I'm just curious. Can a miner/pool operator open up lightning network channels and then proceed to close channels with older states favorable to them in a block, at a later time? This would be manually included rather than broadcast through the mempool. Or does the breach remedy sufficiently address this situation?

Edit: After doing more research, I think the breach remedy is sufficient because the victims would have the private keys of the old states, and could spend the attackers UTXO, am I correct? It's a bit confusing to me still.

AFAIK, the Bitcointalk staff does not make determinations on what is "FUD" and what are actual valid complaints. It is against the rules to engage in violent threats. However, they have to be caught in the act. It may be best if you somehow archive the next offending post.

I've had several posts that I thought were clever memes and links deleted by the mods. Oh well. It's not like any of them really needed to remain immortalized.  

Well, if they are going to run a stablecoin that claims to be backed by fiat rather than a p2p community(like most cyptocurrencies), they need to be more transparent. Oh well, I am an American; so, I really can't use them ATM. (However, I do use other exchanges that use Tether, so could still be affected if something is wrong.)  My holdings with them are dust that I left when I made my exit after their 2016 hack.

I'm not thrilled with the fact that they are holding over 150K BTC in one multisign address, even though it is a cold wallet. Hopefully it is more than a 2 of 3 multisign; otherwise, all one needs to do is compromise 2 of 3 keys to steal that amount of BTC. Bitfinex already had multisign addresses compromised in the past. Also, it would have been nice if they gave us some kind of supporting document listing their fiat holdings.

Edit: Just looked. It's a 3 of 6 multisign. I guess that is a little better.   I certainly hope they have the 6 keys stored in separate locations and have a way to airgap the signing process.

Won't Schnorr signatures pave the way to make this possible? (When and if it gets integrated.)

  Do people know what ambivalent means? It's a state of uncertainty.

When the merit system started in January of this year, every account that was already established was given the minimum merit of their rank. Likely, this person was a full member when the merit system started. I was a Legendary at the time and started with 1000 merit.

LOL Since when is someone being ambivalent suggest that someone "believes" anything? It's like calling someone who is agnostic a religious zealot. 

Is that why CSW himself retweeted this tweet of mine? https://twitter.com/bones261/status/1035621686140391426 Because I am so misinformed? Simple fact of the matter is CSW does not wish to confirm or deny that he is indeed Satoshi at this time. Respect his wishes and leave it alone.

The validity of the court documents have not be confirmed by any court ruling or settlement between the parties involved. CSW has made it pretty clear that he will not be providing any conclusive evidence that he is indeed Satoshi. All he would need to do is sign a message using the private key for any of the addresses the coinbase reward went to in the first 100 blocks. It's not that difficult unless he lost the private keys.
However, loosing the private keys would appear to contradict Satoshi's advise.
One of the possibilities would be that Kleiman had access to all of the private keys and encrypted them, leaving everyone in the dark on what the password was.

CSW legal team filed a motion to dismiss. One of the things they are claiming is that CSW does not have the private keys for Kleiman's coins.
https://www.coindesk.com/craig-wright-moves-dismiss-shakedown-bitcoin-lawsuit/

Here is an excerpt from the bitcoin white paper:


If BCH had not implemented replay protection, it would have been orphaned out of existence long ago. BTC still has the most hash rate invested in it. When and if things start turning around, BCH can claim that they are indeed bitcoin.

Now one can argue that BTC has lost it's way and has strayed far from what is outlined from the original satoshi vision. However, it is very clear from the whitepaper that the chain with the greatest proof of work is always the most legit. Prefer BCH over BTC? Then get an ASIC and mine BCH. You may also attempt to do something that will make BCH more attractive to miners. Using BCH contributes because your fees help attract miners. Also, buying BCH contributes because it pushes the market price a little higher making it more attractive to miners. In the end, the miners have the votes. Get used to it. That is Nakamoto consensus.

Actually, if someone earns BTC and are a US citizen, that person is supposed to pay income tax on it. Also, if someone purchases goods or services with a cryptocurrency, that person is responsible for any capital gains tax that may be due. Depending on what the BTC was worth when someone acquired it, that person could also claim a capital loss as well. Also, it is true that privacy coins are rather obfuscated when checking the blockchain. However, if someone is purchasing goods over the internet, the records on where they will be shipping the goods will not be anonymous.
The chances are pretty good that a person can get away without paying taxes. Also, the guidance is scant and the recording requirements are ridiculous. Chances are pretty good that if a person at least made the effort to pay their taxes on their cyrptocurrency transactions, the government will probably be forgiving if it wasn't perfect. However, if someone makes no effort at all to pay the taxes, they stand the risk of being one of the unlucky few that the government will make an example out of. If someone wants to take the small chance of living in back taxes hell, that is up to them. The government could literally take the shirt off someone's back if they wanted. Furthermore, they could take it a step further and take away that person's freedom after convicting them of tax evasion.

Too soon for these?

I live in the US and you are expected to pay taxes on your Bitcoin earnings. True, you may fly under the radar for your whole life. Much like people who work by getting paid under the table get away with it. However, if you get caught, prepare to have the government extract their pound of flesh from you. You can increase your chances by using an anonymous coin like XMR or ZEC. However, if you are buying goods and services or exchanging them for fiat, there is a good chance there will be a record of the transaction that isn't anonymous. I suppose you can uproot yourself and find a jurisdiction that won't tax you. However, how many people are really interested in moving to these jurisdictions? There is also going and living on a seastead.  

No, the only way BTC will get less volatile is if it actually starts having a real economy develop using it. Right now, only a few get paid in BTC for their work and can purchase all of their wants and needs with BTC. Even many people who manage to cover most of their expenses with BTC alone, actually rely on some method which converts the BTC to fiat. I am not convinced that BTC can really sustain an actual economy. Since it is limited in supply, this encourages hoarding. If too many people HODL, that is not much money flowing and makes for a poor economy. BCH and Lightning network claim to solves this by making the scaling better. However, if you just build bigger pipes, but you only have a trickle worth of water; you are still going to get only a trickle.

Apparently there is not much "agreement" since the BTC market is highly volatile. However, the fixed supply is "supposed" to mitigate this. Only time will tell if this actually continues to work. I'm still a skeptic. That's why I currently own less than 1 BTC and a few shitcoins.

Perhaps a better analogy is to compare fiat to a Pinto rather than a Lambo. A Pinto could have been wrecked by a bad operator, but it also had a flaw, that could be wrecked no matter how good the driver was.



I'm sorry, but the fiat "proof of debt" system doesn't appear to be sustainable. Once people or governments start defaulting on the debt, it becomes a mess. Even with the collateral, the banks just cannot recoup the losses. There are remedies, but rest assured there will be much pain before the remedies take effect.