Bitcoin Forum
November 15, 2019, 01:07:53 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 ... 846 »
4581  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How dose the User activated soft fork work? on: April 09, 2017, 05:14:01 PM
We need USAF because 2 miners can't dictate the fate of bitcoin. Simple inequation explains it:

count(user) >> count(miner) …

Time to kick miner's ass.

they are not dictating anything

blockstream decided pool only vote.

if blockstream cant accept the result of a pool only vote. you dont nuke the objectors, you either accept the no vote or you try again with full community..

if the full community say no. then you give up.

EG
other implementations have not set deadlines or threatened they just plodded along for 2 years.
they accept whatver consensus decide.

blockstream need to man up and do the same.
full consensus vote OR redo segwit properly and include the extra's the community are asking for
non of this 2merkle tier network control with mining nuke bullcrap
4582  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Even more proof that market wants segwit on: April 09, 2017, 04:12:11 PM
OP is referring to recent Litecoin pump and dump I think.

litecoin pump and dump..
who cares.

its temporary price drama.
plus

it was caused by twitter..
not asics or china or asicboost.

asics and asicboost has done nothing in the last 2 years
bu, classic, xt, and a dozen other implementations has dont nothing in the last 2 years

reddit and twitter "rumours" have been the attack, twisted as a victim card being waved at a situation that has never played out

4583  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Even more proof that market wants segwit on: April 09, 2017, 03:41:34 PM
it's a rumor,

are you ignoring this

temporary price drama is meaningless..
PoW nuking based on temporary price speculation and rumour...illogical
4584  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Even more proof that market wants segwit on: April 09, 2017, 03:08:23 PM
blah

random shaolin tweet of speculation and no proof.
temporary price drama

thejaytiesto and the usual blockstream party now wants to bomb china..

4585  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Even more proof that market wants segwit on: April 09, 2017, 03:05:56 PM
lol still laughing

2 year old hardware
and everyone screaming "PoW designed to attack segwit"

logic shows 6month old software and 1 month old flaw found = software not as 'soft' compatible as first thought.

time now to just do a proper node CONSENSUS and get the other features in during the opportunity.. for a 1merkle segwit+dynamics and lowered maxtxsigops limit and other efficiencies (in short: do it properly!!)


otherwise all we are doing is just wasting another year where by blockstream wont take no for an answer and will just delay crap until late 2018 just to ONLY GET flawed 2merkle segwit in(flawed version needing a tier network)

http://www.uasf.co/
Quote
Can BIP148 be cancelled?
Yes. In the event that the economic majority does not support BIP148, users should remove software that enforces BIP148. A flag day activation for SegWit would be the next logical steps and require coordination of the community, most likely towards the end of 2018.
4586  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The only answer against Miners Mafia is UASF on: April 09, 2017, 02:33:56 PM
ASICBOOST is a serious problem and everyone even from big block camp must accept that bitcoin community something need to do
BU was not a movement to increase blocksize but to stall bitcoin from miners as he say and a former BU developer

lol you do know the S9 and asic boost were created before segwit right..

so did they make a time machine?
4587  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Even more proof that market wants segwit on: April 09, 2017, 02:23:55 PM
lol OP's proof
.. a tweet starting "i heard"...

hmm wheres the salt

asics have been around for 2 years
asic boost as been around for 2 years

segwit code 6 months
gmax found flaw in segwit codes incompatibility 1 month

drama today is not caused by actions of asics. but speculation.

asic manufacturers did not make a time machine to make a segwit nuke
segwit just wasnt made 'soft enough' to not cause issues.
and gmax just a month ago found an issue where segwit is noft soft enough to work with 2year old hardware and efficiency technique.

solution
fix segwit to be even softer.
or
fix segwit to actually be implemented as a proper node CONSENSUS along with other community required features(dynamics, lowered max txsigops), thus only need 1merkle and get other needed features in. and finally get the community what it wants

stupid part is even with lots of pools abstaining objecting(70%) the fingers are being pointed at 16% and even blaming temporary price drama on that pool even when the pool has not done anything different for the last 2 years
4588  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How dose the User activated soft fork work? on: April 09, 2017, 01:48:11 PM
quantus

the funny thing is
you ask a question

i give you an answer thats actually has the link to what you asked..

here i quote the link itself
Quote
What is a UASF?

