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

[Lauda]

I'm enjoying Mikey's butthurt massively https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3mqvbp/mike_hearn_its_easily_possible_for_a_sufficiently/

Well I can't call this a surprise even though I had called for a cease of fire. I just can not understand why someone would listen to or support a person who is talking about a takeover of Bitcoin? This should be considered a hostile takeover. XT is just full of controversy.
However, we should shift the focus away from it towards the nexy workshop and 2016. Most of the times when I randomly check the blocks, none of the last few are close to 1 MB (i.e. we are fine for now).

[hdbuck]

Free money?

https://www.bigblockbounty.com/

hum so staff members promote scams now?!

reproted  



edit: ladies and gentlemen... the economic majority agressive minority:



 

[Zarathustra]

What success  

Unlikely for a few more years... of course we need to push projects like Fidelity and NASDAQ away though  

Pathetic.

Yes, it is pathetic that you Gavinistas actually believed you controlled more than ~0% of Bitcoin's socioeconomic consensus.

It's also pathetic you thought you could create a false sense of urgency, to sell XT via the fear of missing out on "projects like Fidelity and NASDAQ."

It's not like i spent all summer long explaining exactly why MPEX's Gavincoin Short, etc, made your 'strategy of defection' impossible.

Even after XT lost, you still don't realize and/or can't admit XT lost.  Pathetic.   

Unbelievable. You are still fighting your proxy war against XT.

[Zarathustra]

edit: ladies and gentlemen... the economic majority agressive minority:


 

Uuuh, the communist orwellian speakers define competition as agression.

[coalitionfor8mb]

[erik777]

I think it is time for this thread to die.

Like XT?    

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHXfEJD6DUk&feature=youtu.be&t=8m48s

When Trace Mayer decides to abandon neutrality and tears Gavin a new one like that, I think it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.

Great video!  Thanks for the link.  I agree with Trace Mayer that monetary sovereignty is the primary value of Bitcoin that can be grown through confidential transactions, and that this block size debate has diverted a lot of potential resources from it. 

[erik777]

Personally I can support running a full node with much bigger blocks from my home.

But, what about your Netflix?!? 

[hdbuck]

edit: ladies and gentlemen... the economic majority agressive minority:


 

Uuuh, the communist orwellian speakers define competition as agression.

Nah thats just Mickey hearn own words.

You wish you were an agression somehow, but i would only credit you shills as a 'squeaking' minority.

but thx for making bitcoin more resilient to your n00bs fud, anyway.


Edit: this thread is not about fighting, but rather just having fun exposing xt shills and scam.. (even more fun than the bfl thread! )

[muyuu]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3mx7y9/mike_hearn_eventually_governments_would_run_out/

Mikey again confusing wishes with current reality.

"Eventually Governments Would Run Out Of Patience And Shut It Down"

[coalitionfor8mb]

Well I can't call this a surprise even though I had called for a cease of fire. I just can not understand why someone would listen to or support a person who is talking about a takeover of Bitcoin? This should be considered a hostile takeover. XT is just full of controversy.
However, we should shift the focus away from it towards the nexy workshop and 2016. Most of the times when I randomly check the blocks, none of the last few are close to 1 MB (i.e. we are fine for now).

(without an "M" there your voice is so much Loude'r, Lauda!)

I got to agree with this. I'm glad that many (me included) are slowly but inevitably converging to the same conclusions. There are million ways to change Bitcoin and only one way to keep it chugging along as it has been for many years now. If there is much disagreement and heated debates about the change then most likely we are solving the problem that doesn't exist yet and instead certain interests of various internal parties come into play.

Bitcoin needs to demonstrate that blockchain validation costs can temporarily go down for it to become sustainable for the decades to come, while at same time providing a test playground for potential fee market to develop to see if enough economic pressure can be maintained by the first mover advantage and the network effect that comes with it.

The limit will have to be raised at some point along the way in order to keep Bitcoin's single transparent unified ledger strong and competitive, because only one blockchain can properly sit in a balance of PoWer that exists on the "Blue Planet" today. For as long as Bitcoin remains an open and sustainable network its future will be bright!

[tvbcof]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3mx7y9/mike_hearn_eventually_governments_would_run_out/

Mikey again confusing wishes with current reality.

"Eventually Governments Would Run Out Of Patience And Shut It Down"

For various reasons, I've been more familiar with Mr. Hearn's position for longer than most of the people reading this.  It is for this reason (and due to my nature) that I was one of the first people to call him out on this forum back when he was widely considered to be some sort of a hero to crypto-currencies.

