Bitcoin Forum
February 16, 2020, 07:43:21 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 [341] 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 ... 878 »
6801  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BTCC CEO Bobby Lee Discusses PBOC Visit In TV Interview on: January 18, 2017, 07:05:38 PM
is not retard like North Korea, I heard that in North Korea, people can't use mobile phone

google Koryolink, oh look north korea have a telecommunications company. and its not a blackmarket under the table company either its actually a public service
6802  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 18, 2017, 06:51:02 PM
The truth is in some hours there will be a simple majority of over 50% running a segwit node and adoption not stalling. In a month or two it will be 60 - 70%.

i got intrigued by your post history..
hmm monero fanboy. i now see why you are devoted to gmaxwell and not even trying to research beyond gmaxwells centralist mindset
you dont care about bitcoins growth, your hoping for some monero riches.

let me guess you then want to cash out with some fiat riches.

goodluck with that though.
6803  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 18, 2017, 06:29:05 PM
You are free to belive whatever you want, that doesnt make it real.
Better take the tiny risk that your conspiracy is real, then hand over bitcoin to a bunch of incompetent noob devs.

you are free to stick head in the sand and only catch a breath to see your friend with the gun warning you of gunfire while he takes aim.

how about do some research and read something. learn. have an open mind and see beyond the small box you want to put yourself in
6804  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 18, 2017, 06:13:24 PM
Sorry I dont talk to conspiracists, makes no sense.

blockstream $90m is not a free gift, its an investment that needs returns
blockstream are part of the bankers making their closed fiat2.0 - https://www.hyperledger.org/about/members

cant make it up when its true.

also you mentioned nodewitness
1   /Satoshi:0.13.1/   1615 (28.87%)
2   /Satoshi:0.13.2/   997 (17.82%)
main imps total = 46.69%

satoshi:0.13.99 / 119 (2.12%)
BTCC:0.13.1/ 56 (1%)  - bob lee's managed sybil distribution
knots:0.13.2/ 19 (0.34%) - luke jr
knots:0.13.1/ 7 (0.12%) - luke jr

and out of that ~50% not all of them are explicitly voting for it. they are implicitly voting for it just by staying upto date.
some are running it to test/examine and bugfind too.

so in context there is no 'majority' or even a marginal majority explicitly in favour of it. hense why high majority is required.
6805  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 18, 2017, 06:06:30 PM
Well with my limited knowledge, I think SegWit is a good thing, I've upgraded my node to 0.13.2, and I block classic and unlimited nodes. Do I need to do anything else?

Hi, good one ! I want to block classic and unlimited nodes on my node aswell, how do i do that ?

Segwit node apdotion ( Flag "NODE_WITNESS") just crossed 50%, the BU-fanboy-team is very delusional, claiming "people dont want it blablaba".

LOL funny
you want to create an altcoin by blocking anything not blockstream. thats real funny
blockstream fanboys wanting to centralise by not being diverse open network, and instead close themselves off into a small box and live in cabin fever of only being fed by one master at the door.

real funny

thats about as rational as letting your best friend shoot your foot because you best friend tells you someone else might shoot your foot. but its your friend that is the only one with a gun... so you let him.. infact you try to get them to teach you how to shoot yourself in your own foot
6806  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 18, 2017, 06:03:57 PM
Go to 8MB now.  Fees go back down to .0001  Keep building LN until it is fantastic.  revoke Maxwell's commit access as he has shown himself to be corrupt. 

we dont need to be at 8mb now.
but we do need more than 1mb.

nodes and pools should have dynamic block settings that gradually increase. EG all agree on 2mb for now and they dip their toe in the water at 1.001mb just to see if any bugs or issues occur (like the DB bug sipa implanted in v0.8 in 2013 when blocks wanted to go over 0.5mb)

if no bugs or large orphan rate occurs, each block can dip a bit further into the water. incrementing the size thats actually produced.
just like the progress from 0.5-1mb in 2013-2015, but at a rate thats natural and helps while reducing risk..
this may be as short as 2 days or longer depending on needs of the community.

then nodes when blocks get to 2mb. they can flag a bigger buffer number the nodes can cope with. and it plays out again safe natural dipping toe in the water to mitigate any orphan drama. growing naturally over time based on what the community as a whole can cope with.

yes people can have 8mb settings personally purely so they dont need to play with settings often and let consensus work out the safer increments under that where the community as a whole can accept.
6807  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 18, 2017, 05:25:39 PM
Ver is trash

wow you backed that up with facts. data, statistics..

