Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2019, 03:20:45 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 ... 858 »
5161  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell on: March 25, 2017, 09:41:29 PM
Would you please obsessing over me?  It's creepy.

I am not your mommy.

You do not get to determine how I spend my time, you do not get to restrict what I say or believe.  I don't force anyone to do anything. You will you make me cow down and obey you through threatening me by lying to the public to try to raise a mob of idiots against me, and even if you do manage to kill me you will not stop bitcoin, you will not convert it to the centralized coin you seem to so desperately want.

So give it a break.

you are the centralist!!

how about just add a few lines of code to be dynamic with segwit.
get your own desires of being god/mommy removed.. and bring yourself down to being on a level of PEER. not the TIER network you want

P.s dont reply commenting about your own mommy complex..
only reply about:

GMAXWLL: if core want to resolve things.. there are 2 options

1. PROVE how backward compatible things are by getting their partner BTCC to make a segwit block with a segwit confirmed tx in it.. worse case rejected in 3 seconds.. best case nothing bad. and it instills confidence.
2. make it dynamic segwit. that way when people realise segwit activation day solved nothing(due to needing users needing to do other things beyond segwit activation).. atleast people are then able to move on with dynamics rather than waiting another 2 years for core to make more excuses
5162  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: discusses Bitcoin Scaling on: March 25, 2017, 08:57:05 PM
he has a point about forget the price and instead concentrate on the infrastructure..
as the concentration on the infrastructure will take care of the price as a side positive effect anyway..

but his understanding of the debate seems to be more of reading the reddit doomsday scripts, rather than the reality.

its core that have all the splitting the network crap. (bip9 that can activate below 95%) (UASF) (PoW algo changes).
core are the ones with wanting the TIER network not the decentralised diverse PEER network

if core is having issues getting consensus they need to NOT press their red button doomsday bombs but instead THEY need to compromise with the community.

the community was going with 8mb base block then lower then lower. and now even dynamic where (heres the truth) the nodes set the limits and pools follow what nodes prefer as a majority.(nodes have 2 limits. pools follow and adjust the lower limit not upper limit)

core can level themselves and unite their side with a few lines of code. rather then get everyone else to rewrite everything for cores half promises

..
as for the arguments of 'giving pools the power'
again only core have done this when they went soft.

...
the consensus was segwit would be accepted if a baseblock increase was part of the deal. core renigged that deal by pretending what they signed meant about just as much as asking their evening carpet cleaner to turn up. pretending they had no power.

core need to take a step back and do something the community want.

dynamics and segwit seems the only compromise which was the original late 2015 debate. so they need to reagree to do it. not hold the network hostage with their doomsday red buttons. while pointing the finger else where blaming everyone else.

they know they cant blame bU. because be has not big red button. they shouldnt blame pools because no matter what pools make, without consensus it will get dropped in 3 seconds.

core need to realise going soft and avoiding the community was CORES mistake, stop acting like gods, admit they are human and realise that the community is more important then devs god complex


Mr Madbitcoins and vinny think its a "roger vs" debate.. its not..
when will those blockstreamists wake up that there are many more people against cores dominance then just roger.
seems they are repeating that rhetoric to feel like core should win. by pretending there is no community divide by pretending its just a 1 man vs

they are both trying to say anyone against segwit is impatient..
yet its core making dadlines and threatening the doomsday buttons while trying to play the victim card.

the solution is simple.
core add just a few lines of code and give users more control and devs less control.

all the dynamic and base block increases are patient and not set deadlines..


im about half way through the video while writing all this.. and all i can see is 2 guys deep in the blockstreamist camp that have no clue about what segwit really does and actually works beyond cores 30 second elevator pitch.

all they care about is getting core activated without actually understanding it.
they pretend core are going slow.. yet core have all the deadlines and red doomsday nuke buttons. they only thing they are slow on is what was actually asked at the consensus meetings.


5163  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: this is just sad on: March 25, 2017, 05:37:49 PM
market cap is a meaningless number

i can create an alt tomorrow with 5trill coins.. get just 1 coin on an exchange and sell it to myself for $1.. and instantly my alt is market capped at $5trillion...

there are NOT $25billion fiat sitting around in bank accounts ear-marked to back the entire cryptocoin market.

anyone can make the market cap spiral up to trillions just by using small numbers.

this is true, but the bitcoin real marketcap, based on how many coins where actually traded, and not on simple math, is still high enough, there is a way to calculate this number maybe?
Bitcoin will raise its value only with the growth of its popularity. If users help raise demand for crypto currency, then bitcoin prices will go up. The main thing is not to panic when racing on stock exchanges prices. It always happens, that's just all react differently to this.

saves me rewriting...

The whales are now dumping their coins and it has caused a major fall in the bitcoins price.