It is also for this reason that since not long after my initial interest in Bitcoin I've been somewhat fixated on how to deal with TPTB interference.  The idea of mollifying the mainstream corp/gov power structures was never something I saw as 'sustainable' and the strategy would fail immediately if/when Bitcoin is actually needed by humanity.  My focus has been on how to harden crypto against even the most severe of attacks (and we've seen not a glimpse of what types of attacks are possible yet.)

I just gave an outline in another thread which condenses some of my ideas on this for anyone interested:

If there were an update to the POW algo, existing miners would suddenly and abruptly have not jack shit to say about the course of Bitcoin.

Things which are rewarded economically are HIGHLY successful.  More than I and more than probably Satoshi would have guessed.  Unfortunately the only thing which was economically rewarded (in the core system at initial release) was sha256 hashing.  ASIC came at least a year before my own best case estimates.  Now we have absurdities like you pointed out where every transaction costs > 1 daily household energy cost and no clear way out of the maze.

[You might say that the ratio can be improved by somehow getting Bitcoin to be used for every coffee purchase to which I would point out that transactions have been basically free (to end users) for half a decade and Bitcoin has not gotten traction in this role.  I would further say that it is because Bitcoin sucks in this role, and making it get somewhere to par with dedicated exchange currencies would be a bigger re-design than some of the adjustments I suggest.]

Let me explain my 'matrix' and 'path' valuations.  Say there are 10 verifying transfer nodes (a-j).  Say that prior to being mined, a transaction needs to be verified three times before being mined.  Say you want to monetarily reward good distribution.  What you do is statistically prefer the least noted verification paths:

Here's an example of three different paths:

  a->b->c-> mine
  f->a->j-> mine
  d->e->j-> mine

If a particular verification path (e.g., f->a->j-> mine) is continually repeated for many transactions, that path loses weighting.  A miner will likely see the same transaction come in through various paths and can choose the one to insert into the block they are mining.

In my vision of things, a fair fraction of the block reward is distributed to each node who participated in transferring the transactions to the eventual miners thereby producing an economic incentive both to transfer transactions, and to be 'weird' (e.g., not one of 10,000 nodes operating within Amazon's cloud which offers no real value to the network.)

The more complex the system, the more easy it is to game.  The real challenge is to try to make sure that the nodes are legitimately operated by independent players ('Joe Enduser' as much as possible) and are not cheating.  We also want to do this while preserving anonymity as much as possible.  A cheap USB device which only becomes unique in the enduser's hands can achieve this.  If the nodes in the transfer network matrix are randomly making connections to one another and are cross-checking one another (see Kaminski's 'nooter') and comparing notes, liars and cheats can be identified and ejected.

This sounds complicated, but functionally it is actually not a very big shift from what we have in today's Bitcoin.  Most users would not even notice a difference.

Most semi-technical people can appreciated the overhead that keeping such a distribution network matrix healthy would add.  If it becomes necessary to operate Bitcoin under steganographic methods, the overhead of that would dwarf the functional overhead which is why the current 1MB block size is not something I want to see vanish.  Should the internet tighten up with global network filtering and regulations on distributed crypto-currencies, the choices would be basically one of three:

 - Forget about distributed crypto-currencies like Bitcoin as a footnote in history.
 - Comply with any regulations mandated to use them.
 - Adapt crypto-currencies to slip through the cracks and provide economic incentives strong enough to incent people to try.

[VeritasSapere]

I'm enjoying Mikey's butthurt massively https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3mqvbp/mike_hearn_its_easily_possible_for_a_sufficiently/

Well I can't call this a surprise even though I had called for a cease of fire. I just can not understand why someone would listen to or support a person who is talking about a takeover of Bitcoin? This should be considered a hostile takeover. XT is just full of controversy.
However, we should shift the focus away from it towards the nexy workshop and 2016. Most of the times when I randomly check the blocks, none of the last few are close to 1 MB (i.e. we are fine for now).

XT should not be considered a hostile take over of Bitcoin. This is very important to understand regardless of what you think of XT. I have already argued extensively on this thread and others why this is not the case. To release an alternative implementation of Bitcoin and to allow the free market and the economic majority to decide on the client through the consensus mechanism of Bitcoin is completely legitimate and should not be considered a take over or a coup. It can only be considered a take over or a coup if the consensus mechanism is circumvented, which is certainly not the case with XT. As long as more then fifty one percent of the mining power supports forking the network then it should be considered as an aspect and part of the process of the Bitcoin consensus which is legitimate, this hypothetical scenario would lead to a split of Bitcoin, however this is how Bitcoin has been designed so that it avoids the tyranny of the majority.

[iCEBREAKER]

Unbelievable. You are still fighting your proxy war against XT.

