ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT

[JayJuanGee]

Who said anything in this thread about Blockstream, you ninkumpoop?    The concept of the thread regarding Classic getting #r3kt has more to do with its own failures to persuade the bitcoin community concerning any kind of necessity for such changes that it was proposing, rather than your proposal that seems to get mixed up about whatever the fuck Blocksteam is going to attempt to incorporate into bitcoin or on top of bitcoin, which appears to be a somewhat separate issue.

its the same issue.. ever heard the term bait and switch.

scare people with one cult just to shelter them in another cult, who have the same financial backers as the first cult in the background

Yeah right.  You are engaged in an attempt to convolute and make-up issues where there are none.  

Sure, nothing wrong with a bit of speculation, yet your connections are truly fantastical in their level of assumptions.

look into price-waterhouse-cooper... oh wait you wont because you will blindly follow blockstream..

goodluck with that.

and if you think that the $55million that PwC gave to blockstream was not from banks.. and the intention for the funds will have nothing to do with bitcoin developers. or if you think that only adam back gets to use the funds all to himself completely separate from bitcoin... then you really have been drinking the blockstream coolaid.

goodluck trying to meander your faith around PwC.. trying to pretend they are a meaningless shadow..

Yes... I agree about one thing, and that is that you are quite the FUCD spreader.


I am not taking any kind of blind faith about anything, and I don't claim to be any kind of know it all about these matters. 

Nonetheless, it seems that in your attempts to have fun with your fantastical lillie conspiracy framework, there are at least a few facts of the matter that you seem to be either discounting or assuming away in your convolution of issues.

1) Anyone or group is free to develop or to invest however they like on systems that they believe are going to work with bitcoin in the future (and they take risks that they may not be correct in their predictions or their abilities to influence changes in their favor or that the system may change), whether that is Blockstream or anyone else.. .or any bank affiliation etc.;

2) anyone who is wanting to change the status quo of bitcoin has the burden of persuasion and the burden of production to convince that such change should be adopted, and neither XT nor classic were able to obtain various changes in the bitcoin protocol (at least not in a direct and immediate way) that were within their BIPs because there was not adequate support for whatever they were proposing; and

3) bitcoin remains a good investment for the moment.  If it converts into something other than what i expected or something other than what others  expected, then each person is free to change investments... so if it begins to appear that something is awry, then I have no problem migrating my investment somewhere else, and at this time, your apparent fantastical observations are considerably insufficient to influence me, and probably should be insufficient to influence anyone who is somewhat knowledgeable about disinformation fearmongering speculation campaigns such as yours.

[gmaxwell]

PWC has no investment in Blockstream or anything to do with investment in Blockstream. (Not that it would matter if they did), AFAIK no bank has any investment in Blockstream-- though they might be wise to, to the extent that the technology we work on might displace some of their businesses they'd be wise to want to figure out how to adapt to it.

But really, most groups that might be displaced by Bitcoin simply can't see it coming-- if they weren't blind to the reasons it would displace them they wouldn't likely be displaced. There is no reason that any ordinary bank today couldn't quite profitably adapt to an all Bitcoin world.

[beastmodeBiscuitGravy]

Brought to you by:

Reid Hoffman, Khosla Ventures and Real Ventures, with investments from Nicolas Berggruen, Crypto Currency Partners, Future\Perfect Ventures, Danny Hillis, Eric Schmidt’s Innovation Endeavors, Max Levchin, Mosaic Ventures, Ray Ozzie, Ribbit Capital, Jerry Yang’s AME Cloud Ventures and several others.

with special thanks to:

Horizons Ventures, AXA Strategic Ventures, and Digital Garage, with participation from existing investors including AME Cloud Ventures, Blockchain Capital, Future\Perfect Ventures, Khosla Ventures, Mosaic Ventures, and Seven Seas Venture Partners.

[valiz]

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 60 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 255 bytes, this results in a fee of 15,300 satoshis (0.06$).

https://bitcoinfees.21.co

[classicsucks]

But really, most groups that might be displaced by Bitcoin simply can't see it coming-- if they weren't blind to the reasons it would displace them they wouldn't likely be displaced. There is no reason that any ordinary bank today couldn't quite profitably adapt to an all Bitcoin world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NlrgjgOHrw

Pic related

[classicsucks]

Meh so Classic got #R3kt - as expected and because the reality is that nobody besides the social media derps wants to commit fork - and so now core should take over and implement their beloved 2MB fork? lol

Hardfork will not happen. Give it a 10 years grace period or even a 51% threshold. Forkers will get #R3kt anyway.

But I kinda regret we did not took the classic opportunity to get rid of goldman-coinbase-sachs and other delusional corporations with their reddit minions. If only they'd have forked their way out of the legacy network.