Whales??
lol

remember the prices and bitcoins are measured in mBtc (1 thousandth's)


it took only ~99btc (99,392mbtc) to move the price from $931 to $926

for all you fake market cap lovers out there..
under $100k to turn
$15,114,878,100 market cap
down to
$15,033,702,600 market cap

thats a drop of $81,175,500 using under $100k



edit few minutes later


less than $302(324mbtc) to drop the price from $935 to $933
yep $302 to make the markt cap change by $32,470,200.00


then ~$50(54mbtc) to ramp the price from $933 to $935
yep $50 to make the market cap change by 32,470,200.00


... one of the reason on why others tends to panic sell.
Users panic because .. blah blah.. Therefore, only calmness is needed.

its not about panic.. its market manipulation by the markets own programming and order limits.

if the only orders you can make are in $1 increments.. then thats $16m-ish market cap change every time an order line is filled. even if that order line only contains 1mbtc (0.0001)

the fix is to allow more increments
EG not 0.934-0.935
but
0.93401-0.93402-0.93403-0.93404-0.93405
that way the price doesnt move by the whole dollar (volatile with no pressure needed/much coin needed).. but instead in cent amounts more smoothly
5164  Economy / Speculation / Re: Its time to grab bitcoins from the whales! on: March 25, 2017, 05:24:54 PM
... one of the reason on why others tends to panic sell.
Users panic because .. blah blah.. Therefore, only calmness is needed.

its not about panic.. its market manipulation by the markets own programming and order limits.

if the only orders you can make are in $1 increments.. then thats $16m-is market cap change every time an order line is filled. even if that order line only contains 1mbtc (0.0001)

the fix is to allow more increments
EG not 0.934-0.935
but
0.93401-0.93402-0.93403-0.93404-0.93405
that way the price doesnt move by the whole dollar (volatile with no pressure needed/much coin needed).. but instead in cent amounts more smoothly
5165  Economy / Speculation / Re: Its time to grab bitcoins from the whales! on: March 25, 2017, 05:00:34 PM
The whales are now dumping their coins and it has caused a major fall in the bitcoins price.

Whales??
lol

remember the prices and bitcoins are measured in mBtc (1 thousandth's)


it took only ~99btc (99,392mbtc) to move the price from $931 to $926

for all you fake market cap lovers out there..
under $100k to turn
$15,114,878,100 market cap
down to
$15,033,702,600 market cap

thats a drop of $81,175,500 using under $100k



edit few minutes later


less than $302 to drop the price from $935 to $933
yep $302 to make the markt cap change by $32,470,200.00


then ~$50 to ramp the price from $933 to $935
yep $50 to make the market cap change by 32,470,200.00



edit hour later


0.013btc ($12.13) to move the price from $950 to $948

thats $32m off the meaningless market cap..  yep $12.13 caused that
5166  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: this is just sad on: March 25, 2017, 04:20:27 PM
market cap is a meaningless number

i can create an alt tomorrow with 5trill coins.. get just 1 coin on an exchange and sell it to myself for $1.. and instantly my alt is market capped at $5trillion...

there are NOT $25billion fiat sitting around in bank accounts ear-marked to back the entire cryptocoin market.

anyone can make the market cap spiral up to trillions just by using small numbers.

Yes....That's an accurate observation.  In cases such as the one you described, the volume of trade needs to be factored into the speculation when considering marketcap. However, wise traders pay attention to volume.  If you look more closely, you will find that some of the alts have huge volumes, and according to the charts, those which do have large volumes of trade are on the top, right?

until you take away the bot trading by 2 people every few seconds
10btc traded by 2 bots can equal thousands of "volume" a day just playing tennis with 10btc back and forth

yep 100k volume does not mean 10,000 separate coins were bought or sold.
it means maybe
10btc played tennis back and forth 1000 times

meaning even volume doesnt represent real transaction desires, or even show how much actual different coins changed hands
5167  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: schnorr on: March 25, 2017, 03:28:52 PM
Quote
Plausible deniability for multisig: using Schnorr threshold signatures it may be easier to prevent multiple signers or third-parties from knowing who else signed or didn't sign. That's because the individual signatures are merged into a unified signature that doesn't directly reveal who signed it. This can be used in situations where the signers are afraid of reprisals for spending funds in a particular way.

or used by managers to create 1 of 2 multisigs, and pretend its just a single signer..


but shhhhh dont tell people it before gmaxwell has control of the network to abuse it..
5168  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BUgcoin strikes back on: March 25, 2017, 03:08:39 PM
LN may be permissionless theoretically, but in practical terms, it may not be...because it may not be economically
feasible to open your open channel, and you'll have to rely on someone else's.  

