Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)

[Zarathustra]

Their Big Lie is that Bitcoin was created to replace commercial banking, not central banking (as if the Genesis Text was about $2 ATM fees instead of TBTF bailouts).

Brilliant observation, thank you.

It is indeed.  I personally care not one iota about replacing ATM's.  The debt-based monetary system which currently animates the entire economic state of my country is what I care about.  More specifically, the inherent life expectancy of such systems and their typical failure modes, and what it may mean to me.  Even more specifically, what evolves out of such an implosion.

It is worth note that almost without exception the efforts that Hearn and Andresen have focused on are to facilitate to enlistment of people who's interest does not go beyond the ATM/VISA/PayPal aspect of the Bitcoin monetary system.  I attribute this to a strategy which recognizes that these participants are a distinct liability to the defensibility of the ecosystem.  The demands that 'the masses' make will open many chinks in the armor.  Actually 'chinks' is an understatement.  The effect would be that of a sufficiently large torpedo detonated under the keel mid-ship.

I do believe that this 'enlist the masses' focus has been strategic, and is for the ultimate purpose of destroying the Bitcoin solution in it's initial form.  At least in Hearn's case.  Gavin may at one point have been legitimately convinced that ballooning the userbase was a viable defense however naive that may be, and also that bending over backward to placate the existing political power structures so that they will be nice to us made sense.  I don't believe that that is a sustainable argument any more if it ever was, and Gavin must certainly know this.

heh, and now coinbase goldman sachs is issuing bitcoin 'debit' cards...

clearly the innovation of teh century!

No, xapo did it before. Those are the market players who will enforce big blocks next year. Zero chance for the stream blocking trolls.

[brg444]

No, xapo did it before. Those are the market players who will enforce big blocks next year. Zero chance for the steam blocking trolls.

Do you enjoy sucking up to the bankers?

Are these the leaders you trust Bitcoin with? Larry Summers, Citibank & Visa?

[Zarathustra]

In any case-- I suggest you stop thinking in terms of finding ways to "force" people to do things; it's unbecoming.

You are free to suggest whatever you want. The market will force the centralized dev team to raise the limit. That is my prediction. If you decide to prolong the stalemate ("which is the preferred outcome of bitcoin core" according to your cheerleader iCEBREAKER, the ad hominem warrior), your influence will be marginalized. The market will not be forced to follow the devs of one company any longer. The tide is turning.

[Zarathustra]

No, xapo did it before. Those are the market players who will enforce big blocks next year. Zero chance for the steam blocking trolls.

Do you enjoy sucking up to the bankers?

Are these the leaders you trust Bitcoin with? Larry Summers, Citibank & Visa?

Your signature is sucking up to the bankers.

[brg444]

In any case-- I suggest you stop thinking in terms of finding ways to "force" people to do things; it's unbecoming.

The market will force the centralized dev team to raise the limit. That is my prediction. If you decide to prolong the stalemate ("which is the preferred outcome of bitcoin core" according to your cheearleader iCEBREAKER, the ad hominem warrior), your influence will be marginalized. The market will not be forced to follow the devs of one company any longer. The tide is turning.

Core running at full steam while XT's spiritual leader just rage quit and the "Unlimited" team of Lolcows can't even figure out what the hell it is they're trying to do.

[btcdrak]

It's amazing to see what uncontroversial technical consensus looks like:

BIP65 a week release of supporting version






Now compare BIP101/XT after 3 months



source: https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/block_version/5y?c=block_version&r=week&t=a

[brg444]

It's amazing to see what uncontroversial technical consensus looks like:

BIP65 a week release of supporting version



Now compare BIP101/XT after 3 months


source: https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/block_version/5y?c=block_version&r=week&t=a

Great contribution to this thread! Deserving of the #REKT stamp of approval

[Zarathustra]

It's amazing to see what uncontroversial technical consensus looks like:

BIP65 a week release of supporting version






Now compare BIP101/XT after 3 months



source: https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/block_version/5y?c=block_version&r=week&t=a

Irrelevant. But you don't get it.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162684.msg12379135;topicseen#msg12379135
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162684.msg12955016;topicseen#msg12955016

[brg444]

Irrelevant. But you don't get it.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162684.msg12379135;topicseen#msg12379135
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162684.msg12955016;topicseen#msg12955016

Oh yeah, the whole "you're just not ready" excuse  

[Zarathustra]

The BTTC event will force

What?  Miners have taken payments for prioritizing transactions for eons. MTGox was doing the same thing in _2011_ (it gave hosting to eligius in exchange for prioritizing transactions).  F2Pool apparently has an API that you can pay access too.

