Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[billyjoeallen]

Bitcoin: distributed decentralized money secured by cowardly miners concentrated in China.  There is no plan or code to switch security measures if they get compromised.

Awesome. This is where I keep my life savings.  I'm a fucking genius.

[shmadz]

You gotta trust somebody

Right. with bitcoin I need to trust the integrity of the blockchain, that the record has not been tampered with. I can verify this myself, and I can cross-verify with several thousand other nodes across the network.

In a fiat transaction I need to trust the government and central bank, which do not have a great track record over the last hundred years. When was the last time the federal reserve was audited?

With Bitcoin you only have to trust the government and central bank of China.  Chinese miners caved to core. You think they wouldn't cave to their own government?  

I'm certain they would capitulate to their government. If they try to make a change or otherwise manipulate transactions their blocks will be rejected and we will fork.

Why can you not understand censorship resistance?

Maybe you can help me understand. So we fork, but we would have to fork away from SHA256 or they could just point to the new fork and doublespend again, right?

Forking seems to be a last resort thing, and there is no code or plan in place to make that kind of switch, to say nothing of no hashpower to secure the new fork, so it could take weeks or months and in the meantime, no Bitcoin.  During that time, could not the Chinese easily discover our new hashing algorithm and swamp the hashpools with more doublespending?

So please, explain this censorship resistance. How is this not a vulnerability?

Censorship resistance comes from the fact that change cannot be forced upon the bitcoin network. Anyone who refuses to accept the new blocks will simply do so and continue on their merry way. You can only double-spend bitcoin that you control. The people that are actually using bitcoin will simply continue to use bitcoin. Any strange blocks or attempt to re-write the blockchain will simply be ignored.

The fork is not last resort, the fork will happen as soon as the first block is formed that does not conform with the consensus rules.  

[molecular]

...
Few people decide the future of 'Bitcoin'.... really decentralized , right ?

Unregulated currency money, created by & for people united by their unwavering faith in greed being a virtue?

What could possibly go wrong???

Not much, except that people might get distracted from this awesome vision and fall victim to coercive schemes, slavery and fraud (scams, ponzis).

That's all in there. Coercive schemes, slavery and fraud? That's all a part of free market, kept in sanctified balance by Invisible Hand

Right. One of the first "balancing acts" would probably be the bankruptcy of a couple of nationstates (certain coercive schemes based on slavery and fraud).

Good riddance.
 

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

You gotta trust somebody

Right. with bitcoin I need to trust the integrity of the blockchain, that the record has not been tampered with. I can verify this myself, and I can cross-verify with several thousand other nodes across the network.

In a fiat transaction I need to trust the government and central bank, which do not have a great track record over the last hundred years. When was the last time the federal reserve was audited?

With Bitcoin you only have to trust the government and central bank of China.  Chinese miners caved to core. You think they wouldn't cave to their own government? 

I'm certain they would capitulate to their government. If they try to make a change or otherwise manipulate transactions their blocks will be rejected and we will fork.

Why can you not understand censorship resistance?

Maybe you can help me understand. So we fork, but we would have to fork away from SHA256 or they could just point to the new fork and doublespend again, right?

Forking seems to be a last resort thing, and there is no code or plan in place to make that kind of switch, to say nothing of no hashpower to secure the new fork, so it could take weeks or months and in the meantime, no Bitcoin.  During that time, could not the Chinese easily discover our new hashing algorithm and swamp the hashpools with more doublespending?

So please, explain this censorship resistance. How is this not a vulnerability?

Censorship resistance comes from the fact that change cannot be forced upon the bitcoin network. Anyone who refuses to accept the new blocks will simply do so and continue on their merry way. You can only double-spend bitcoin that you control. The people that are actually using bitcoin will simply continue to use bitcoin. Any strange blocks or attempt to re-write the blockchain will simply be ignored.

The fork is not last resort, the fork will happen as soon as the first block is formed that does not confirm with the consensus rules. 

Censorship resistance has to do with stateless currency, not the ossification of the protocol. Innit?

[shmadz]

Bitcoin: distributed decentralized money secured by cowardly miners concentrated in China.  There is no plan or code to switch security measures if they get compromised.

Awesome. This is where I keep my life savings.  I'm a fucking genius.

I suggest you sell all bitcoin you have, immediately.

I'm not even kidding, go buy Monero or Ethereum or something. I think this bitcoin thing is not healthy for you.

[molecular]

Bitcoin: distributed decentralized money secured by cowardly miners concentrated in China.  There is no plan or code to switch security measures if they get compromised.

Awesome. This is where I keep my life savings.  I'm a fucking genius.