.. oh wait you didnt
6808  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 18, 2017, 05:20:25 PM
LN investors do not have the same objectives in mind as LN creators.  Please keep this in mind at all times.

this i have to disagree with
blockstream NEED their LN.. not for utility. but for them becoming the hub. they already have the code to have it set up where they become the hub(removing buzzwords, they hold the DNS (peer location) seed)
they want to be the hub to charge penalty fee's and 'manage' the maturity to activate revokes. they NEED LN to start making income to repay blockstream investors.

they are in debt to a tune of well over $90m that needs repaying.
they are desperate to get LN working by a deadline or they wont get another tranche of funding. and if not hitting the deadline they need to start repaying the debt.

this is why rusty russel, sipa and maxwell are desperate to scare people into thinking LN is the only solution.
this is why rusty russel, sipa and maxwell are desperate to halt onchain dynamic scaling to make people think LN is the only solution.
this is why rusty russel, sipa and maxwell are desperate to  scare people by saying false stories of "non blockstreamers want 1gb by midnight"
this is why rusty russel, sipa and maxwell are desperate to  scare people by saying false stories of "non blockstreamers are bad"

not due to it being part of bitcoins open ethos, or the benefit of the community. but due to blockstream contracts to make returns to investors

do the sheep honestly think blockstream was given $90m investment with no ROI contract, .. where by the sheep think it was a free gift
6809  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 18, 2017, 05:01:22 PM
anyone out there got a uptodate analysis of the "days destroyed" stat blockchain.info used to keep
to show these blockstream sheep that not many people tx's are spent multiple times a week to actually benefit from LN.

the only people using LN are a small niche amount. (daytraders, gamblers and faucet raiders)
oh need i remind blockstream sheep that intentional spammer wont use LN because their intention is not to spend but to spam.
so they will continue spamming. LN does not solve intentional spam

need i remind blockstream sheep that LN is the paypal2.0. which if they think Ver wants centralisation due to his comment about paypal2.0, this was contextually him saying he will accept that blockstream want LN(paypal2.0) if blockstream allow dynamic blocks

6810  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 18, 2017, 04:55:50 PM
good to see people reading and researching LN

now to put it into realistic scenario

when settling. and confirmed(after service). the funds are not spendable onchain straight away by the intended recipient. they are locked in for a week(papers scenario 1000 blocks)..
this is the same as banks/paypals. 3-5business days 'funds unavailable'. you can see it's confirmed but not matured to be spent.

however while the intended recipient is waiting a week. the other party can revoke those funds.
this is the same as banks/paypals chargeback feature.

so guys. while having a service that while inside the service you can swap IOU's instantly (like paying someone inside paypal) when it comes to channel closing and settling(withdrawing out and settling the account) you are on hold for a week and have risk of chargeback.

atleast understand the "after service experience" and understand its the same as you get with banks/paypal.

accept LN is not permissionless and your reliant on another party (dual signing) again like banks/paypal
6811  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 18, 2017, 12:32:22 AM
But without LN i guess we'd need at least need 1GB Blocks

oh shut up with your 1gb blocks.
seems you are spending too much time in blockstreams cabin fever box, listening to all their advertisements and doomsdays. agreeing with them because your locked in a box where its only them talking.

lets set your record straight because it sounds like its bent out of shape and just repeating the same tune of other people in a loop

1. bitcoin will not be the one world currency of 7billion..
2. it will be a free open decentralised network (onchain) but not all 7billion will use it and not all at the same time. it will/should remain a free open choice. not something people are forced to use with no other assets to hold their eggs in different baskets

ok now take todays rational 2million regular users. 0.026% population

and think of a rational number of users it will achieve in 50 years.
hint it wont be anywhere near 100%

lets say it was 5% of world finance. (making it the top 5 reserve 'nation' of the world)

thats over 50 years.. not by midnight tonight by the way.

so in 50 years is only 100mb block.. again not 100mb tonight.. but in 50 years

meaning 2mb growth a year or doubling every 7 years

both of which are achievable and manageable.

after all looking at the technology growth over the last 2 decades. i think people will laugh in 50 years that we are worried about 100mb blocks
just like we laugh at people just 20 years ago getting excited about having 32mb ram and 4gb hard drives, back then thinking that was huge. where they back then would worry about 128gb storage. and we are laughing by holding something the size of a fingernail

again dont think "world domination by midnight" think rationally realistically naturally and sensibly.
6812  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Fibonacci Fork on: January 17, 2017, 10:54:55 PM
i think we need to go back to the old forum feature that people are locked in newbie jail for a bit.