UASF stands for User Activated Soft Fork. It’s a mechanism where the activation time of a soft fork occurs on a specified date enforced by full nodes
meaning its an oppertunity core could have used to do a proper job seeing as they are now including full nodes

Quote
The August 1st date allows for the economic majority to successfully activate SegWit. Theoretically, if the hashpower drops by up to 85%, it might take up to 13 weeks to complete an activation period. In this scenario, SegWit will still activate for all BIP148 compliant nodes.

meaning if if only hit 80% the "might take upto 13 weeks to complete an activation period" will be longer than 13 weeks. meaning issues.

which i then proved with
Quote
A flag day activation for SegWit would be the next logical steps and require coordination of the community, most likely towards the end of 2018.

but hey if all you do is want to copy and paste "shill".. then maybe you need to check your glasses if you dont like the answers rather than realise that blockstream cant take no for an answer. or realise that blockstream are wasting YEARS (upto late 2018) just to do half a job that not everyone likes even when that oppertunity could have been used better


P.S the blocking of certain blocks after activation of segwit (either bip9 or uasf) is not about just 'empty block guys or fake tx guys.
its about any pools that have said no to segwit.

meaning blockstream are doing all they can to get their 2merkle half assed version of segwit in to create their tier network.
rather than using the opportunity to get a 1merkle segwit with dynamic blocks and other features that can only be done by a node upgrade.

but its all been wordplayed by saying "economic nodes" and "user activated soft" even though it is about nodes needing to upgrade which in reality and no wordplay is hard consensus

..
(soft=pools only)
consensus = majority accepted
contentious/controversial no clear majority

(hard=nodes and pools)
consensus = majority accepted
contentious/controversial no clear majority

meaning UASF (without word play) is actually a hard consensus (not hard contentious/controversial).
4589  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do you trust core? on: April 09, 2017, 07:50:56 AM
asic s9 chip design 2015
asicboost theory 2015
both in production 2015
public released spring 2016

segwit 2merkle envisioned december 2015
in production spring 2016
public release october 2016

feb-march 2017 gmax finds flaw in 2merkle soft segwit.
cant redesign 2merkle segwit.
april 2017 gmax call asics a attack that knew about segwit and was designed specifically to stop segwit

..
logic fail (unless time travel is possible)
4590  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do you trust core? on: April 09, 2017, 07:30:42 AM
blockstream - 100% no
core - 95% no (theres only a couple people who defy the gmax whip, but you dont hear them speak much)

core have become too dependant on gmax CTO and founder of blockstream

evidence: if core was 'independent' there would be no:
'its not core its an altcoin'
'they just took core code and tweaked it so REKT them as an altcoin'

there would be
'anyone can independently tweak core code'
4591  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The only answer against Miners Mafia is UASF on: April 09, 2017, 07:18:59 AM
and it doesn't make much sense for them to run one

if blockstream as a DNS seed maintainer set themselves up as just a 'spoke' 'routed hop' between hubs can make 1penny from 7million users a day each

they can repay their $70million VC DEBT in 3 years. especially seeing as how blockstream are VC partnered with coinbase and bitpay anyway
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#b
-bitpay
-blockstream
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#c
-coinbase

so DCG get the blockstream debt paid and it also helps DCG get repaid by coinbase and bitpay. all due to the corporate partnership
4592  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The only answer against Miners Mafia is UASF on: April 09, 2017, 07:09:52 AM
They did not develop any lightning implementation,

??
rusty russell of blockstream employment
https://blockstream.com/team/rusty-russell/
Quote
Rusty Russell
Infrastructure Tech Engineer
..After 14 years as a senior developer at IBM, he took a six-month sabbatical to work on cryptocurrencies. ..
while devoting most of his time to exploring the emerging frontier of Bitcoin development.

is not making lightning network software??

https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning/graphs/contributors
Quote
#1 rustyrussell 1,281 commits / 335,340 ++ / 71,321 --
4593  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How dose the User activated soft fork work? on: April 09, 2017, 07:02:32 AM
its where non mining, but proper full network validation nodes upgrade to really enforce proper consensus. but....
(here is the twist and betrayal)
while this opportunity should be used to have features properly implemented like dynamic block and 1merkle segwit(and other things)..
what is only being forced into the network is the soft 2merkle segwit changes and nothing else.

stupid thing is
if bip9 doesnt get the 95%

if UASF doesnt get the 80%

blockstream wont give up.
they will waste another year

http://www.uasf.co/
Quote
Can BIP148 be cancelled?

