid the most problematic aspects pertaining to deployment logistics. Unfortunately, it’s clear not everyone saw it quite like this. There’s obviously still significant misunderstanding in the community, some people are still just too pissed off to want to cooperate, and some people are still looking for a way to save face.

I ask for your help as a fellow Bitcoiner and as a friend to help end this silly dispute that’s been tearing apart our community. I know it won’t be easy to heal wounds, but we’ve got to stop with this petty tit-for-tat proxy war on reddit and we’ve got to stop politicizing mining - we need to find a better way of having all our concerns addressed and resolve issues without having to polarize entire groups of people against one another who, in the end, are not the cause of the problem. It’s not their fault.

- Eric
6  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Speculation (Altcoins) / [DASH] Dash Price and Trade Discussion Thread [UNMODERATED] on: January 02, 2017, 07:44:19 AM
Since DashHole cultists are deleting posts containing information contrary to their groupthink, here is an unmoderated Dash price thread.

Share & Enjoy!


The Dash Scamassu ATM, Proton Mail, Mycelium, and Coinfirm fiascos aren't helping the price keep up with Bitcoin, much less Monero.

At least one Masternode owner (and Foundation Member) will "start offloading this month" if there is no substantial progress reported, because Dash core team proposals "keep asking for money but have zero responsibility and accountability to provide updates."

Is there enough volume and bid depth to absorb several Masternodes being liquidated?
7  Other / Politics & Society / Who is Hillary Clinton's handler? on: October 07, 2016, 04:39:43 AM
As compelling case can be made for each of of these suspects.

David Kendall is a high powered DC lawyer to whom normal laws do not apply.  He is does not hold the necessary clearance to possess or view classified documents, yet was allowed to control and even abetted in holding the USB drive with Hillary's GAMMA level emails.

"Clinton’s chief lawyer at Williams & Connolly, who leads all Clinton-related legal matters, is David Kendall. He has successfully represented Bill and Hillary Clinton together and separately throughout decades of their legal entanglements since the 1980’s, ranging from the former president’s sex scandals to missing billing records for Hillary Clinton’s work as a partner in The Rose Law Firm on behalf of the failed Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan and Capital Management Services."

Huma Abedin is Marxist Saudi royalty and HRC's closest confident.  She's married to New York politician Tony Weiner, who is for unknown reasons able to groom and sext message underage girls without being frogmarched into prison.

In a nutshell – quoting former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy writing at National Review this week – Huma Abedin “worked for many years at a journal that promotes Islamic supremacist ideology that was founded by a top al-Qaida financier, Abdullah Omar Naseef.” That would be for at least seven years (1996-2003), by the way, during which Abedin also worked for Hillary Clinton.

Bill Clinton, Dubya's brother from another mother, is a full partner in the Bush crime family.  Google 'Mena Barry Seal Bush Clinton' if you don't know the story.  Bonus points for appreciating Don Lasater and Bernard Rapoport's roles in making crack babies a thing.

Road to Moscow: Bill Clinton’s Early Activism from Fulbright to Moscow

As a Georgetown junior, Clinton inherited his antiwar orientation from his part-time employer, Senator J. William Fulbright. Fulbright’s views on Vietnam had in turn been influenced by scholar Bernard Fall. Fall had an academic background at institutions linked to Chinese Communist apologist Owen Lattimore. He had recently co-authored a book on Vietnam with Marcus Raskin, cofounder of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), which disseminated Marxist propaganda aimed to sway Fulbright and other decision-makers. Fulbright’s office was also in regular contact with Igor Bubnov, a KGB operative on Capitol Hill. President Johnson had ordered the FBI to monitor Fulbright and his staff for suspected Communist contact at the time Clinton went to work for Fulbright.

Clinton remained relatively quiet about his war views during his first year as a grad student at Oxford from fall 1968 to spring 1969. He took an activist turn in summer 1969 while seeking to avoid being drafted. During summer vacation, he worked with the Vietnam Moratorium Committee (VMC), a US antiwar group which was helping a Communist-dominated coalition called the New Mobe organize fall protests.

Upon Clinton’s return to Oxford that fall, he and his friend Richard Stearns helped a British VMC counterpart called Group 68 organize Americans in England for Moratorium protest events. (A supplementary background profile of Group 68 follows the body of the article, exploring the group’s links to a British antiwar network centered around Bertrand Russell and Russell’s associate Tariq Ali. Russell’s network helped the North Vietnamese and Soviets disseminate anti-US propaganda through channels such as the International War Crimes Tribunal, sponsored by the Soviet front the Stockholm Conference on Vietnam.)