it gives them time to read and understand and learn
6813  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BTCC CEO Bobby Lee Discusses PBOC Visit In TV Interview on: January 17, 2017, 07:20:24 PM
Bobby makes it sound like it wasn't anything big, just a normal conversation, where the authorities want to show who the boss is. I think they are slowly losing control over the money flow and they know it. This posing that they are doing now is nothing more but buying time and slowing the inevitable. All good, but it seems they had not enough footage to show, so they filled the gap with physical Bitcoins.

you need to realise china have the fiat in the banks. it does not evaporate. it just changes account holders. bitcoin does not impact the banks 'value'.
you are not seeing the real world and instead thinking about some civil war which is revolutionary.. but in reality there is not a civil war happening by having exchanges.

the civil war of bitcoin is not about exchanges that swap fiat...
instead its about the retail/consumer use of bitcoin to buy things in shops instead of using fiat.
as that can result in a shop then paying a staff wages in bitcoin and then that staff member only buys stuff in bitcoin. and that shop buys its re-stock in bitcoins, which loses the banks "value" because it affects the GNP and GDP of the countries economy.

so dont think exchanges are the knife to kill a bank/government. instead think about bitcoins utility in retail, wages, lifestyle. as that is the knife of revolution
6814  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BTCC CEO Bobby Lee Discusses PBOC Visit In TV Interview on: January 17, 2017, 05:06:35 PM
No way, China can't ban bitcoin, bitcoin is running on the Internet, unless they cut the power or Internet connection, which is impossible.

fun fact. even if china pulled the plug on the chinese internet. the pools would connect via satalite to stratums outside of china. only disruption it would cause is about 1minute of pool hopping before resuming back to usual..

but thats as we can both agree at the extreme and irrationalable concept of china pulling their internet offline.
so dont worry. bitcoin mining would continue. unhindered. pools have already mitigated these risks years ago, even the absurd near impossible risks
6815  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 17, 2017, 04:59:42 PM
Thats about as much as % user votes on slushpool.

https://slushpool.com/stats/

25 % Don't care
31 % Bitcoin core

Both will be mined as segwit afaik

Wouldn't be surprised if the ratio of ppl running Bitcoin Core nodes which don't care would be even higer.


12,234 archive nodes (99.83%)
thats new.. wait.. its wrote by blockstream. grain of salt needed

i wonder out of the segwitnodes if Luke also (stupidly) included 0.13.0. rather than just counting the segwit flaggers (0.13.1 & 0.13.2)
im guessing he also included 0.13.0. and if so.. facepalm required
6816  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Satoshi's coins rights on: January 17, 2017, 04:55:02 PM
I would answer this with a question : " What do you think will happen with the value of Bitcoin, when people can simply "code" out your

coins. "? We cannot even reach consensus on SegWit, how are we ever going to reach consensus about this? A lot was done with the protocol,

to keep people honest. {They act in a way, to protect their own interest} Doing this, would be like pissing on someone's face.  Roll Eyes ... Today it

is Satoshi's coins and tomorrow it is Roger Ver.... etc. etc..  Angry

agreed
the best solution is have a new keypair type. but have it voluntary. all keypair types are always accepted. then let people voluntarily move them or not.

at worse (the doomsday of QC) people funds get stolen out of old keys. temporary price drama when theives, steal and cashout. but then it stablizes when those coins circulate into the new secure keypairs. thus retaining fungibility and the drama surpasses like a bad episode we dont watch again.

the coins stay in circulation and people learn their lesson.

however destroying old coins or getting a 'manager' to decide to take the coins and redistribute/destroy them (as he deems fit) purely using the fear of a theft /destruction as an excuse to allow him to thieve/ destroy. is stupid
6817  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BTCC CEO Bobby Lee Discusses PBOC Visit In TV Interview on: January 17, 2017, 04:41:16 PM
bitcoin trading does not affect banks/governments FIAT

its that simple.

here is a rational and logical thought.
for every buyer is an opposite and equal seller.  FIAT is not burned. it just moves bank accounts.

infact in 90% of trades it stays in the same bank account. (the exchange).

but in a more broader longer term view X deposits to Y who withdraws to Z. but XYZ are all funds held in bankaccounts the governemt oversee. thus nothing changes in regards to fiat. apart from the account holder.

what would change. is if chinese were posting bank notes to a service. or stealing gold bars from banks and posting them to a service.. then that would be taking from the economy.