LN is not prmissionless.
its a 2 party signature

EG
imagine it like a co-sign bank account.. you cant buy a hooker without your wife signing the cheque..

you cannot just send funds(permissionless). you need to find a second party to agree.
5169  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: this is just sad on: March 25, 2017, 03:01:27 PM
market cap is a meaningless number

i can create an alt tomorrow with 5trill coins.. get just 1 coin on an exchange and sell it to myself for $1.. and instantly my alt is market capped at $5trillion...

there are NOT $25billion fiat sitting around in bank accounts ear-marked to back the entire cryptocoin market.

anyone can make the market cap spiral up to trillions just by using small numbers.
5170  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: schnorr on: March 25, 2017, 02:40:03 PM
if what you're saying is true and not exaggerated/spin, then they (core) has truly gone mad.

well segwit only fixes things if everyone is disarmed from doing quadratics/malle which is only really achieved by moving to segwit keys. (the activation is more about getting the topography of the tier network inplace when people set up thier node
...
mimble works by having a mimble manager with the key to a multisig to use funds without the owner having to be actively online.
...
the spin is only.. if these get activated and if they are used by the managers for negative purposes..
there is no spin about the functions abilities. just who and how it could be used by the wrong people incharge

sorry if im never the utopian dreamer and ass kisser. but i look for flaws to wake people up to risks.

P.S core went mad ages ago. for many many reasons
5171  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: schnorr on: March 25, 2017, 02:00:31 PM
they are prepping to get core(blockstream) nodes as the upper filter tier. ("dont worry folks no need to upgrade and be FULL NODE PEERS, proteching annd diversifying and decentralising the network.. we can filter a stripped data block down to you, no need to validate it")

by changing the keypairs (segwit+schnorr) and dicking around. next stage is to get people to move their UTXO over to segwit/schnorr.("to get the fixes as promised everyone needs to move to segwit keypairs")

next stage is scream blue murder about d-wave threat to really push people to move funds so that they can kill off old blocks and prune it (part of the destroy satoshis / oldtimers stash) if they dont move it in X months.


oh and more intensely funny and worrying.. when they get their p2WSH, they want to slide in a 1 of 2 multisig. where by some 'mimblewimble' manager has the second key, so mimble can just pluck peoples funds out of random people/blocks created after its all setup. to spend (but salespitch twisted) in a cough trusted cough mixer and then hand the funds back in the next block, thus allowing them to keep blocks stored down.

some fools see the "wow less blocks to store, amazing huh".. but others see the "dang they wanna have control of our coins, hell no"
especially when mimble becomes more about the UTXO like an account balance.. rather than the blockchain concept of the last 8 years.

then we can just call it bank2.0
5172  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 86% segwit support from users on: March 25, 2017, 04:55:57 AM
there are more implementations than just BU, so why fear BU?
I'm not against more implementations of Bitcoin. I'm just against people shoving their favorite, consensus breaking implementation flavor of the month down my throat.

the only one bypassing consensus is core. they intentionally and publicly said they prefer giving only the pools the vote.. bypassing the nodes
5173  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 86% segwit support from users on: March 25, 2017, 04:54:23 AM
Because core(blockstream) has been the selected software-trojan horse by deep pocketed agencies and states to bribe the chinese mafia into mining it.

FTFY

blockstream CEO CTO..
BTCC, bitfury ..
lol follow the money.. DCG


5174  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Classic developer admits it: blocksize debate is just a powegrab excuse on: March 25, 2017, 03:37:52 AM
Yes,nothing is happening today for the progress of bitcoin.They are not really worried about transaction fees and more time for transactions.They are just mentioning this issue to grab the power.Whatever happens is not good for the progress of bitcoin.But we as bitcoin investors cant do anything now and we are just audience to watch this drama.

you (as a non-pool) cant do anything to stop segwit officially, because core went soft.

but for other proposals that are not soft you can.
EG if you hate segwit and you hate dynamics then just stick with core version 0.12

it wont do much for veto'ing segwit but 72% of pools currently are not flagging for segwit unless they see unofficially good node support.
but would show you dont support dynamics officially

if you hate dynamics but want segwit then run version core 0.13.1-0.14, its unofficially supporting segwit but would show some unofficial confidence in it, and it it OFFICIAL veto of dynamics due to officially reducing node count consensus of dynamics

..
if you hate segwit but want dynamics
the there are SEVERAL brands that are for dynamics BU is just one. but you can also tweak any othr favourite brand you prefer to be dynamicly capable

if you want segwit AND dynamics then theres bitcoin EC. or you can tweak your own core v0.14 to be dynamic and segwit accepting


5175  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Proposal: Make the orignal "Nakamoto" coins available for miners on: March 25, 2017, 03:15:11 AM
and this is a subtle hint of whats to come...

if segwit activates.. a threat will come.
move to segwit keys or have your current UTXO killed off in a mass prunning event of blocks before activation date getting prunned

people can already see blockstream planning it as their threat to push people to use segwit keys to force people to move funds to even achieve segwits promises

P.S
core have all the prunned, mimble wimble and other plans to move funds and destroy blocks without community consent..