Something tells me that BTC2/USD and R3CT/USD would've always tracked BTC/USD by a huge margin, with envy...

[hdbuck]

PWC has no investment in Blockstream or anything to do with investment in Blockstream. (Not that it would matter if they did), AFAIK no bank has any investment in Blockstream-- though they might be wise to, to the extent that the technology we work on might displace some of their businesses they'd be wise to want to figure out how to adapt to it.

But really, most groups that might be displaced by Bitcoin simply can't see it coming-- if they weren't blind to the reasons it would displace them they wouldn't likely be displaced. There is no reason that any ordinary bank today couldn't quite profitably adapt to an all Bitcoin world.

There is all the reasons In the world Banks WILL NEVER adapt to bitcoin as it is meant to freaking by-pass them and their sham of a financial system.

Them banksters rely on debt money. Not sound money.

So they will fight it, infiltrate it, try at corrupt it, etc.

Pretty much what we have witnessed so far with stupid "Blockchain tech" hype, social ingeneering bullshitery, kyc/aml regulation sheningans, governance schemes and other fork attacks.

But may they try harder. Make bitcoin even more resilient to their obsolete tactics.

[hv_]

PWC has no investment in Blockstream or anything to do with investment in Blockstream. (Not that it would matter if they did), AFAIK no bank has any investment in Blockstream-- though they might be wise to, to the extent that the technology we work on might displace some of their businesses they'd be wise to want to figure out how to adapt to it.

But really, most groups that might be displaced by Bitcoin simply can't see it coming-- if they weren't blind to the reasons it would displace them they wouldn't likely be displaced. There is no reason that any ordinary bank today couldn't quite profitably adapt to an all Bitcoin world.

There is all the reasons In the world Banks WILL NEVER adapt to bitcoin as it is meant to freaking by-pass them and their sham of a financial system.

Them banksters rely on debt money. Not sound money.

So they will fight it, infiltrate it, try at corrupt it, etc.

Pretty much what we have witnessed so far with stupid "Blockchain tech" hype, social ingeneering bullshitery, kyc/aml regulation sheningans, governance schemes and other fork attacks.

But may they try harder. Make bitcoin even more resilient to their obsolete tactics.

Never say never.

And if there is a way to earn (or safe) money, they will (maybe when it's the last or only one left).

[hdbuck]

PWC has no investment in Blockstream or anything to do with investment in Blockstream. (Not that it would matter if they did), AFAIK no bank has any investment in Blockstream-- though they might be wise to, to the extent that the technology we work on might displace some of their businesses they'd be wise to want to figure out how to adapt to it.

But really, most groups that might be displaced by Bitcoin simply can't see it coming-- if they weren't blind to the reasons it would displace them they wouldn't likely be displaced. There is no reason that any ordinary bank today couldn't quite profitably adapt to an all Bitcoin world.

There is all the reasons In the world Banks WILL NEVER adapt to bitcoin as it is meant to freaking by-pass them and their sham of a financial system.

Them banksters rely on debt money. Not sound money.

So they will fight it, infiltrate it, try at corrupt it, etc.

Pretty much what we have witnessed so far with stupid "Blockchain tech" hype, social ingeneering bullshitery, kyc/aml regulation sheningans, governance schemes and other fork attacks.

But may they try harder. Make bitcoin even more resilient to their obsolete tactics.

Never say never.

And if there is a way to earn (or safe) money, they will (maybe when it's the last or only one left).

They dont need to earn/save money, They fucking print it all day long.

[Fatman3001]

PWC has no investment in Blockstream or anything to do with investment in Blockstream. (Not that it would matter if they did), AFAIK no bank has any investment in Blockstream-- though they might be wise to, to the extent that the technology we work on might displace some of their businesses they'd be wise to want to figure out how to adapt to it.

But really, most groups that might be displaced by Bitcoin simply can't see it coming-- if they weren't blind to the reasons it would displace them they wouldn't likely be displaced. There is no reason that any ordinary bank today couldn't quite profitably adapt to an all Bitcoin world.

There is all the reasons In the world Banks WILL NEVER adapt to bitcoin as it is meant to freaking by-pass them and their sham of a financial system.

Them banksters rely on debt money. Not sound money.

So they will fight it, infiltrate it, try at corrupt it, etc.

Pretty much what we have witnessed so far with stupid "Blockchain tech" hype, social ingeneering bullshitery, kyc/aml regulation sheningans, governance schemes and other fork attacks.

But may they try harder. Make bitcoin even more resilient to their obsolete tactics.

Never say never.

And if there is a way to earn (or safe) money, they will (maybe when it's the last or only one left).