Over winter vacation of 1969-1970, Clinton toured Moscow, where he had been preceded by his roommate Strobe Talbott. Talbott was then translating the memoirs of former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, which had been leaked to him by Victor Louis, a KGB disinformation agent and talent spotter. Clinton and Talbott’s other roommate Frank Aller was doing similar work on the unpublished notes of Edgar Snow, an academic associate of Lattimore.

Arkansas Connections

The hidden hand in all these scandals is the CIA, who obviously recruited Hillary while at Radcliffe or Yale and "suggested" she make a power couple with Slick Willy.

But who is the puppet master?
8  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Discussion (Altcoins) / BTC-E in the current circumstances is a scam [Where's our ETC?] on: July 28, 2016, 09:05:31 PM

Ethereum Classic

27.07.16 19:52 from admin
Dear Clients!

BTC-e’s official standpoint on this issue is as follows: Ethereum Classic in the current circumstances is a scam. The Ethereum community decided to implement the hardfork in order to switch to the new chain. All major pools and exchanges (including BTC-e) did exactly that.

On the second day after the start of ETC trading BTC-e received a notification from Poloniex, saying that we need to secure the ETCs in our ETH wallet. At the time of notification, most of these coins have already been sent to Poloniex by our users. So there were almost none of these coins in our wallet.

We continue to receive requests from our customers demanding to return the ETCs that are supposedly deposited in our ETH wallet. We cannot do that for the reason specified above.

Anyone, who purports that we sent the coins to Poloniex in order to sell them, can check all the transactions on blockchain. All transactions are recorded and it is easy to trace the sender and the volumes of coins sent.

Best Regards,
BTC-e Team


1. We weren't prepared for the persistence of the antifragile and hence preferable Classic branch.  Vitalik told us it would just magically disappear.

2. All our precious immutable original ETH have been stolen (definitely not an inside job) so we are forcing you to accept mutable BailoutETH in their stead.

3.  Despite the demonstrated Silbert/whale/dev/community support and overall market value of ETC, we will wave our hands and simply declare it a scam.

Coinbase/GDAX didn't voluntarily decide to provide their customers' ETC.  They were forced to, Because Lawyers and Angry Customers.

Even ignorant supreme shitlord Brian Armstrong, understanding that blatant theft is bad for business, had to make noises about intending to do the right thing (In Two Weeks).

This will not stand.
9  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / ENOUGH DASH SPAM ALREADY on: April 28, 2016, 01:09:13 AM

The DashSpam belongs in your signature, not at the end of posts.

Please stop spamming the forum.

As I've already explained, we heard you the first two dozen times:

For those who would like real information about Dash, you can find it here:

The conversation happens here:

Join Dash Nation and be part of a winning team with a clear path for success.

To see how Dash technology will be perfect for retail applications, see this site:

OK, thanks for the links.   Tongue

Tao (Dash Nation Campaign Founder) (Come introduce yourself in our welcome thread, I'd love to meet you)

Are you being paid to post for this "Dash Nation Campaign?"

I'm starting to sense a pattern. Readers, can you see it? The same individuals, repeating the same mantra

I'm also starting to sense a pattern. Readers, can you see it? The same individuals, repeating the same spam links.

For more Dash information, see the following sites:

We heard you the first 5 times you said this.  At this point it's obviously spam and SEO rank gaming.

This kind of thing is exactly why the mod told you to stop posting paid spamvertisments on that forum.

Is your goal to make Dash look like a try-hard spam-driven Nigerian scam?  Because that's what your spam is doing.

How do you manage to get a typo in an obviously copy-pasted group of spam/SEO rank gaming links?  I don't believe you type them out every single time.  Do you really expect us to believe you type out those spamvertising/PageRankBait links every time you post them?

The least you could do is wait 24 hours between reposting your instamined scamvertisement links.  Or is that expecting too much?   Cheesy

To Progress. To Optimism. To Decentralized Technology. To Dash.


Tao (Dash Nation Campaign Founder)

Please stop spamming forum posts with these repetitive links.

They belong in your signature, where people have the option of not having to see them.

I understand you want to try to fix Dash's Google problem, but it's obnoxious to make everyone scroll past endless spam just for the sake of your SEO.

Thanks in advance!   Smiley

The rules here are very simple to follow.