No, you (like Roger Ver, Mike Hearn, Peter R, etc.) are still fighting for XT's failed governance coup like lost Japanese soldiers.

I, OTOH, am dancing on XT's grave and heckling the mourners.   

Thank you for producing such lulzy quantities of self-pitying grief, for the entertainment of the socioeconomic majority.

Now why don't you fork off to Bitcoin Jesus' Island of Misfit Gavinistas forum?  Or Frap.doc's circlejerk?  Or voat/v/bitcoinxt?

You know you are not wanted and have no power here.  Your 'oh poor me' martyr complex is old and busted.  Do something new or GTFO!

[tvbcof]

Unbelievable. You are still fighting your proxy war against XT.

No, you (like Roger Ver, Mike Hearn, Peter R, etc.) are still fighting for XT's failed governance coup like lost Japanese soldiers.

I, OTOH, am dancing on XT's grave and heckling the mourners.   

Thank you for producing such lulzy quantities of self-pitying grief, for the entertainment of the socioeconomic majority.

Now why don't you fork off to Bitcoin Jesus' Island of Misfit Gavinistas forum?  Or Frap.doc's circlejerk?  Or voat/v/bitcoinxt?

You know you are not wanted and have no power here.  Your 'oh poor me' martyr complex is old and busted.  Do something new or GTFO!

I, for one, enjoy your antics immensely.  I do however hope that 'our group' doesn't count these people out prematurely.  They are not stupid and do not want for resources.  I can pretty much promise that they'll be back and will be constantly learning from their mistakes.

[muyuu]

I, for one, enjoy your antics immensely.  I do however hope that 'our group' doesn't count these people out prematurely.  They are not stupid and do not want for resources.  I can pretty much promise that they'll be back and will be constantly learning from their mistakes.

I don't, I have them very present. I'm aware they will keep going at it until they can't any more.

[brg444]

I, for one, enjoy your antics immensely.  I do however hope that 'our group' doesn't count these people out prematurely.  They are not stupid and do not want for resources.  I can pretty much promise that they'll be back and will be constantly learning from their mistakes.

I don't, I have them very present. I'm aware they will keep going at it until they can't any more.

If at least Peter R could switch from his usual charting drivel and spherical cows..... I'm up for new challenges but he keeps repeating the same old bored ideas

[iCEBREAKER]

I do however hope that 'our group' doesn't count these people out prematurely.  They are not stupid and do not want for resources.  I can pretty much promise that they'll be back and will be constantly learning from their mistakes.

I'm counting on XT-type disloyal opposition to continue providing BTC with the adversity required to further develop its antifragility.

If nobody attacks BTC, the dodo bird "island effect" sets in and we grow too fat/lazy/stupid to fly.  

The lulz are great fun, but there are higher strategic purposes and hidden ideological agendas embedded within my "antics" (which BTW I am glad you enjoy).

[knight22]

I, for one, enjoy your antics immensely.  I do however hope that 'our group' doesn't count these people out prematurely.  They are not stupid and do not want for resources.  I can pretty much promise that they'll be back and will be constantly learning from their mistakes.

I don't, I have them very present. I'm aware they will keep going at it until they can't any more.

If at least Peter R could switch from his usual charting drivel and spherical cows..... I'm up for new challenges but he keeps repeating the same old bored ideas

It's strange you still manage to not understand them yet.

[brg444]

I, for one, enjoy your antics immensely.  I do however hope that 'our group' doesn't count these people out prematurely.  They are not stupid and do not want for resources.  I can pretty much promise that they'll be back and will be constantly learning from their mistakes.

I don't, I have them very present. I'm aware they will keep going at it until they can't any more.

If at least Peter R could switch from his usual charting drivel and spherical cows..... I'm up for new challenges but he keeps repeating the same old bored ideas

It's strange you still manage to not understand them yet.

 

Maybe his "ideas" were novel to you but I'm sorry to break the news that his stuff was 5th graders economics 101 platitudes.

[knight22]

I, for one, enjoy your antics immensely.  I do however hope that 'our group' doesn't count these people out prematurely.  They are not stupid and do not want for resources.  I can pretty much promise that they'll be back and will be constantly learning from their mistakes.

I don't, I have them very present. I'm aware they will keep going at it until they can't any more.

If at least Peter R could switch from his usual charting drivel and spherical cows..... I'm up for new challenges but he keeps repeating the same old bored ideas

It's strange you still manage to not understand them yet.

 

Maybe his "ideas" were novel to you but I'm sorry to break the news that his stuff was 5th graders economics 101 platitudes.

So why don't you understand them?