Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2019, 11:36:37 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 ... 858 »
4881  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: it is Core, not Bitman blocking segwit on: April 06, 2017, 10:00:39 PM
Bitmain in their recent statement admitted that there chips have ASICBoost
built in, but have not used them on the main chain. Are you calling Bitmain
timetravelers then? Obviously not. This means they had them for a longer
time than people assumed.
what i mean is asicboost is not a "segwit attack/exploit"
asicboost is just an efficiency gain.. end off..

its greg denying his bad code, by using his snobbery to hide that his code is just not compatible with hardware of 2 years ago

When SegWit was released, Bitmain and it's pool, Antpool, did not yet know
that the Coinbase reference is added to with anchor codes. When they learned
it did, they likely began to oppose SegWit on those grounds secretly but
declared publicly it was because there would be no 2MB blocks.

so they said no to segwit because they knew segwit had a incompatibility bug with efficient hardware..
EG like saying you cant use bitcoin with an ATI GPU in 2011, because of an issue that was added in code in 2011 that only works with geforce GPU's

do you blame ATI or the code writers for not making mining easy.
4882  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: it is Core, not Bitman blocking segwit on: April 06, 2017, 09:48:33 PM
Using ASICBoost prevents many forms of development that helps
scaling and non-scaling issues. It is potentially more serious
than anything else currently.

asic boost has been around longer.
easy fix.. make software that doesnt hurt the hardware.. not the other way round.


cant blame the hardware of 2 years ago for software problems of 6 months go

thats like saying ATI exploited bitcoin by being better at GPU mining in 2011-2013 compared to Geforces poor efforts

that like blaming raspberry Pi1 for not validating signatures fast, and so libsecp256k1 had to be invented because raspberry Pi was attacking bitcoin
4883  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: it is Core, not Bitman blocking segwit on: April 06, 2017, 09:39:26 PM

some clarification on those "facts":

1. Jihan supported before understanding the final SegWit Implementation code.
2. Extension blocks do not change the Coinbase references, only add new anchor txs.
3. This comment is jumping the gun. In depth investigations begin now.
4. This data set should be larger and go farther back in time. Likely prior to the patent dates.
The ASICBoost could be throttled from time to time to prevent obvious indicators.
5. Fees are irrelevant here. The exploit centers around gaining more block rewards.
In a future with less block reward and more fees, this exploit is worthless.
6. We need independent verification, which will begin now.

so your saying they did go back in time and made S9chips to include asic boost to attack segwit..
wow amazing.

or logic dictates that segwit wasnt programmed well to actually work with asic efficiency boosts.
Hint: which is easier
1. go back in time by 2 years and undo hardware changes to meet temporary software requirements just 6 months ago, just for some blockstreamer
2. get the centralist blockstream team to now change their code seeing as its only been in public for 6 months and not even active code yet

calling an efficiency boost an attack, even though the efficiency boost existed prior to the code that is supposedly being attacked.. has been the funniest twist of words by greg this month.

anyway

just done some quick maths


* stats at time of post

hmm
looks like BTCC and F2pool are the ones making more blocks than their hash %
not the other way round

*for those wishing to question the numbers


i would have expected antpool to have a block % of something in the 40's while having hash in the 30's if all this gmaxwell PoW propaganda was real
definitely not less than their hash%
4884  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Jihan Wu's patent: The resume on: April 06, 2017, 08:14:04 PM
The only thing that'll sort it is a successfully implemented upgrade that ... addresses the qualms of the few sane ones.
yp its called decentralised consensus
where nodes set the rules, pools follow and devs just work on making things which the users accept or deny.
no dev mandated crap, no dev-king nuke bombs


starting with dynamic blocksize
with a few tweaks to drop maxTXsigop limits to way way way below 20% of maxBLOCKsigop limit (real quadratic spam fix)

 and LN as a voluntary side service. not the end goal only resort

nodes=king
pools=secretary
devs=manual labour

4885  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: it is Core, not Bitman blocking segwit on: April 06, 2017, 08:04:03 PM
You are assuming that when the miners signed the HK agreement,
they already knew what the final SegWit implementation would be.

