Bitcoin Forum
October 16, 2019, 10:54:15 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 [200] 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 ... 833 »
3981  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 10:51:17 PM
I now assume you are a shill, after all, calling critics racist is exactly what a shill would do to push his agenda. Thank you for the clarification. Smiley

call me what you like.
but now you have go all the insults off your chest
go research and try seeing the big picture from the point of view of the bitcoin network.
dont wear the blockstream defence cap.
wear the critical thinking cap.

dont read the reddit scripts. read the code and documentation
again not with the utopian dreamer blockstream defence cap

look at the big picture, the long term picture.
and be truly critical.
maybe even worth you repeating to yourself "what if hearne coded this" just to keep your critical mind on track

i will just leave you with this thought.
knowing that changing PoW requires a network consnsus upgrade to achieve it
instead of doubling down on threats just to push segwit as is but done hard.. the blockstream team and fanboys should think of plan B
if they are going to pull a pin... actually recode segwit to be 1 merkle and a proper network wide 4mb that is also dynamic and add other community desird features.
dont waste the blockstream triggered hard fork event if soft fails to activate, purely to push opposition away, use it to unite the community with proper non cesspit creating network
3982  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 10:47:54 PM
Franky on ASICBOOST exposure: All is good. Ignore temporary drama.
Franky on AntBleed exposure: All is good. Ignore temporary drama.
Franky when someone mentions SegWit: "DOOMSDAY. TEMPORARY GESTURE. BLOCKSTREAM. BOMBS."
 Cheesy

lol
lauda you make me laugh

segwit end user features that core promise and promote are the empty promise temporary gesture. but the tier network and control is less than temporary.
PS read the core code and documentation about biasedly rejecting blocks and disconnecting from nodes purely out of version bias, not out of rule validity.

its really time you took some time to read less of reddit and more of the actual details
3983  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 10:35:31 PM
You'd think that if bitmain were to cease development on minerlink, they would remove all related code, or even announce that they are working on a fix.

Great to see there are people looking out for these exploits, but I think bitmain really screwed up here.

has anyone looked at bitcoin cores DNS seed managed by mainly blockstreamers

        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bitcoin.sipa.be", "seed.bitcoin.sipa.be", true)); // Pieter Wuille, only supports x1, x5, x9, and xd
        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bluematt.me", "dnsseed.bluematt.me", true)); // Matt Corallo, only supports x9
        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("dashjr.org", "dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org")); // Luke Dashjr
3984  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 10:31:02 PM


all i read is racial slurs against a country.
now to the real debate BITCOIN network code
long term view not temporary drama that is forgotton about after minutes/days

think about the big picture
3985  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 10:02:54 PM
I need to know why are you defending bitmain and BU? I can clearly see that you have some understandings of things and are concern about bitcoin but you are always in the other side but I just say what ever I believe is fact or it's just my opinion.

im not just defending BU or bitmain. i defend anything thats not blockstream(core)
things that gets attacked or used as a distraction (point the finger at) to avoid people seeing or questioning blockstream
because although theres all this temporary drama of point the finger how A, B, C maybe, if, could, might do something that lasts 2 minutes. its just distractions from what bitcoin really is.. the code

Can we use ASIC machines for other purposes such as gaming or other computational processes other than hashing sha256?
With GPU you could use them for other things and they existed before bitcoin so unlike ASICs they weren't specifically manufactured just for mining.
Bitmain was established only to build machines focused on one thing and I call that control unless they were in computer hardware before and or now are making other hardware than miners?
ATI wont even bother to build their own GPU farms because they manufacture computer hardware and sell to the market while mining requires at least a year to ROI and that is not a guaranteed fact.

if you think it would be year ROI .. thats for end users based on RETAIL prices.
6 months based on wholesale price (bestbuy starting a mining farm themselves with their bought cost stock)
3 months based on production price(ATI starting a mining farm themselves with their manufactured cost stock)

now imagine for every gpu ATI wholesale they can make 2 gpu's meaning pass one to retailer, keep one at zero cost
meaning ATI could start getting returns instantly because the 2nd gpu which they keep is literally zero cost because the retailer covered the cost with the first gpu via the wholesale price

now imagine for every gpu bestbuy retail they can buy 2 gpu's meaning pass one to retailer customer, keep one at zero cost
meaning bestbuy could start getting returns instantly because the 2nd gpu which they keep is literally zero cost because the customer covered the cost with the first gpu via the retail price

this is where ASIC manufacturers are profiting. it does not cost $2k to make a ASIC.

We're here to convince the undecided miners to chose the best option to proceed but we have forgotten the very obvious fact that only those with enough knowledge and understanding of cryptography and code are the ones currently mining and they will manage to figure out the truth for themselves and we're just wasting our times keeping a clean image of crypto.
yp and when a dev team bypasses node consensus, and only has 33% of pools vote.. then its also devs that should figur out the truth.. that maybe they need to go back to the drawing board and do things that would unite the community.. not point fingers at blaming everyone but themselves

All we need we already have, bitfury and bitmain 2 big manufacturers and they both will keep each other in line though I wouldn't mind to have a third big company/pool to balance the power, we just need a functioning and stable network the rest are just back ground noise.
there is another asic manufacturing company, infact more then one more company.
but all this drama is prtending bitmain have 70% control. which is the illogical part of all this distraction techniques
3986  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 09:33:50 PM
So your argument is it donít matter if bitmain is shady because they donít produce 70% of miners? What if it was 60% or 50% or 40%, what amount would worry you? Even bitmain donít dispute the 70% figure so why do you?