Please review them and ask spammers like Tao to curb his enthusiasm.
10  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / GavinCoin AKA "Bitcoin Classic" 2016 Roadmap on: February 25, 2016, 11:57:13 PM

Note: This is our initial roadmap proposal. We will run this by miners, companies and users for feedback, before it is finalized.

Bitcoin Classic 2016 Roadmap

The Bitcoin Classic team will help realize Satoshi’s vision of making Bitcoin scale into a global peer to peer cash system, and not just a settlement network. We believe on-chain scaling is crucial for the long term health of Bitcoin. On-chain scaling maximizes transaction volume, whose fees are needed to replace miner rewards on the medium to long term scale.

Our preferred strategy for on-chain scaling, is to eliminate the need for blocks to be synced within seconds. We will implement solutions that make continuous block syncing possible. Instead of transmitting the data for a new block all at once when it is found, we can significantly optimize current bandwidth by sending data during the full ten-minute interval between blocks. This will enable the Bitcoin network to scale to significant new levels, without endangering decentralization. We will scale using a 3-pronged approach:
Phase 1 (Q1-Q2)
Urgently resolve issue of blocks being almost full

    Implement BIP 109: Raise block size limit from 1MB to 2MB.
    Hard fork with 75% activation threshold (750 of 1000 blocks), 28 day activation grace period.
    Software based on Bitcoin Core implementation 0.11.2 and 0.12.0.

Note: 0.11.2 is already finished and available for download here.
Phase 2 (Q2-Q3)
Eliminate the need for blocks to be sent within seconds

    Reduce the effect of block propagation times on orphan rates (lost miner income)
    De-emphasize block size as an obstacle for scaling and open up potential for on-chain transaction throughput gains using several improvements (listed below).
    Optimizations for bandwidth constrained nodes via improvements to the P2P layer

Note: We intend to discuss various solutions such as the ones listed below and pick the best ones.

    Parallel validation of blocks (theoretically reduces the profitability of excessive-sized block attacks).
    Headers-first mining (largely nullifies excessive-sized block attacks).
    Thin blocks: Blocks refer to transactions that have been well propagated rather than including them, allowing for minimization of bandwidth use.
    Weak blocks: allow miners to pre-announce the blocks they are working on, to minimize the data sent once a block is found.
    Validate Once: Transactions that have been validated when entering a node’s memory pool do not need to be revalidated when included in a block (speeds up block validation).

Phase 3 (Q3-Q4)
Make the block size limit dynamic

Note: This phase will only happen when miners & companies confirm Phase 2 successfully addressed their blocksize concerns.

    Use a variation of Steven Pair’s/BitPay proposal. Validation cost of a block must be less than a small multiple of the average cost over the last difficulty adjustment period
    Simplified version of Segregated Witness from Core, when it is available

Technical details

A more technical version of the roadmap can be found here

We plan to hold an on-chain scaling conference soon, where these and future scaling solutions & concerns can be discussed among the community.

11  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Dash Collapsing. Ethereum UP. on: February 12, 2016, 08:59:58 PM

False things DashHoles believe about ETH (and why they want to believe them).

1) ETH is out of money.

This FUD get repeated more often than "zomg Russia and China totes banned Bitcoin" rumors.  ETH is back by Szabo and his BTC billionaire buddies.  If they need more funds, the cypherpunk cabal will simply raise the price of ETH.  The real issue is how Dash expects to pay for the Evolution roadmap-to-unicorns.  Talking trash about ETH's lack of funds is a nice way to deflect from Dash biting off more than it can chew, but reality will ultimately prevail over cult doctrine about bottomless MegaBlock cornucopias of endless budget largess.

2) ETH is too complicated to work.

The math behind sharding, partitioning, tree chains, etc. has been done.  It's extremely challenging but not impossible to engineer and implement as a 'world computer.'  Meanwhile, Dash's two three tiered structure is hopelessly dependent on trusted third parties, and reducing mixing times to something competitive with other privacy coins is apparently not as great a priority as chasing yet-another-Storj unicorns.

3) ETH is being pumped and it will dump.

That FUD was demolished on the initial post-ICO-dump ETH rally.  Now it's doing ~50k BTC in volume/day, with ~6k BTC in bids.  Can your shitcoin do that?  No, Dash's rebranding and Evolution hype cycles are over, and probably never coming back.  It's all downhill from here, and the comet will soon take the Evan's Gate cultists to a better place, to reward them for their faith in snake oil and bad crypto.