P.S
having code that can destroy coins is worse than just letting a thief move them.. oh and lets not forget the real world realising devs can simple delete coins at a whim will destroy any "asset" trust of fungibility.

if anything let a thief move them.. atleast the funds would then be moved to secure keys and then still part of circulation.. the ramifications of destroying funds will be worse.

think about it. if satoshi did move them to secure keys.. what would the response be.. "its not satoshi.. its D-wage theft, destroy them before they are all moved"

how will anyone know the difference between the legit owner moving them and a d-wave thief.
5176  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: stop blaming miners on: March 25, 2017, 01:09:21 AM
miners are already feeling the effects, if compromise is not reached they will have lots of bricks and debt

Exactly. The incentive system in BTC should actually kick into effect soon.

When Segwit was in the ascendancy BTC was hitting new highs and was resilient even after the ETF decline. As soon as BTU took the lead BTC has suffered. The market is speaking and is hitting miners where it hurts.

segwit made many promises from late 2015. but now people are seeing the holes. and realising something else is needed because segwit is not as utopian as promised.
5177  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: stop blaming miners on: March 25, 2017, 01:07:34 AM
Yes we are not to blame miners because they are just earners like us who wanted good profit, so respect what perspective they have for their own good. Price will move as part of the economy system and yet demand versus supply will realky take effect of what had happening right now and price actually goes down as the current update shows.

pools just collate tx's (in an arrangement and block formation that NODES accept).
nodes can reject any invalid block arrangement which literally makes pools not get paid. so pools are not going to do foolish things.
secondly the exchanges set the bitcoin price based on users decision of value.

users can decide that bitcoin has less price value and as such pools acceptable block earnings lose fiat price value. so again pools are not going to do anything to hurt their income.

dont blame pools because they are not kissing blockstreams ass.
pools are 72% veto/abstaining from segwit because of many factors.
1. the node count is not sufficient to cover any orphan risk or consensus protection.
2. not all the merchant services are sold on the idea of segwit
3. segwit itself is not 100% fix. and it has many empty promises it cant hope to realistically achieve.
4. segwit turns the node network into a TIER network not a PEER network
5178  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: stop blaming miners on: March 24, 2017, 11:52:59 PM
Since the first ASICs came out we're witnessing a growing centralization of Bitcoin by mining industries. The pools are getting bigger, farms are getting bigger and the equipment is getting more expensive. That's what people are afraid of when looking in the near future. What if in 2 - 3 years it will all be in the hands of 2 big companies that will each have 35% of the network and the rest of us little people will have to accept whatever they come up with?

in 2013 there were only half a dozen pools... now well over 20 pools
5179  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: stop blaming miners on: March 24, 2017, 11:28:19 PM
blockstream

Life must be so simple when you don't need valid arguments, just a bogeyman.

like blockstream fanboys cannot defend the half promises of segwit that wont be met and the empty temporary bribe gestures, etc.. they instead find their own boogeyman, such as blame the pools for blockstreams removal of reactive pricing(replaced by average) removal of priority(replaced with just pay more) and refusing to expand REAL blocksize(replacing with empty promises of more tx if segwit happens)
yet all the finger pointing can find its way back to blockstream caused events


well when nodes HAD the power to veto. pools had to follow nodes lead or get orphaned.
EG
Code:
2017-01-29 06:59:12 Requesting block 000000000000000000cf208f521de0424677f7a87f2f278a1042f38d159565f5
2017-01-29 06:59:15 ERROR: AcceptBlock: bad-blk-length, size limits failed (code 16)
boom non consensus block dealt with in 3 seconds. drama over
...
but now blockstream used a loophole to give pools the power(going soft).. and if pools dont kiss blockstream ass blockstream can kill the pools.

also segwit(blockstream) wants to widen their loophole(going soft even easier in future) to make it even easier to throw trojans in without node consent/veto.
and again blame pools if anything bad happens or kill pools if they dont do as blockstream say.

if blockstream had any honour. they would see there is resistance and instead of threats of lowering bip9, doing UASF and mining algo changes.. they should honourably re thing and compromise themselves to something the community would accept..
but no its blockstreams road or the cliff
5180  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: stop blaming miners on: March 24, 2017, 11:18:48 PM
but whoever takes up that new race will be fully aware that they'll be kicked to the kerb if they wilfully go against the interests of blockstream. if it happens once, it can happen again and they'd better know that.

FTFY
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 ... 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!