but bitcoin legitimately does not do that. all banks see is a name change on who owns what.. banks still hold the fiat and just change the account holder, thats it.

in short banks dont care about bitcoin. banks have legal tender laws, tax laws, minimum wage laws that ensure fiat remains in circulation to keep them in a job

all the chinese drama was just standard regulation policy stuff.
6818  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Satoshi's coins rights on: January 17, 2017, 01:58:33 PM
One last time before I declare you a lost cause:  Do you think there should be a cut off point where coins not moved to a quantum proof key are frozen by the network?

dont bother talking to CB.
he loves to meander the topic off topic. poke the bear, get you to reply and then poke some more until you bite and then claim he is the victim.

he is just tryng to derail topics and meander into making him a victim so he can then try play a victim card to make people think he deserve sympathy. although his point has no facts, data, stats, info.
he just wants sympathy and then use that sympathy to get people on his side.

he abuses emotion to win people. not using data or facts. just emotion
just ignore him he is a well trained troll



back to the topic on hand
new keytypes should be added. and people can voluntarily move their funds.
those that dont can continue using old keytypes. and be at risk of having their funds stolen

in no way should old keys be destroyed or have funds moved by some 'manager' to be redistributed.
in short being punished by centralists at blockstream.

instead the coins should remain part of circulation. and if a hacker was to QC bruteforce. then those coins can be stolen.

end result is temporary price drama but no death to fungibility or coin cap limiits

unlike the proposal to destroy coins which does destroy fungibility and destroy the coincap limit and permanently causes issues for the whole economy
6819  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 17, 2017, 01:54:20 PM
franky 1
There's no reason for your FUD by now. If the community feel that someone take over bitcoin and it become centralised everyone can simply vote by his money and move to any of your "decentralised" alts, right? By then stop your useless FUD you can't convince anyone

ok now your trolling.
go do some research and learn something.. as all your doing is wasting your own time otherwise

have a nice day
6820  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 95% lol. No chance. SegWit is now dead. on: January 17, 2017, 01:33:26 PM
Bitcoin is not afraid of alts. There've been a lot of them. If Unlimited or Classic become another two it won't matter anyway they will cost nothing. Averyone knows what developers like Core team contribute and what did sneaky rats like Roger Ver or Andressen or Hearn

you have no clue.

just because you have read a story from X blockstreamers does not make the story true. nor does it mean everyone.

you have cabin fever. thinking the cabin is decentralised because you see more then one person in it. the issue is that your not allowing yourself to get out of the cabin to see things from the whole world. you want to stay within the cabin because you are confortable.

bitcoin is the outside world not the cabin you have locked yourself into.

please look outside of the box and not subject yourself to only conversations with those locked inside the box.

its gmaxwell that wants to intentionally split to alts.. everyone else wants to stay on the mainnet.

i bet you think ver wants paypal2.0 because you read a TITLE of a post on r/bitcoin. but didnt read the CONTEXT.

its LN that is being described as paypal2.0 and ver simply said he would be happy to let blockstream have their LN if blockstream allow mainnet to dynamically and naturally grow.

in no way did it mean ver was making LN.. as we all know thats what blockstream are doing.
CONTEXT COUNTS

wake up and look passed the propaganda of misinterpreting TITLES of posts and start reading the CONTEXT and then researching from an unbiased and diverse set of sources. otherwise your just circle jerking the same stories in the same small cabin of a few biased people. thinking your all correct because your all hear only one story.

here i will spell it out for you.
here is blockstream gmaxwell trying to get anyone not blockstream to fork away..  and they replied they wont be that dumb to intentionally split the network... and before you reply BullSh*t.. its from the horses mouth himself.

What you are describing is what I and others call a bilaterial hardfork-- where both sides reject the other.

I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral by requiring the sign bit be set in the version in their blocks (existing nodes require it to be unset). Sadly, the proposals authors were aggressively against this.


gmaxwell is desparate to get blockstream devs to dominate bitcoin by making other teams fork off.. but none of the other teams are listening to him. they are laughing at him.

if there is anything that i could suggest you learn. without bias..
learn consensus (built into bitcoin)
learn the difference between concensus and an intentional split (gmaxwell calls bilateral fork)

oh and yes hardforks are not all bilateral
there are consensus hardforks too(one chain, minority simply cannot sync)

gmaxwell is trying to brush consensus under the carpet and then shine a glowing light on bilateral. simply because he wants the split

please take some time to research outside of the box you have put yourself into

Pages: « 1 ... 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 [341] 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 ... 878 »
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!