4) ETH is too hard to use; it's basically a Javascript programming task even to get your coins out of your IPO wallet.

Kraken has a great page where you just upload your wallet, put in your passphrase, and enter the number of coins to be swept. Super easy to use.  Meanwhile, good luck teaching Grandma and Aunt Felicia the difference between mixed and unmixed Darksendable-or-not coins, much less the lengthy/unpredictable process for mixing them.

5) Dash isn't competing with ETH.

Anything Dash can do, ETH can do better.  Especially privacy.  And vending machines (stripper not included).[/quote]
12  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!

Everyone knows that Bitcoin runs on drama

How do we prevent Bitcoin forks (or should we)?

Re: Prioritized transactions, and tx fees

[PATCH] increase block size limit


How a floating blocksize limit inevitably leads towards centralization

In re Bitcoin Devs are idiots

Roger Ver and Jon Matonis pushed aside now that Bitcoin is becoming mainstream

New video: Why the blocksize limit keeps Bitcoin free and decentralized

Bitcoin and Voting Power

Share your ideas on what to replace the 1 MB block size limit with

Gavin Andresen Proposes Scalability Roadmap and Hardfork

Looking before the Scaling Up Leap

The Hard Fork Missile Crisis

Fork off

Twenty Megabytes testing results

Let's address some of the more common pseudo-arguments raised by the very stupid people that like the Gavin scamcoin proposal

Bitcoin 20MB Fork

Permanently keeping the 1MB (anti-spam) restriction is a great idea ...

Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

The capacity cliff

Crash landing

Bitcoin faces a crossroads, needs an effective decision-making process

Gavin Threatens to Quit Bitcoin Development and Join Hearn's Fork

[Bitcoin-development] soft-fork block size increase (extension blocks) Re: Proposed alternatives to the 20MB stepfunction

What Have The Core Bitcoin Devs Ever Done For Us?

Mike Hearn: In about 1-2 weeks, Bitcoin XT will include support for 20mb blocks

The Bitcoin Gauntlet

Hearn's Worst Case Scenario: Checkpoints in XT to "ignore the longest chain"

Bitcoin's Ironic Crisis

How the Bitcoin experiment might fail

"Bitcoin" XT Status Update

Analyzing the 2013 Bitcoin fork: centralized decision-making saved the day

I ran Bitcoin Core for >3 years, and I turned it off today

Big block support observer

Why is Bitcoin forking?

Not Bitcoin XT

Bitcoin XT has code which downloads your IP address to facilitate blacklisting

MeniRosenfeld comments on "It's time for a break: About the recent mess & temporary new rules"

What happens when the managers and investors ignore the engineers and scientists

Bitcoin Battered After "Governance Coup"

Adam Back Says the Bitcoin Fork Is a Coup

Nuclear option of forking the codebase should only be used as a last resort

Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)

BIP101 implementation flaws


Measuring Decentralization

Supermajority and BIP101 activation, part 2

Adam Back on the Overlooked Importance of Full Nodes in Bitcoin

[bitcoin-dev] Capacity increases for the Bitcoin system.

[bitcoin-dev] Block size: It's economics & user preparation & moral hazard

Time for Bitcoin Users to Reclaim Their Voice

Bitcoin's Elegant Upgrade Mechanism: Miner Voting

bitcoin "unlimited" seeks review

Why Bitcoin's Decentralization Matters

The resolution of the Bitcoin experiment

A Bitcoin Believer?s Crisis of Faith

ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT

Whiny Ragequitting

Hearn: 8MB "obviously wasn't based on any kind of scientific analysis"


Lesson learned from the Classic coup attempt or why Core needs to prepare a GPU only PoW

How to Use Open Source and Shut the Fuck Up At the Same Time

Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another?

The Governance of Anarchists

Hard Fork Risks and Why 95% Should be the Standard

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.

Scaling Bitcoin: The Great Block Size Debate

[bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Increase block size limit to 2 megabytes

PSA: Clearing up some misconceptions about full nodes

Why My Faith in Bitcoin has Been Restored

A Call for Consensus

Hard Fork Conspiracy Treacherous

Ed Felten: What does the White House think of cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin?

Double Billing is not ?Healthy Competition?

I disapprove of Bitcoin splitting, but I?ll defend to the death its right to do it

Bitcoin Roundtable Consensus

Peter Todd Disputes Claim That 75% Majority Hard Forks are Safe

Segregated Witness and Hardware Wallets

Lesser known reasons to keep blocks small, in the words of Bitcoin Core developers

Coinbase CEO Rejects Proposal for Bitcoin Hard Fork in 2017

Bitcoin Roundtable Consensus: Wladimir Says ?I?m All For It?