You fucking shills crack me up  Cheesy


here is the laugh.

bitmain wont self destruct their own rigs
bitmain cant self destruct other manufactures rigs

if bitmain did, it would only affect their own hashrates
if bitmain did, it would just cause 2 minutes downtime but end up costing them $2k per unit because everyone would ask for refund/comspnsation
if bitmain agenda was to... they would have already

so its just temporary drama of shooting themselves in the foot if they did fire a gun.. logically less important then things like creating a tier network that ruins the diverse decentralised peer network ethos.

you want to scream blue murder about "if's" and maybe of hardware that can cause only a couple minutes drama.. but avoid talking about the bearded elephant in the room that actually has got deadlines but cant meet promises.. that will affect the network if allowed to continue..

you can try distracting the debate away from what core should do as a plan B by trying to make people look in the direction of mining.. but ultimately devs need a plan B
3987  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 08:32:43 PM
Who manufactured the first ASIC and mined with it? maybe we really need to change the POW to make it anti-ASIC and make it GPU compatible? that way no one could control the mining industry and influence it as much as bitmain is doing right now.
can you prove bitmain control the mining industry. or are you reading the reddit speculation

1. then its just a ATI vs Geforce.. and everyone starts pointing fingers that ATI has a backdoor efficiency gain called openCL
2. if you think hobbyists can mine in their basements. forget it. farms will buy up THOUSANDS of top end ATI's

If everyone could mine with GPU then we know who is manufacturing them and there are only 5 big companies making GPU and they have the best technology and their marketcap is much higher than crypto combined so they couldn't be bothered to get personal with the network such as bitcoin and other crypto currencies.
But question remains, who will compensate millions of dollars to those already mining with ASICs?

thirdly. there would then be arguments once ATI gpu stocks dry up of "what if ATI are holding onto stock and starting their own farms to control bitcoin"
3988  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 08:04:15 PM
Is that for real? I was under the impression that Jonald was intelligent. "I don't care if Stalin is shady I like his uniform" ... holy crap  Shocked

it would only be a worry if bitmain had a exploit against bitfury or bitfury had an exploit against bitmain..
but finding that bitmain "could" only access their own products and "if" they triggered anything they would end up with queues of refunds.. its not as big a deal as say a soft fork that bypasses real network consensus, to add code that if activated changes the network into a tier network without nodes consent/veto ability
3989  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 07:43:42 PM
On thing is certain. Bitmain reacted very professionally. They responded promptly and included good, convincing explanations.
There is small problem though, another week and we have more allegations, another discovered bug/backdoor.
I wouldn't want to work for Bitmain's PR team now.

gmax is desperate to find directions to point his fingers as to why segwit did not get activated by christmas like most blockstreamists thought would happen.

he cant really blame nodes due to his own back door of going soft, bypassed node consensus. so he has to double down on blaming the pools which HE made the only voters.. as to why they are not 95% yays..

maybe he should ask them "how should/should a 0.15 version be changed and what features should be added to make it a community wide full network uniting upgrade

the 'volume' of trying to use backdoors as an excuse, when his team used backdoors, is getting 'louder' in its hypocrisy
3990  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 07:23:48 PM
There is no source. That's the estimate that people believe Bitmain has produced so far. I doubt you could provide a source for any exact number (unless Bitmain publicizes the number of shipped miners, but even that is not enough).
so in short you have just seen the 70% nay sayer /abstainer and just named that your 70% "bitmain" estimate... (facepalm)
You don't have any proof that supports any other views. This is a reasonable estimate considering the current state of the ASIC manufacturing industry. The only one who should facepalm is yourself for your own ignorance.

i guess you missed my subtly in the other post where i said i hope im not too subtle. you may want to re-read it
3991  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 07:18:15 PM
There is no source. That's the estimate that people believe Bitmain has produced so far. I doubt you could provide a source for any exact number (unless Bitmain publicizes the number of shipped miners, but even that is not enough).

so in short you have just seen the 70% nay sayer /abstainer and just named that your 70% "bitmain" estimate... (facepalm)
3992  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 07:10:52 PM
proof of claim?
and dont quote reddit / twitter
Estimations based on reasonable assessment of the ecosystem. Does that even ring a bell for you? Almost ALL of your posts don't have any sources, yet you keep asking for them in nonsensical situations. Please give me the huge list of current ASIC manufacturers (who sell to individuals in normal quantities).  Roll Eyes

i canaan should mention a few, but ill leave you to ebang your heads against a wall to show your "estimates" and "assessments" claims. also i am not gonna get baited into the loaded questions of useless hardware such as USB devices. so i will just let you get a bitfuryous about me not spoonfeeding you the data, and instead wait for you to show where you lot got your 70% figures from.