Google 'gmaxwell out of band fees' and you can find lots of posts where I'm schooling people about this possibility (and actuality)-- including pushing for fee estimator designs that don't get confused by it.

There is nothing all that interesting about it, in this case: In Bitcoin, a fee is pretty much a fee regardless of its paid in or out of band.

We even have a supported, documented, and maintained facility in Bitcoin Core for doing this, and have for years, written by the same people you seem to expect to be surprised by it:

(...)

That it's surprising to /you/ only shows you weren't paying attention.    

Todd is surprised/concerned. I'm not.

[Lauda]

Oh yeah, the whole "you're just not ready" excuse  

Just put him on ignore like me and you will be better off. XT is a failed takeover of Bitcoin. Everyone should accept its fate by now.

[Zarathustra]

Oh yeah, the whole "you're just not ready" excuse  

Just put him on ignore like me and you will be better off. XT is a failed takeover of Bitcoin. Everyone should accept its fate by now.

XT. LOL. You proxy warriors are so funny. As if it is about XT. Gavin and Mike are the main trigger that the community will raise the limit soonish.
If you'll claim victory next year after you'll have been forced to follow the new limit is irrelevant.

[hdbuck]

Oh yeah, the whole "you're just not ready" excuse  

Just put him on ignore like me and you will be better off. XT is a failed takeover of Bitcoin. Everyone should accept its fate by now.

XT. LOL. You proxy warriors are so funny. As if it is about XT. Gavin and Mike are the main trigger that the community will raise the limit soonish.
If you'll claim victory next year after you'll have been forced to follow the new limit is irrelevant.

mike is done, still waiting for gavin to hand his key back.

[iCEBREAKER]

Silly arguments by meme carry no weight.

Samson Mow, BTCC's chief operating officer, said: "BlockPriority is a unique and innovative service available exclusively to BTCC users. It's also a means of mitigating potential impact to our customers from the lack of progress on blocksize increases."

Mow is just doing his job, which is to make a profit for BTCC.  Using for marketing purposes the energy/hype/FUD of the Bitcoin Civil War is a clever way to do that.  Good from him.  The rest of us know RBF makes his USP fairly useless, and LN will make it obsolete.

As for memes, your stark, absolute denial of their importance betrays your lack of confidence.

Why don't you go tell Richard Dawkins all about how silly memes are?  Oh wait, you just aren't sufficiently educated to realize memes are as important as genes in shaping evolution.

This is is Bitcointalk, not a dry scholarly journal.  Here in the court of public opinion, control of the narrative does carry weight.

Perhaps you've never encountered the phrase "withering ridicule."

That tells us you are also insufficiently educated to be familiar with Saul Alinky's famous maxim "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."

Since you are a special needs type learner, I'll spell it out for you and t y p e  s l o w l e y . . .

We are not here to argue with you.  We already won the argument, after beating XT to death with our FUD stick and DDOSing the corpse into subatomic particles with the trusty old LOIC.

We are here to enjoy ourselves by making fun of you and ensure your Gavinista narrative stays dead.

Memes are very effective for that purpose.  The sillier, and thus funnier, and thus more memorable, the better.  In Dawkin's meme theory, that corresponds to fitness.

Your 'Bitcoin is dying Because Core' meme is dead, because it was less fit than our 'XT is rubbish' meme.

You are so outmatched here it's not even funny; you don't even understand the nature of the battles in which you desire to fight.

That's why Team XT is getting rekt like Ronda Rousey.  You should have touched gloves, Mikey.   

[iCEBREAKER]

I want to apologise to Ice and Berg and anyone one else that I may have had a pop at on this or other threads.