They dont need to earn/save money, They fucking print it all day long.

hdbuckonomics, read it and weep

[hv_]

PWC has no investment in Blockstream or anything to do with investment in Blockstream. (Not that it would matter if they did), AFAIK no bank has any investment in Blockstream-- though they might be wise to, to the extent that the technology we work on might displace some of their businesses they'd be wise to want to figure out how to adapt to it.

But really, most groups that might be displaced by Bitcoin simply can't see it coming-- if they weren't blind to the reasons it would displace them they wouldn't likely be displaced. There is no reason that any ordinary bank today couldn't quite profitably adapt to an all Bitcoin world.

There is all the reasons In the world Banks WILL NEVER adapt to bitcoin as it is meant to freaking by-pass them and their sham of a financial system.

Them banksters rely on debt money. Not sound money.

So they will fight it, infiltrate it, try at corrupt it, etc.

Pretty much what we have witnessed so far with stupid "Blockchain tech" hype, social ingeneering bullshitery, kyc/aml regulation sheningans, governance schemes and other fork attacks.

But may they try harder. Make bitcoin even more resilient to their obsolete tactics.

Never say never.

And if there is a way to earn (or safe) money, they will (maybe when it's the last or only one left).

They dont need to earn/save money, They fucking print it all day long.

Yep, as miners do.

[pereira4]

PWC has no investment in Blockstream or anything to do with investment in Blockstream. (Not that it would matter if they did), AFAIK no bank has any investment in Blockstream-- though they might be wise to, to the extent that the technology we work on might displace some of their businesses they'd be wise to want to figure out how to adapt to it.

But really, most groups that might be displaced by Bitcoin simply can't see it coming-- if they weren't blind to the reasons it would displace them they wouldn't likely be displaced. There is no reason that any ordinary bank today couldn't quite profitably adapt to an all Bitcoin world.

There is all the reasons In the world Banks WILL NEVER adapt to bitcoin as it is meant to freaking by-pass them and their sham of a financial system.

Them banksters rely on debt money. Not sound money.

So they will fight it, infiltrate it, try at corrupt it, etc.

Pretty much what we have witnessed so far with stupid "Blockchain tech" hype, social ingeneering bullshitery, kyc/aml regulation sheningans, governance schemes and other fork attacks.

But may they try harder. Make bitcoin even more resilient to their obsolete tactics.

I think there is a place for "Bitcoin banks" to exist.
Most people will not like the idea of being responsible of their own money... like the idea of having all of your networth at home in some cold storage, might seem to scary for them, and they couldn't take it if they did a mistake and lost it all. So I for those that are scared of that, and would rather trust a bank carrying their private keys, im sure there will be services like that. Personally I think it kills the point of Bitcoin, but who cares, as long as we have the option to manage our own money.

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

Bitcoin banks - Mt. Gox, Cryptsy, Intersango

A great idea whose time has come

[hv_]

PWC has no investment in Blockstream or anything to do with investment in Blockstream. (Not that it would matter if they did), AFAIK no bank has any investment in Blockstream-- though they might be wise to, to the extent that the technology we work on might displace some of their businesses they'd be wise to want to figure out how to adapt to it.

But really, most groups that might be displaced by Bitcoin simply can't see it coming-- if they weren't blind to the reasons it would displace them they wouldn't likely be displaced. There is no reason that any ordinary bank today couldn't quite profitably adapt to an all Bitcoin world.

There is all the reasons In the world Banks WILL NEVER adapt to bitcoin as it is meant to freaking by-pass them and their sham of a financial system.

Them banksters rely on debt money. Not sound money.

So they will fight it, infiltrate it, try at corrupt it, etc.

Pretty much what we have witnessed so far with stupid "Blockchain tech" hype, social ingeneering bullshitery, kyc/aml regulation sheningans, governance schemes and other fork attacks.

But may they try harder. Make bitcoin even more resilient to their obsolete tactics.

I think there is a place for "Bitcoin banks" to exist.
Most people will not like the idea of being responsible of their own money... like the idea of having all of your networth at home in some cold storage, might seem to scary for them, and they couldn't take it if they did a mistake and lost it all. So I for those that are scared of that, and would rather trust a bank carrying their private keys, im sure there will be services like that. Personally I think it kills the point of Bitcoin, but who cares, as long as we have the option to manage our own money.

I'd even say more stronger: Banks have strongest security & firewalls -> Clients will pay fees for this service,

and banks NEED (!!) to run miners as well, so they still can print money (thanks to hdbuck ) , but MORE they will help to ensure / win back the decentralization !! (bye bye China) and might ensure having strong code dev.

[hdbuck]

PWC has no investment in Blockstream or anything to do with investment in Blockstream. (Not that it would matter if they did), AFAIK no bank has any investment in Blockstream-- though they might be wise to, to the extent that the technology we work on might displace some of their businesses they'd be wise to want to figure out how to adapt to it.