The reality is that they did not perform their due diligence until after
SegWit was released. When the miners signed the "agreement" they
signed a promise based on a design that was still being worked out.

It is very likely that when ASICBoost Miners learned that the
coinbase is altered in SegWit, they would never follow through with
the full terms of the HK "agreement".

ASICBoost Miners, in theory, can never support new coinbase
references. The issue is not SegWit, it is the Coinbase data.


your assuming that bitmain read october 2016's segwit code
and then time travels back to 2015 and made blueprints for a chip that could attack segwit..

..
more likely sceneario.. segwit is not ASIC compatible .. not the other way round.(unless time travel is possible)

end result
0.13.x versions have issues with ASIC and no longer going to be segwit compatible ..
time to wait a month and let 0.14.1 to be released and let blockstream restart their nodecount that will work with ASICS
4886  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: "Bitcoin" Unlimited Officially #REKT on: April 06, 2017, 07:39:32 PM
and now the burst your bubble moment

ASICS have been around alot longer than segwit has.

trying to assume that asics were hard programmed to actively attack segwit is like blaming a caveman for something invented much much later.

let me guess Jihan has a time machine and seen october 2016's segwit code and and went back in time to 2015 and started building the blueprints for the s9 specifically to hurt segwit

p.s im using gmaxwells announcement of him reverse engineering a chip... (before you propaganda twist it into being about software)
afterall your all complaining about bitmain (hardware company) not CGminer (software company)

kind of funny hardware and cgminer developed befor segwit:bitcoin was even released is suddenly.. 6 months into segwit deadline a "sudden threat"

yawn
gmaxwel has $70m debt to repay and is actually looking to for any reason to split the network.
afterall he did ask nicely early on
What you are describing is what I and others call a bilateral hardfork-- where both sides reject the other.

I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral ... Sadly, the proposals authors were aggressively against this.

The ethereum hardfork was bilateral, probably the only thing they did right--
and has slowly got more and more desperate each week closer it gets to the deadline when he is suppose to offer something to appease his VC masters.


meanwhile other implementations plod along for the last 2 years + making no threats no deadlines and no timebomb or PoW nukes..

time to say blockstream are getting REKT.

all them real independant core devs. maybe its time to maintain core without blockstream reliance because blockstream wont be around forever
4887  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Why does Roger Ver pay for BU Reddit ads? on: April 06, 2017, 06:44:21 PM
Because Vermin is dash guy and let'm scale dash as he want and get the fuck out of Bitcoin


let gmaxwell play with his fiat and monero and stop making bitcoin into his 'centralist experiment' to appease his future bosses at hyperledger.

let DCG go play with zcash and litecoin
let BTCC go play with litecoin

we al know they have lost their desire for bitcoin along time ago
4888  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Well, well, well, now we know what Jihan Wus been up to. on: April 06, 2017, 06:37:52 PM
and now the burst your bubble moment

ASICS have been around alot longer than segwit has.

trying to assume that asics were hard programmed to actively attack segwit is like blaming a caveman for something invented much much later.

let me guess Jihan has a time machine and seen october 2016's segwit code and and went back in time to 2015 and started building the blueprints for the s9 specifically to hurt segwit

p.s im using gmaxwells announcement of him reverse engineering a chip... (before you propaganda twist it into being about software)
afterall your all complaining about bitmain (hardware company) not CGminer (software company)
4889  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: ASICBOOST Aftermath: What Now Must Be Done? on: April 06, 2017, 06:28:47 PM
The problem here isn't ASICBOOST. The problem is that Jihan Wu (and others) are actively blocking SegWit for their own personal gain, while pretending that it is a difference in principle and they are acting to help us all.

sorry to burst your bubble but ASICS have been around alot longer than segwit has.

trying to assume that asics were hard programmed to actively attack segwit is like blaming a caveman for something invented much much later.

