All forks were bug fixes at a protocol level.

Bailout definition :


The devs, who became filthy rich thanks to their crypto token, feared that a third party who controlled more than 10% of all ether in circulation could tank the price and destroy (or affect) their wealth. To avoid this they bailed out themselves by stealing money from this party who executed a contract and returning this money to themselves.

Satoshi "hardcoded" the following quote on Bitcoin's first block: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"

See heere: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Genesis_block

That sentence basically sums up the problem bitcoin solves: in the fiat world you do not control your money, and this is a huge problem. In the fiat world your hard earned money can be seized or inflated to infinity by central bankers, the government, etc.

With Bitcoin you are your own bank, you have full control of your money and nobody, I repeat, NOBODY, can ever touch your money if you maintain control of your private keys. No third party can do shit with your money if keep your private keys safe.

In Bitcoin on-chain transactions that have enough confirmations are final and irreversible. In Bitcoin, cash is fungible.

On the contrary the devs and big stakeholders in Ethereum were just bailed out - they hard forked because they couldn't accept a 33% loss. On Ethereum third parties can arbitrarily decide to seize your money even if you keep control of your private keys. They can just reverse transactions if they want. Transactions are not necessarily final nor irreversible.

The Financial Times published an article yesterday. The title? "Ethereum bailout complete. Long live Ethereum!".

Oh, the irony!

Every day that passes Bitcoin proves it is resilient. Bitcoin is sound money that keeps its promise: you will always be able to move money on chain without third parties being able to stop you - it is impossible to reverse a transaction, FULL STOP.

Ethereum just proved it's a joke. We already knew its awful money (uncertain supply controlled by a benevolent dictator, wow, that sounds sustainable). Now the ethereum community just demonstrated they have no idea of what are the fundamentals of their crypto, what problem they are trying to solve, what promise they need to fulfill. They proved they are just butthurt because they lost the Bitcoin train and just want to profit handsomely from their altcoin in the short term - at all costs, even if fundamentals are destroyed in the process.

Yes, Ethereum just bailed out their devs and stakeholders, fundamentally destroying any sustainability hope for Ethereum in the long term. The Bitcoin community would have never thought seriously about forking to bail out those who lost money on MtGox, that's a big difference.

Disclaimer: I own thousands of ethers, but still a fact is a fact.

I will just leave this here:

Genesis block, Bitcoin: The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks

Block 1920000, Ethereum: Financial Times 20/Jul/2016 Ethereum bailout complete.

mark toknormal's post - he is speaking the truth.

amen brother - if bitcoin survives a few years more there will be a whole generation for which bitcoin is simply better than gold - full stop.

Any good source for bid sum / ask sum charts?

Regardless of that, Ethereum is bad money. There's no issuance plan (or let's say there is a new issuance plan every 2 months) nor a limit to ether supply, Vitalik will generate more ether (or not) as he sees fit. At the end of the day he is a de facto central banker, like it or not. Bitcoin's value proposal is the opposite: finite supply and predictable issuance rate - and that's what makes Bitcoin sound money.

Are there any easy, straightforward instructions to use joinmarket? Blockchain's shared coin was easy.

That really sucks.

Cierto, llévatelo al general porque SEGURO que esto no tiene nada - pero nada - que ver con la minería.

Es curioso como cada vez que sale un tema en prensa que uno conoce de primera mano se da cuenta de que la inmensa mayoría de lo que se publica es un disparate. Si son cifras se les cuelan (o desaparecen) ceros con una alegría tremenda... Si son sucesos confunden el nombre de la víctima con el del verdugo y le dan la vuelta a los hechos y se quedan tan panchos... Y en temas de Bitcoin ya ni hablemos

creado un hilo: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1484574.0

A las 11:30 darán más info:

http://www.elmundo.es/espana/2016/05/25/57455d5de5fdea4a3a8b45f8.html

http://www.levante-emv.com/sucesos/2016/05/25/detenidos-valencia-macrorredada-descifrar-codigos/1422769.html

http://www.farodevigo.es/sociedad/2016/05/25/golpe-policial-mineria-bitcoin-espana/1467412.html

http://www.abc.es/sociedad/abci-treinta-detenidos-gran-operacion-centros-mineria-bitcoin-201605251023_noticia.html

De El Mundo:

BTW (and sorry for being slightly off-topic): did blockchain.info remove "shared coin", their coinjoin implementation? Cannot find it anymore!

OK, so the recommended procedure when upgrading to 0.94.1 is to manually delete the old databases, right? Otherwise we would have in the same folder the ~70GB db together with the ~120MB one....

May I ask who is in charge of mantaining that part of the code?

So even if I don't use --dbdir to choose an alternate db folder Armory 0.94.1 will not use the old directory, e.g.: "databases"?

One question about key-stretching: which algorithm are you using? ROMix? Scrypt?

Installed 0.94.1 with an alternative folder for the db (--dbdir) and all is well.  If i drop the --dbdir argument it will re-build the new ~120MB db in the default folder and delete de old ~70GB one - correct?

I installed Armory 0.94.1 and it works very well. Its database is now under 150MB, a huge improvement if you ask me!

No, i did not switch yet and in fact I'm inclined to stay - I think goatpig has done a pretty good job so far.

You're right, I misstyped Alan's name - I edited the post and corrected it.

Now that Alan has stopped working on Armory, what wallet do you use for offline storage?