Blocksonly mode BW savings, the limits of efficient block xfer, and better relay

MIT Media Lab Director Joi Ito Speaks Up on Bitcoin Technical Development Environment

What Happened At The Satoshi Roundtable

Coinbase CEO: Core Team is a "Systemic Threat"

Boycott Coinbase to stop the attack against Bitcoin

A date with Sybil

BTCC's Samson Mow on Block Size: The Bitcoin Community Must See Through Manipulation, Keep Calm and Write Code

Contentious Blocksize Wars

A Closer Look at Reddit Vote Manipulation About Bitcoin

BTCC Funding, Development Report, and Hard-Forks

Clearing the FUD around Segwit

Bitcoin Hard Forks May Become Safer With User Voting

Peter Todd Worried About Those Willing to ?Fork Bitcoin at All Costs?

The Power of Schnorr: The Signature Algorithm to Increase Bitcoin's Scale and Privacy

Bitcoin Core 0.12.1 Released, Major Step Forward for Scalability

Supporters of 2 MB Bitcoin Blocks Unable to Convince Miners to Hard Fork in Beijing Meeting

Bitcoin scaling tradeoffs with Adam Back

Roger Ver tries to intentionally spend unconfirmed bitcoins from a zero fee transaction, which fails, and then blames failure on technology.

FYI, @gavinandresen's commit access just got removed - Core team members are concerned that he may have been hacked.

Dazed and confused, but trying to continue

Gavin Andresen is Not Giving Up on Bitcoin Classic


An Anatomy of Bitcoin's Great Scaling Debate

Almost half of the Classic nodes just disappeared

Mike Hearn: Bitcoin's "Young, Unripened Democracy" Suffers Under Authoritarian Developers

Antpool Will Not Run SegWit Without Bitcoin Block Size Increase Hard Fork

Ethereum is the Forefront of Digital Currency

Bitcoin Protocol Role Models

Original vision of Bitcoin

Rick Falkvinge on Segwit: I think it's a dead-end. It's over-engineering.

The Big-Blocker Fallacy

Time to End the Block-Size Blockade

Segregated Witness and aligning economic incentives with resource costs

A Future Led by Bitcoin Unlimited is a Centralized Future

The artificial block size limit

Why Segregated Witness will make 2017 Bitcoin's best year yet

The SegWit Debate

How Bitcoin Unlimited Users May End Up on Different Blockchains

Why Bitcoin Unlimited?s "Emergent Consensus" Is a Gamble

Happy Bitcoin Coder

Money, blockchains, and social scalability

Scaling Bitcoin: Reflections from the DCG Portfolio

The DCG is not Bitcoin. You are Bitcoin

Complete Review on SegWit vs. Bitcoin Unlimited: Arguments and Clarity

The SegWit Debate

How Bitcoin Unlimited Users May End Up on Different Blockchains

1/29/17 loses 13.2BTC trying to fork the network: Untested and buggy BU creates an oversized block, Many BU node banned, the HF fails

LOL! Miners running latest BU need to set their max block size lower than Core to avoid mining invalid blocks

So who the hell is still supporting BU?

Statement regarding excessive block by Bitcoin Unlimited software 29 Jan 2017

Bitcoin Market Needs Big Blocks, Says Founder of BTC.TOP Mining Pool

Segregated Witness (SW) vs Bitcoin Unlimited (BU)

Gavin Andresen supporting an attack on the minority chain in case BU fork with majority hashpower

Capitalist View on a Bitcoin Hard Fork

Scaling Bitcoin: Reflections from the DCG Portfolio

The DCG is not Bitcoin. You are Bitcoin

Complete Review on SegWit vs. Bitcoin Unlimited: Arguments and Clarity

Why Bitcoin Will Get Scaling Without Segwit or Large Blocks

BTCC's Bobby Lee: Why Chinese Bitcoin Miners Are Not Happy With SegWit

Understanding the risk of BU (bitcoin unlimited)

Moving towards user activated soft fork activation

The Bitcoin Balance of Power Poster

Why Bitcoin Transaction Capacity Doesn’t Really Matter

Bitcoin: no need to keep talking

The Bitcoin Filibuster

Why I'm resigning as a 'moderator' of /r/btc

The Core Development Scalability Roadmap

The Origins of the Blocksize Debate

Bitcoin Realism or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love 1MB Blocks

MIT Expo Spotlights Bitcoin Tech Concerns

Economic Implications of Chain Splits and Resolution

Chain Splits and Resolutions

How Bitcoin Unlimited ( $BTU) will be erased

Coinbase, Bitfinex Would List Bitcoin Unlimited As “Altcoin” After Soft Fork: Mow

Bitcoiners, get your priorities straight.