let me guess Jihan has a time machine and seen october 2016's segwit code and and went back in time to 2015 and started building the blueprints for the s9 specifically to hurt segwit

p.s im using gmaxwells assumptions of reverse engineering a chip... (before you propaganda twist it into being about software)
afterall ur all complaining about bitmain (hardware company) not CGminer (software company)
4890  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: ASICBOOST Aftermath: What Now Must Be Done? on: April 06, 2017, 05:50:41 PM
lol

i didnt see people crying when an AMD CPU had an advantage vs a Intel CPU
i didnt see people crying when an ATI GPU had an advantage vs a Geforce GPU

but all of a sudden "bomb ASICS coz gmaxwell says so"

why the sudden bomb threats and deadlines and blackmails..
is the $70m debt recovery process coming soo soon?
4891  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: changing the whitepaper? on: April 06, 2017, 05:18:39 PM
franky1 don't dispute, you know as well as I that BU would and will never happen, no fork as a matter of fact. Yes there's "no one forcing anyone" but yet that's all these kids have been talking about these past few days. It has been catalyzed by something...


i have been pasting this sooo many times
this little nugget
What you are describing is what I and others call a bilateral hardfork-- where both sides reject the other.

I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral ... Sadly, the proposals authors were aggressively against this.

The ethereum hardfork was bilateral, probably the only thing they did right--

its not the intention of NON-CORE implementations to split the network.. as you say its gmaxwell and his chums baiting the community

the catalyst is
get the community pointing at BU, while blockstream try to make their TIER network for the DCG cartel.

after all blockstream and DCG had a round table meeting over a month ago, and rather than publicly release the minutes of their meeting they pushed out the "craig wright is satoshi" mantra to distract the real conversation.

i am not in any bandcamp no matter how hard they try to throw me in a band camp.
i can just see passed all the blockstream reddit scripts of REKT campaigns to pretend blockstream are the victims.

there should be no core TIER network (but gmaxwell needs it to repay the $70m debt)
there are not only 2 implementations there are over a dozen.

the only ones not playing ball by avoiding a fair open diverse decentralised peer network are blockstream(core)
4892  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Jihan Wu's patent: The resume on: April 06, 2017, 05:07:48 PM
So Blockstream wants the bitcoin market to be centralized through a few central companies and hubs?
Nope, that was Bitmain that wanted to maintain centralization of mining hardware and hashing power through their company and hubs.

LOL
check out DCG portfolio
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#b
blockstream
bitpay
BTCC
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#c
coinbase

blah blah blah..
yep all the big names of the blockstream cartels cabin fever mindset of REKTing anything not blockstream sanctioned, as a altcoin are all on the portfolio

P.S
while its the DCG/bockstream cartel that are fearmungering, making deadlines shouting threats, mandatory activations, going soft to avoid node consensus, adding PoW nukes.

the other decentralised peer implementations are just plodding along letting consensus decide.. no threats no deadlines.
and saying no to splitting the network
What you are describing is what I and others call a bilateral hardfork-- where both sides reject the other.

I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral ... Sadly, the proposals authors were aggressively against this.

The ethereum hardfork was bilateral, probably the only thing they did right--
4893  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: changing the whitepaper? on: April 06, 2017, 04:59:15 PM
isn't this old?
i swear i heard about this at least 4 months ago, cobra or whatever said this and nothing happened.

has this resurfaced or is it a repetition of an old drama (sorry can't open reddit from here)
he re-launched his mission yesterday.
reddit
Quote
Cobra-Bitcoin -87 points 1 day ago

The paper is under the MIT license and part of the original Bitcoin project support files. The paper points to bitcoin.org, and was originally uploaded there, it's well within our right to produce an updated version that corrects the major problems. As things are right now, too many people get encouraged to read the white paper to "learn" about how Bitcoin works, and these people just come out with an incorrect interpretation of how things should be.


cobra tried to do this last year. many objected and the drama died..
seems like core cant take no for an answer and will just keep trying to push it rather then get over their own snobbery
4894  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: bitmain and asicboost/segwit on: April 06, 2017, 04:54:22 PM
By that I mean BITMAIN and associates. This includes the likes of ViaBTC, and other mostly Chinese organizations/individuals.