Yes. In the event that the economic majority does not support BIP148, users should remove software that enforces BIP148. A flag day activation for SegWit would be the next logical steps and require coordination of the community, most likely towards the end of 2018.

purely to try getting segwit activated and nothing else.(facepalm)

4594  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The only answer against Miners Mafia is UASF on: April 09, 2017, 06:37:55 AM
Greg Maxwell on the other hand stands to profit handsomely if Bitcoin becomes a settlement layer, regardless of the damage done to Bitcoin as a result of this.
Prove it.

to correct quickseller and to get around lauda's word twisting mantra:
Greg Maxwell on the other hand stands to clear the $70m+ VC DEBT easily if Bitcoin becomes a settlement layer, regardless of the damage done to Bitcoin as a result of this.

4595  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The only answer against Miners Mafia is UASF on: April 09, 2017, 06:31:48 AM
However my daily uploads are limited to 2GB,
My upload speed is a little slow, typically 50Mb/sec,

However I pay though the teeth for it,

50mbit/sec= 6.25mbyte/s = 375mbyte/min = 2gb/6min

6 minutes of uploading a video or any content of any kind(thats2gb+) and your blocked the rest of the day??
time for you to change your ISP
4596  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: it is Core, not Bitman blocking segwit on: April 09, 2017, 06:07:36 AM

If you acknowledge that it was just a gentlemen’s agreement between individuals
(and not representatives of Core with decision authority, which is impossible and a
oxymoron in a voluntary open-source community), why are you arguing about it?

It seems to me that the miners were attempting to pull a fast one. They were trying
to get a handful of people to decide the future of the Bitcoin Network. During that
meeting, all invited parties told the miners they had no actual authority and the
miners got mad because they are ignorant as to how the Bitcoin development
community actually works. They thought they could dictate the future.

Blockstream has no authority over the Core development. Maxwell and other
employees of Blockstream are Core developers, but they are separate entities.
If you think Blockstream breached, sue them. If you think Maxwell, as an employee
of Blockstream was a bad boy, ask Back to fire him. Ultimately, it is worthless since
all parties who signed the “agreement” had no power nor authority to guarantee or
implement a 2MB hardfork. That is the community's decision. Not any of theres.

You might consider the reason why you think there is a “Blockstream Circus” is
because you don’t really understand the full development system. If you or the
miners would have had your way, Bitcoin would have a dictator or CEO, it seems.

I love Bitcoin and the liberty it grants, you only love to control and strangle it

agent...
by you pretending Gmax is not the chief tech officer (boss) of development
by you pretending luke does not moderate bips(along with gmax)
by you pretending they are as powerless as a highschool janitor..

is you failing to understand.
many many many people have had dynamic proposals rejected even at mailing list level(blockstream moderated)
and at bip level(blockstream moderated)
and then even when just grabbing core code and independently adding tweaks and asking the core devs to help out.
again blockstream devs REKT that too by saying "its not core, its an alt".

core are not independent. they are follow the leader of 10 paid devs and 100 unpaid interns staying loyal in hopes of getting a job with blockstream

the HK agreement was where people who CAN CODE and CAN direct their employees were invited to write code...
if the HK agreement thought open community effort was possible then .... oh wait, that was tried and REKT..
so the HK agreement wanted the guys that could code to get core to open its gates and do something to be on the same playing field as other diverse nodes.
but luke JR, etc just wanted to act like unskilled janitors/floor cleaners, just turning up for a free lunch before returning to mop and wax the floor, because gmax didnt want to go that route.

i find it funny that one day you praise blockstream devs as kings that own bitcoin and deserve control.
then the next day, pretend they are just floor sweeping janitors and there is no control.

so.

either
man up and be ok with diversity and decentralisation (true independence).
or
man up and admit your preference of core dominance and control in a centralised one codebase dependant group
4597  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: AsicBoost Probably the reason Segwit is being blocked. on: April 09, 2017, 05:21:05 AM
1. (to address posts above) 30% of pools abstaining is really due to being smart and knowing nodes DO matter so no point flagging for something that a node wont fully validate/handle even if node can 'hotpotato game' a stripped block
solution: finally do a proper node+pool consensus and need 1 merkle. and while at it, go dynamic. = community happy