On the recent bout of malleated transactions

Reflections on Scaling and Bitcoin Protocol Development

Nobody Understands Bitcoin (And That's OK)

Bitcoin Miners Signal Revolt Amid Sluggish Blockchain

Flag day activation of segwit [shaolinfry]

The Road to One Megabyte

How to destroy bitcoin in 8 steps:

Ways to enhance Post-fork withering of Core chain [/u/gavinandresen]

Divisive ‘Bitcoin Unlimited’ Solution Crashes After Bug Discovered

CoinDesk Explainer: The Bitcoin Unlimited Debate

Bitcoin is. And that is enough.

Why Bitcoin Node Statistics Aren’t Trustworthy

Why Bitcoin Unlimited should be correctly classified as an ‘attempted robbery’ of Bitcoin, not a fork

Someone Wants to Stick a Fork in Bitcoin

Community Reacts to Bitcoin Unlimited Bug, Calls For SegWit Activation

'Super UASF': Could a Clever Idea Break Bitcoin's Scaling Deadlock?

Cypherpunk tears are shed for Bitcoin

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.

A Fork in the Road

Bitcoin's Scaling Debate is Devolving Into an All-Out Twitter War

Bitcoin Exchanges Unveil Hard Fork Contingency Plan

Adam, Greg, Core Devs and big blockers.. Now is the time for compromise. [maaku7]

Coinbase responds to industry letter.

Why Coinbase didn't sign the industry letter

How can we solve replay attacks in the event of a hard fork

BIP for the mandatory activation of segwit by shaolinfry

Jihan Wu's latest Weibo post looks like an offer to negotiate

What happens to my bitcoins in TREZOR after a hard fork?

My name is Meni Rosenfeld and I support Bitcoin Core.

What would happen for Ledger hardware wallet users in case of a Bitcoin fork

Bitmain No Longer Under Influence of Jihan Wu, Says Lawyer

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."

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.
13  Other / Politics & Society / Rand Paul Returns to the Spotlight at GOP Debate on: January 29, 2016, 12:46:08 PM
Paul the Younger had an oustanding debate last night.   Cool

Is Rand back in the top tier?  His performance set Twitter's heat aflutter; social media says he won the debate.


Paul the Elder will speak at U. of Iowa the night before the caucuses.  Will America's Last Founding Father be able to mitigate Trump's Idiocracy voters?

Don't forget to donate BTC/USD/TLC, because there's only one anti-authoritarian fiscal conservative running this year!


Back on the main stage, the Kentucky senator made his presence felt

After being bumped from the main debates in early January due to low polling numbers, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul took full advantage of his primetime slot at Thursday night’s Republican debate.


Despite his less than spectacular standing in the polls, Paul signaled Thursday he’s not ready to give up the fight. But in the end, he used his final pitch to the public to explain to voters his personal views on entering the race, rather than taking an opportunity to appeal to voters in Iowa. While other candidates brought up Sept. 11, blasted Hillary Clinton, and the Bible, Paul stuck to what he knows.

“I’ve gotten to do some incredible things. Got to be on the floor of the Senate. And it has been amazing to me,” Paul said. “But the thing that is most important to me and caused me to run for office is I’m worried about the country and how much debt we’re adding.”



* Rand Paul: Maybe the Kentucky Senator just needed to take a debate off. After not making the main stage in the 6th debate (and refusing to appear in the undercard debate), Paul was a major player in this one. He showed off his trademark willingness to needle the other candidates -- he went after Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz at various points -- but also offered nuanced thoughts on racial profiling and abortion. This was the Paul who many political observers -- myself included -- thought we might see in this campaign: A candidate willing and able to speak to issues his party has struggled to address in recent years.

14  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Core needs to prepare a GPU only PoW - Spondoolies CEO Guy Corem on: January 25, 2016, 06:34:21 AM

So, as I write these words, it seems that Classic has a good chance of meeting its activation Threshold. Jonathan is aiming for Classic to be activated when 75% of the last 2,016 (currently coded 1,000 but he said in the interview that he might increase to 2,016) mined blocks indicate support of the Classic fork, meaning the miners that mined them are ready to do a 2MB Hard Fork and leave behind everyone on Core.
What will happen to Core chain if Classic will be activated?