Is anyone else struggling to remember the above? Not saying it didn't happen, bett, but you're possibly being a little too hard on yourself 

We're all big boys here, so no need to smooth over unruffled feathers.  All the bed-wetters who can't take a joke left for obscure rump forums.

Back when the looming possibility of catastrophic consensus failure seemed real, I was inviting everyone from all sides over to watch the fireworks at a Great Schism party.

sgbett, feel free to have a pop at me anytime.  The adversarial process is educational; clash is the crucible from which truth emerges.  Even if we have to exaggerate or typify our erstwhile fellow Bitcoiners as opponents in order to stir the shit.

Life would be boring as hell if everyone got along and never disagreed.  And that goes double for Bitcoin, which as we all know is powered by internet nerd drama.   

[iCEBREAKER]

The BTTC event will force

...
There is nothing all that interesting about it, in this case: In Bitcoin, a fee is pretty much a fee regardless of its paid in or out of band.
...

Speaking of 'out of band', let me again suggest that it ('out of band') is a powerful concept which could be used to financially reward all infrastructure providers rather than just miners.  Specifically, 'full verifying transfer nodes' (shortened to 'full nodes'.)  The obvious reason for doing so would be that it would foster a broad and robust network.

If a dedicated subordinate chain were used for the 'global network infrastructure support reward' duty, the payouts could be done on the micro level.  Only those actively supporting the infrastructure would care much about this particular sidecoin so the load would not need to be borne on the main-chain.  Better yet, there would need be nearly no changes to core as it operates now provided that the miners could be induced to submit the block reward to the support sidechain.  Not sure how best this would be accomplished (if it is even very possible.)

Yes, in and out of band fees are key to weening Bitcoin off block subsidies without starving it.

That's why I take care to always refer to fee markets in the plural, lest someone get the wrongheaded idea that we have limited mechanisms for dealing with fee backpressure resulting from continuously full blocks.

[iCEBREAKER]

No, xapo did it before. Those are the market players who will enforce big blocks next year. Zero chance for the steam blocking trolls.

Do you enjoy sucking up to the bankers?

Are these the leaders you trust Bitcoin with? Larry Summers, Citibank & Visa?

Your signature is sucking up to the bankers.

Hal Finny is sucking up to the bankers?

LOL no.  Your problem is that you share so vanishingly little of Hal and Satoshi's Vision that you are almost entirely unable to grok what Bitcoin is all about.  The rest of your buffoonery flows from that initially flawed paradigm.

[sgbett]

I want to apologise to Ice and Berg and anyone one else that I may have had a pop at on this or other threads.

Is anyone else struggling to remember the above? Not saying it didn't happen, bett, but you're possibly being a little too hard on yourself 

Punching someone in the face is still bad even if some other people are chopping off limbs.

[sgbett]

I want to apologise to Ice and Berg and anyone one else that I may have had a pop at on this or other threads.

Is anyone else struggling to remember the above? Not saying it didn't happen, bett, but you're possibly being a little too hard on yourself 

We're all big boys here, so no need to smooth over unruffled feathers.  All the bed-wetters who can't take a joke left for obscure rump forums.

Back when the looming possibility of catastrophic consensus failure seemed real, I was inviting everyone from all sides over to watch the fireworks at a Great Schism party.

sgbett, feel free to have a pop at me anytime.  The adversarial process is educational; clash is the crucible from which truth emerges.  Even if we have to exaggerate or typify our erstwhile fellow Bitcoiners as opponents in order to stir the shit.

Life would be boring as hell if everyone got along and never disagreed.  And that goes double for Bitcoin, which as we all know is powered by internet nerd drama.   

I'll still  be having my own opinion on shit, for my own reasons. I'm just going to try not to fall into the trap of thinking that people that disagree have some ulterior motive. They might, but until there is hard evidence of it then any empty accusations on my part are just noise.

I still think you small blockers are crazy like

[Carlton Banks]

I want to apologise to Ice and Berg and anyone one else that I may have had a pop at on this or other threads.

Is anyone else struggling to remember the above? Not saying it didn't happen, bett, but you're possibly being a little too hard on yourself 

Punching someone in the face is still bad even if some other people are chopping off limbs.

Even face-punches are memorable though. It's possible that you're also just remembering it differently to everyone else