2. asicboost is not a harm its an efficiency gain. like ATI's openCL was. and the resulting hash is not fake but a valid hash that works and checks out. (ATI did not attack bitcoin in the GPU mining era, for analogy comparison)

3. mining hardware and asicboost predates segwit.. meaning miners didnt create an attack, segwit 'going soft' 2merkle tricks just isnt compatible
(a yet to be active bitcoin code failing due to ATI opencL incompatibility wouldnt of been blamed as a ATI openCL attack, for analogy comparison)
solution: segwit finally do a proper node+pool consensus and need 1 merkle. and while at it, go dynamic. = community happy

4. again miners hardware software efficiency 2015. segwit anyonecanspend backdoor exploit AFTER that. segwit code release october 2016.  feb-march 2017 gmax finds a flaw in segwit and goes full wetard to blame miners(facepalm illogic).

today
rather than give in and do a better job with only 6 month old inactivated segwit software,
rather than give in and finally do a real full bitcoin network upgrade of 1merkle and keep all diverse nodes on level playingfield of a peer network
gmax wants to double down.
mandatory activation, remove pool efficiency but keep his 2 merkle TIER network control agenda

issue with gmax plan:
some outsider can start building a 600k blockheight chain privately using the asicboost. to get better chainwork.. then in a few years when bitcoin moves to a 1 merkle, they plop in their chain and take over, due to bitcoin being less efficient than the outsider during the 2merkle period.

solution. do a full proper node+pool consensus, go dynamic, keep the community happy and just let pools use the most efficient hashing methods ther are.

dont break the pools kneecaps just to force segwit tier network in.

P.S segwit using the anyonecanspend opcode backdoor exploit (AKA 'going soft') and suggesting that blockstream can add more backdoors (aka 'even easier to go soft') is allowing more risks of outsiders using those backdoors to slide in their own trojans undetectable to native nodes.
(if people take off their dev devotion hats, they will see it)
4598  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Inside-the-Dragons-Den-Bitcoin-Cores-Troll-Army on: April 09, 2017, 02:26:02 AM
There is no such thing as the "Blockstream trolling group", same is the case with "Cores Troll Army".

Lauda, CB, & BillyBobZorton definitely wear the Bitcoin Core Troll Army Uniforms.
Methinks you do Protest too much.  Cheesy


lauda wants to think he is not a troll but a
wizard
dragon
ninja

lol thats the point i was making when i said lauda only gets to hang around the water cooler rather then be invited to the secret clubs  (i was and still am giving subtle hints to see how deep he can dig his own hole)
4599  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BUcoiners are trolling you into buying alts on: April 08, 2017, 08:09:29 PM
There will be no hard fork because BUcoin has no real support from the community. Sooner or later Jihad Wu will retract and the current altcoin bubble will pop in your face and everyone not holding BTC will be left behind.

lol says the guy that said
Im profiting big time with litecoin, I got in after this dip and im already making great gains. Litecoin will go to 50 dollar, 100 dollars, even 300 dollars, because Litecoin doesnt have all the stupid drama and big whales from Bitcoin.
We will be rich thanks to Litecoin and segwit!!
4600  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Sending transactions only to SegWit miners on: April 08, 2017, 07:35:34 PM

Since segwit requires 95% signaling to activate, most or all miners will be segwit anyway.

If you're asking if today, would it be possible to send your transactions to a pool signaling segwit, the answer is no.  You don't have the power to do that.  
Whoever mines the block decides what transactions to include.


technically it can be done if you set your node to only connect to a pools IP adress of the ones you prefer
or you know the pools API to manually 'PushTX' the transaction to only the pools you prefer

why wouldnt the tx get relayed onward?

some pools dont relay unconfirms to other pools. especially high fee tx's so that if the pool misses that block they can still include the still unconfirmed tx in next block.

also the network game theory is that the normal non-mining fullnode relay should have got the tx's to all the pools so no need for the pools to retransmit unconfirms between each other, allowing the bandwidth between pools to be utilised better to broadcast to each other mainly solved blocks and not much else
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 ... 846 »
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!