Will Classic activation mean the end to the Core chain ?
Not necessarily; Careful planning on behalf of Core will allow it survive.

I believe that Core developers will split into three camps: Some will join Classic Chain (and fork), some will quit Bitcoin altogether, and some will continue development on Core Chain (and fork).

I tend to believe that most Core developers will remain and implement the Core scalability road-map as planned. I simply don’t see Core following Classic’s governance model in which the users vote on issues.

Mainly, Core needs to replace its PoW function, preferably to a function which make any effort to create ASIC for it economically nonviable. I’ll discuss such a proposal below.
The other thing Core needs to do is to change the Transaction ID, in order to create a complete split of coins.

By implementing the above, upon Classic activation, each Bitcoin will be split to ClassicCoin and CoreCoin. Each coin will be transact-able separately and will have a different market value. Most of the exchanges will probably support both Chains, hence each Coin will have different market value based on supply and demand.

From the user perspective, she will needs to install both wallets (Core and Classic) and import the old private key into both wallets. It makes sense that multi chains wallets will be created, so the user will be able to transact easily with wallets on both Coins. These wallets may even present the following arithmetic: 1 CoreCoin + 1 ClassicCoin = 1 BTC, so if you have 80 CoreCoins and 73 ClassicCoins it would show up as 73 BTC + 7 CoreCoins. It might be able to transact in that way as well, sending CoreCoins and ClassicCoins with one wallet “Send” action to the receiver.


Suggestion for GPU only PoW change for Core

In order to survive, Core needs to change its PoW or else Core miners won’t be able to mine at all or Core chain will be susceptible to 51% attacks from Classic miners. I purpose the following, in order to prevent mining centralization, and prevent the possibility of such a governance coup in the future:

    Core will prepare a large set of cryptographic hash functions, at least 100 or more initially. Any simple (not memory hard) function will do

    Every 3 months (12,096 blocks), the PoW change automatically, by random data hashed from the last block before the change

    A selection of 10 or more functions is made from the large set, selected deterministically from last block data

    If the functions have tunable parameters and or constants then those are also selected deterministically from the last block data

    Those 10 or more functions are constructed in a stack (e.g. X11)

    The Stack of functions with their new constants and parameters (all selected deterministically by hashing last block data) is the NewPoW

    In order to prevent Hash-Rate oscillation (very bad…), The OldPoW and the NewPoW coexist for one month (4,032 blocks)

    Each PoW function actually serves for 5 months:

    - One month of Phase In period in which it co-exists with it’s predecessor

    - Three months in which it serves alone as the only PoW

    - One month of Phase Out period in which it co-exists with it’s successor

    During the Phase In period, the NewPoW difficulty is set initially to a very low value, to incentivize miners to mine it.

    However, During the first 252 blocks (1/16 of the phase in period), only one block with the NewPoW is allowed every 16 blocks. If more then one block with the NewPoW is mined during this period, the rest will be discarded.

    There will be a lot of miners trying to mine the new PoW since its difficulty was set to a low value, there will be a lot of soft forks. To avoid it, the block with NewPoW with minimum BlockHash is accepted as the winner, all the rest are discarded.

    In the next 252 blocks (second 1/16 of the phase in period), only two blocks with the NewPoW are allowed every 16 blocks.

    Every subsequent 252 blocks of the phase-in period, one more block with NewPoW will be allowed.

    After each 252 blocks of the phase-in period, the difficulty of the NewPoW will be adjusted based on the time it took to create blocks with NewPoW from the beginning of each 16 blocks period.

    By the end of the phase-in period, the OldPoW will be retired and the only acceptable blocks will be blocks with the NewPoW

This proposal if implemented correctly, will bring a never ending GPU mining on Core chain. It will also reduce the hash-rate oscillation between each PoW change. In order to make sure an ASIC effort will be uneconomic, the initial set of functions needs to be large enough. In addition, on every future Hard Fork of Core Chain, additional hash functions need to be added to this set (assuming CoreCoin price increase).