But really, most groups that might be displaced by Bitcoin simply can't see it coming-- if they weren't blind to the reasons it would displace them they wouldn't likely be displaced. There is no reason that any ordinary bank today couldn't quite profitably adapt to an all Bitcoin world.

There is all the reasons In the world Banks WILL NEVER adapt to bitcoin as it is meant to freaking by-pass them and their sham of a financial system.

Them banksters rely on debt money. Not sound money.

So they will fight it, infiltrate it, try at corrupt it, etc.

Pretty much what we have witnessed so far with stupid "Blockchain tech" hype, social ingeneering bullshitery, kyc/aml regulation sheningans, governance schemes and other fork attacks.

But may they try harder. Make bitcoin even more resilient to their obsolete tactics.

I think there is a place for "Bitcoin banks" to exist.
Most people will not like the idea of being responsible of their own money... like the idea of having all of your networth at home in some cold storage, might seem to scary for them, and they couldn't take it if they did a mistake and lost it all. So I for those that are scared of that, and would rather trust a bank carrying their private keys, im sure there will be services like that. Personally I think it kills the point of Bitcoin, but who cares, as long as we have the option to manage our own money.

I'd even say more stronger: Banks have strongest security & firewalls -> Clients will pay fees for this service,

and banks NEED (!!) to run miners as well, so they still can print money (thanks to hdbuck ) , but MORE they will help to ensure / win back the decentralization !! (bye bye China) and might ensure having strong code dev.

#braindamage

[Luke-Jr]

I'd even say more stronger: Banks have strongest security & firewalls

My justification for keeping most of my bitcoins in MtGox...

[hv_]

I'd even say more stronger: Banks have strongest security & firewalls

My justification for keeping most of my bitcoins in MtGox...

Good point - Need to say better: Stronger than I have...

[BITMAIN]

Whether we like it or not, Bitcoin simply cannot hardfork while a large part of the community does not consent to it.

You seem to recognize exactly that a non-consensus hardfork is not necessary and is potentially damaging, so I remain a bit unclear regarding what fruitfulness comes from your going around polling people in the bitcoin community regarding what kind of scenarios they believe in which a hardfork would be a good thing?

There are real improvements that can be made to Bitcoin with a hardfork.
If the community could come to agreement on it, it would help Bitcoin compete in the near term at least.

Likely, I do not understand technicalities sufficiently; however, I thought that almost all significant changes could be achieve through soft forks, so I remain uncertain why a hardfork would be even needed, unless there was some kind of technical emergency.. such as some kind of bug that allowed a maligned player to steal coins.

In other words, to attempt to rush consensus seems to be an unnecessary (and potentially dangerous and damaging) alteration of bitcoin's governance, rather than attempts at addressing any kind of necessary technical resolution.

The mentioned block withholding attack falls under "allowing ... to steal coins" IMO.

I do agree any rush is unnecessary, and that a safe hardfork is probably impractical at this time (albeit I am trying to find a way to prove myself wrong here, so I can meet the terms I agreed to, but so far no success in doing so).

Well, you were there for the actual discussion of the agreement, but it seems very impractical, and even a bad reading of the actual literal agreement to believe that a pursuit of a hardfork would be necessary prior to verifying how seg wit plays out first.. .
I mean, really, seg wit is not even actually live on the network, yet, so isn't it feasible that seg wit could really cause a lot of the points for an actual hard fork to be mute... (at least regarding to a raising of the blocksize limit for some time to come)  and yeah of course, a large number of bitcoin holders would agree that if old coins somehow become more vulnerable due to changes in security or abilities to break cryptography, then those matters are going to be weighed to potentially justify a hardfork rather than a softfork... but also, breaking cryptography is much at the theoretical level, instead of actual demonstrations of such breaks of cryptography occurring, no?

Yes, it was a compromise. I don't see any strong purpose to active pursuit of a hardfork right now, and except that I promised in HK to do so, I otherwise probably wouldn't be.
Of course, nobody else in the community outside of that HK meeting has agreed to do anything, and is free to reject any proposal we come up with.

July. Thanks.

[iCEBREAKER]

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4k7gq1/whats_up_with_uhellobitcoinworld/

I wanted to contact him about the disappearance of the mining fund from his website, but now I wonder what's up, as it seems like scam currently.

Half of all Klassik nodes disappear, then /u/hellobitcoinworld takes the money donated for mining Klassik blocks and runs...

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4k7gq1/whats_up_with_uhellobitcoinworld/

I wanted to contact him about the disappearance of the mining fund from his website, but now I wonder what's up, as it seems like scam currently.

Half of all Klassik nodes disappear, then /u/hellobitcoinworld takes the money donated for mining Klassik blocks and runs...

The person most shocked by this is cypherdefendant - the idea that someone would run a scam in the bitcoin world, shocking.