too many people are quoting 70% so i want to see your source

hopefully i have not been too subtle
3993  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 05:56:42 PM
bitmain (with 70% of miner production and largest mining pool)

proof of claim?
and dont quote reddit / twitter
3994  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 04:24:46 PM
it's freaking pathetic to see what r/btc has become. i started off checking there sometimes and then rapidly found myself rolling my eyes at almost every thread. at this point it's beyond redemption.

same goes for r/bitcoin

best advice just stay away from reddit... its just like fox news
3995  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Blockstream/Core lost. It is only a matter of time now. on: April 27, 2017, 04:13:55 PM
This BTC Core vs BU thing is very stupid and border on playground politics. Let's say for one moment ONE of the two sides win this and the other

side {no matter who they are} stop supporting Bitcoin... Who will be the winner then? We will see one HUGE rage quit from a lot of people and

the support that we have been working on for years will be halved. We should make compromises on both sides and concentrate on finding a

better solution for a scaling solution. { because both of them suck }  Embarrassed

Cheesy finally someone gets it
3996  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Blockstream/Core lost. It is only a matter of time now. on: April 27, 2017, 03:40:46 PM
pie charts of nodes but doesnt show proof of backing (no ip lists) - result, ignore it and trust bitnodes as better source

"community measure" weighted to exaggerate results. where some of the advocates are just consultants that dont need nodes, or have listed their 3 subsiduaries as 3 separate votes even though its the same 'team' in all 3 votes..
also only a small selection of bitcoin merchants - result biased limited overview

questionnaire of 61 people, hmm who got told where to vote - result biased by spamming link to only one side



also if pereira4 is not around billy bob will daily spam the same biased stuff..
if billy not around lauda will

each day the same stuff is posted but none of them even think about researching behind the numbers. they just post it


P.S
want to see the narrative control


P.P.S
question 4 (as advertised by lauda and other) is
do you want MINERS to activate BU

..
if the question was "do you want community consensus to activate BU" results would be different
this is where people need to learn CONTEXT and source of data
3997  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda on: April 27, 2017, 03:04:59 PM
I think it is obvious that the backdoor is purposely included, although most likely there is no plan to use it. However, this is still a betrayal of the trust of everyone using the antminers. a node

FTFY and now you are talking about the bip9 node bypass backdoor Cheesy

PS even gmax and luke both admit that using the 'anyonecanspend' is a backdoor to go soft. and intent to make it easier to do things soft in the future by opening the backdoor wider which they did exactly that with bip9 and UASF and more things to come

now imagine this
what if hearne did what blockstream devs did.. (the only way to possibly get blockstreamists to think outside of the box)
3998  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 02:14:16 PM
the claim is that 70% of the hashrate is using Bitmain's hardware.

proof of claim? please dont refer to reddit or twitter

P.S achow, remember last year i presented the anyonecanspend issue and for a month you said it was nothing.

now ask yourself a year later
1. why is core is coded to prevent old nodes (downstream) from getting unconfirmed segwit keys
2. why is core is coded to prevent old pools allowed to add a segwit tx in a non segwit block

Cheesy have a nice day.. it only took months for them to realise the risks and then change a few things, including waiting till way after segwit activates before releasing the wallet activated version of segwit on mainnet

p.p.s
are you and lauda still making money from people with core issues, and not even bothering to report the issue to core to fix so fture people dont run into the issue?
3999  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers on: April 27, 2017, 02:06:41 PM
A guy has a mining monopoly capable of killing the network?

if you think jihan owns the whole 9time of posting) 67% nay sayer/abstainers.. then maybe its time you done some research

i find it funny how all the blockstreamists are throwing around the 70% 'control' and blame jihan, bomb jihan bomb china, without doing any realistic and rational thinking

reddit scripts are sounding too much like fox new scripts these days..

western countries wants the middle-east (1900-2000)
western countries bomb the middle east (otterman war-iraq/gulf wars)
middle east fight back
western countries throw a victim card and do the fox news media stories of 'bomb them, bomb them bomb them'

blockstream wants bitcoin as theirs, where blockstream is the engine and at the centre of bitcoin.. at its 'core'
blockstream REKT anything outside of blockstream support
anything outside of blockstream support fight back
blockstream throw a victim card and do the reddit script stories of 'bomb them, bomb them bomb them'
4000  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Blockstream/Core lost. It is only a matter of time now. on: April 27, 2017, 01:43:31 PM
I was wondering if the Antbleed news would finally cause BU/Bitmain defenders to admit they have been wrong, or if they would go full bore insane. Guess I have my answer. Defending an exploit that could be used to wipe out much of the network is stark raving insane, as is the notion that exposing it somehow helps the clowns who perpetrated the exploit.

bitmain having a switch in its own server, that only affects only its own equipment, which will cause its customers to request refunds.
hmm

oh and also if they wanted it as a weapon they would have pulled the trigger already

however
this last month has all been about blockstream flock trying to find any bug in anything not blockstream advocated.. but not willing to listen when code made by blockstream has flaws
Pages: « 1 ... 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 [200] 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 ... 833 »
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!