Thanks goes to:

    Adlai Chandrasekhar for suggesting the automatic method of replacing PoW parameters using Blockchain data
    Benny Gorlick for suggesting to select the next PoW from a large set of predefined functions
    Emin Gün Sirer for suggesting the mechanism to prevent hash-rate oscillation after each PoW change
    James Hilliard for creating a tool that generates a transcript from the WeChat group “MinerInWorld”
    Vitalik Buterin for reviewing the proposal
    Luke-Jr for reviewing the proposal
15  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT on: January 16, 2016, 10:44:12 PM

Even if the Tooministas win, they lose.

16  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Great Day for Bitcoin. Cryptsy finally admitted theft and Mike Hearn rage quits on: January 15, 2016, 12:49:06 PM
This is a great day for Bitcoin. has with typical self-aggrandizement surrendered unconditionally to the Knights of Satoshi, leaving the Gavinista insurgency demoralized and rudderless.

A parasitic shitcoin exchange will no longer operate fraudulently on an undisclosed fractional reserve, teaching noobs about the risk of being too greedy and gullible.

Fee markets continue to mature, as Bitcoin's pay-for-priority model ignores the drama and reliably records properly funded transactions.

Planned upgrades to Honey Badger proceed apace, as Core's Wizards develop miracles such as Lightning, SegWit, Sidechains, Confidential Transactions, RBF, CLTV, etc.

The Winklevoss ETF is one day closer to approval, while Bitcoins are shaken free from forlorn faint-hearted Gavinista fail-forkers' feeble fingers.

The Bitcoin Core community continues thriving under the light touch of Thermos's moderation and administration, while the Gavinistas splinter into increasingly esoteric personality-driven cliques.

Paper money continues to burn, as Chinese and other markets are in free-fall despite the best efforts of Hearn's beloved BIS coordinated and funded Plunge Protection Teams.

I'm happy as a daisy!

17  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Darkcoin/Dash and Cryptsy - WTF is going on here? on: January 13, 2016, 05:27:58 AM
There are multiple single-purpose accounts which registered around the same time as or after the Darkcoin launch, and to this day only post in Dash threads.

Let's hold them accountable for defending the Crypty scam, by memorializing their Baghdad Bob worthy 'there is no problem on Cryptsy' cheerleading.

I suspect there is more than meets the eye about the relationship between Dark/Dash-coin and its former main exchange.

Remember the cozy relationship between BigVern and Paycoin?  Now put that together with the fact Dash was their main coin, by far, for about an entire year.

I have got to defend Cryptsy, from the beginning they have been a stable exchange to rely on while many others have fallen down hard(mintpal anyone?)

Cryptsy has been really good for me, Big Vern is known and US based, and no one has ever lost money there over a very long time.

I remember this same thing with people recommending to leave Cryptsy and go to Mintpal in this same thread. How did that turn out?

There is also the distinct possibility that Cryptsy has done absolutely nothing wrong at all and these are all completely false allegations.

Big Vern fires back !

If anyone has more examples of DRK/Dash sockpuppets acting as white knights for Cryptsy, please LMK so I can add them to the dossier.
18  Economy / Speculation / Fiat Collapsing. Gold/Silver/Bitcoin UP. on: January 08, 2016, 03:05:04 AM

Now that Frap.doc has been put out to pasture, it's time for a new (and less prejudiced) economic monitoring thread.  Today is a better day than most to start one!

[ZeroHedge] Gold, Bitcoin Soar After China Liquidates Most Reserves On Record To Defend Currency

Moments ago gold finally broke out above the $1,100 resistance level which so many sellside experts warned it would never be able to cross again...

... while that "other" currency, bitcoin, has soared by 5% overnight, not on some idiotic narrative about a Russian pyramid schemer's website, but because of what we first warned in September (when bitcoin was at $225): the more the Yuan devalues, the faster Chinese depositors will seek to circumvent China's capital controls and convert their increasingly less valuable money into either other currencies (via bitcoin), or into gold.

[CNBC] As global markets flounder, Bitcoin rockets up 6%

Finally, the conservative, hard-asset heavy portfolio stops melting down and begins to pay off!

19  Other / Meta / In Which otoh calls our mods Nazis on: November 22, 2015, 11:37:06 PM
Since otoh's whining about "modnazis" is off-topic in the altcoin section, I'll start a thread here, in the appropriate Meta sub.


Didn't you had already RageQuit the forum with this 'goodbye cruel world' post?

20  Other / Politics & Society / Yale students screaming down one of their professors on: November 13, 2015, 06:03:57 AM
Anyone catch the name of the screeching harpy in the infamous Yale video?

I love how she screams "Be Quiet!" before demanding everyone's opinion be considered and validated...
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!