you might want to reach further over to the blockstreams associates side. EG F2pool and BTCC

oh that reminds me. even f2pool was good enough to have morals to admit something
meanwhile bitcoins segwit 31% block flagging is only temporary due to a hack expect it to drop back down below 30% in the next fortnight

https://twitter.com/f2pool_wangchun/status/848582740798611456
Quote
Wang Chun‏ @f2pool_wangchun

Someone hacked major mining operations and their stratum had been changed from antpool, viabtc, btctop to us. Our hashrate doubled instantly

10:07 am - 2 Apr 2017


4895  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: bitmain and asicboost/segwit on: April 06, 2017, 04:51:08 PM
apparently being used

prove it
i do laugh at you and gmaxwell waffle about X but then throw in the "apparently" "could be" "potentially"

anyway
lets see what the maths really tells us

just done some quick maths


* stats at time of post

hmm
looks like BTCC and F2pool are the ones making more blocks than their hash %
not the other way round

*for those wishing to question the numbers


i would have expected antpool to have a block % of something in the 40's while having hash in the 30's if all this gmaxwell PoW propaganda was real
definitely not less than their hash%

oh well gmaxwell debunked.

kind of funny how many times gmaxwells announcement didnt name the pool and how many times gmaxwell uses the word "they could" rather then "they are"
Quote
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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).


..
just to let the script writers twist it into "its an attack, bomb them bomb them bomb them"

P.S
gotta laugh that when its an exploit.. he words it as attack on Bitcoin's SHA2 [adambacks] hashcash.
but when its a bug he calls it an bitcoin proof of work oversight....

he is too far deep inside his bosses pocket

4896  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: ASICBOOST Aftermath: What Now Must Be Done? on: April 06, 2017, 04:44:48 PM
lets see what the maths really tells us

this post is very clear to anyone that you not even understand what we talk about here.... Tongue what a crap
what has to do this with ASICBOOST?Huh Ver is You?

asicboost should be showing a 20-30% advantage not a minus% disadvantage

now show me your stats
dare ya!
4897  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: ASICBOOST Aftermath: What Now Must Be Done? on: April 06, 2017, 04:28:33 PM
lets see what the maths really tells us

just done some quick maths


* stats at time of post

hmm
looks like BTCC and F2pool are the ones making more blocks than their hash %
not the other way round

*for those wishing to question the numbers


i would have expected antpool to have a block % of something in the 40's while having hash in the 30's if all this gmaxwell PoW propaganda was real
definitely not less than their hash%

oh well gmaxwell debunked.

kind of funny how many times gmaxwells announcement didnt name the pool and how many times gmaxwell uses the word "they could" rather then "they are"
Quote
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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).


..
just to let the script writers twist it into "its an attack, bomb them bomb them bomb them"

P.S
gotta laugh that when its an exploit.. he words it as exploiting [adambacks] hashcash.
but when its a bug he calls it an bitcoin proof of work oversight....

he is too far deep inside his bosses pocket
4898  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: bitmain and asicboost/segwit on: April 06, 2017, 04:25:55 PM
BITMAIN Equipment won't stop hashing. They have ASICBOOST built into its hardware, but only the units that BITMAIN is operating have the corresponding software for ASICBOOST to work.

This means that all of BITMAIN's farms/mines will lose the 30% advantage. However, they still own massive amounts of hashpower.
Consumer units shouldn't be affected.

only bitmain has the software? pfft
if you keep pulling your own leg like that... only you will be the one walking with a limp
4899  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: bitmain and asicboost/segwit on: April 06, 2017, 04:13:54 PM
just done some quick maths


* stats at time of post

hmm
looks like BTCC and F2pool are the ones making more blocks than their hash %
not the other way round

*for those wishing to question the numbers
4900  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: bitmain and asicboost/segwit on: April 06, 2017, 03:57:18 PM
Yawn

2013 - GPU miner- "some dude is using asics, thats unfair lets bomb them bomb them bomb them"
2014 - GPU miner- "decided to buy an asic, way cheaper than a bomb, happy now"

result
join the party of many pools of a decentralised PEER network using asics by bitmain..not throw a tantrum and refuse to give up your corner of your blockstream TIER network.

PS its not just antpool using bitmain products
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 ... 858 »
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!