I've always assumed a majority of economically driven, rational miners.

Maybe that assumption is flawed.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Bitcoin: distributed decentralized money secured by cowardly miners concentrated in China.  There is no plan or code to switch security measures if they get compromised.

Awesome. This is where I keep my life savings.  I'm a fucking genius.

ignored ... i don't know who has taken over the BJA account but it is clear now your aim is to FUD and stir shit at every turn, big-block war pumping, now something new to pump FUD ... you are an enemy of bitcoin.

[blunderer]

...
Few people decide the future of 'Bitcoin'.... really decentralized , right ?

Unregulated currency money, created by & for people united by their unwavering faith in greed being a virtue?

What could possibly go wrong???

Not much, except that people might get distracted from this awesome vision and fall victim to coercive schemes, slavery and fraud (scams, ponzis).

That's all in there. Coercive schemes, slavery and fraud? That's all a part of free market, kept in sanctified balance by Invisible Hand

Right. One of the first "balancing acts" would probably be the bankruptcy of a couple of nationstates (certain coercive schemes based on slavery and fraud).

Good riddance.
 

Oh, and there I was, thinking we was talkin' 'bout BTC
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye, hmm?

[billyjoeallen]

You gotta trust somebody

Right. with bitcoin I need to trust the integrity of the blockchain, that the record has not been tampered with. I can verify this myself, and I can cross-verify with several thousand other nodes across the network.

In a fiat transaction I need to trust the government and central bank, which do not have a great track record over the last hundred years. When was the last time the federal reserve was audited?

With Bitcoin you only have to trust the government and central bank of China.  Chinese miners caved to core. You think they wouldn't cave to their own government?  

I'm certain they would capitulate to their government. If they try to make a change or otherwise manipulate transactions their blocks will be rejected and we will fork.

Why can you not understand censorship resistance?

Maybe you can help me understand. So we fork, but we would have to fork away from SHA256 or they could just point to the new fork and doublespend again, right?

Forking seems to be a last resort thing, and there is no code or plan in place to make that kind of switch, to say nothing of no hashpower to secure the new fork, so it could take weeks or months and in the meantime, no Bitcoin.  During that time, could not the Chinese easily discover our new hashing algorithm and swamp the hashpools with more doublespending?

So please, explain this censorship resistance. How is this not a vulnerability?

Censorship resistance comes from the fact that change cannot be forced upon the bitcoin network. Anyone who refuses to accept the new blocks will simply do so and continue on their merry way. You can only double-spend bitcoin that you control. The people that are actually using bitcoin will simply continue to use bitcoin. Any strange blocks or attempt to re-write the blockchain will simply be ignored.

The fork is not last resort, the fork will happen as soon as the first block is formed that does not conform with the consensus rules.  

The network is secured by HASHPOWER! is this not obvious?  Does someone have a warehouse full of SHA512 ASICs laying around to secure the new fork if our hashpower gets compromised?

Even if it is, we can write the code for this new fork in 10 minutes? Convince everyone to use it (because convincing people of the need to upgrade is so damn easy).  I feel like the only sane guy in a loony bin!

or Inigo Montoya.

What is this term "censorship resistance?" I do not think it means what you think it means.

[shmadz]

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye, hmm?

Heh, Blinderer,   LOL

[oda.krell]

Look at that. I'm away for an hour, and at least 5 pages filled up with senseless posturing of smalldickblockians.

By the way, just saying: go and read what 'consensus' actually means. Hint: it's not "100% agreement, or 95%", despite what that grand political theory you cooked up in your mom's basement might tell you.

[blunderer]

Bitcoin: distributed decentralized money secured by cowardly miners concentrated in China.  There is no plan or code to switch security measures if they get compromised.

Awesome. This is where I keep my life savings.  I'm a fucking genius.

I've always assumed a majority of economically driven, rational miners.

Maybe that assumption is flawed.

Your loose definition of "economically driven," therin lies the rub.
First, it's not BTC the miners may be looking for (the FOOLS!) but USD. They don't necessarily keep the BTC they earn as BTC, but sell it immediately for filthy fiat. Now, if a gubermint bro pays them more to f8k bitcoin, they'll do that sooner than you can say "rational self interest." (because, unlike hodlers, not invested in BTC)

And, of course, China being Communist China, nationalizing them mines don't seem like much of a stretch, do it?
And once we start defining "economically driven" in terms of handing over the gear or getting driven to jail, well ...what we got there's one of them paradigm shifts :-

[shmadz]

You gotta trust somebody

Right. with bitcoin I need to trust the integrity of the blockchain, that the record has not been tampered with. I can verify this myself, and I can cross-verify with several thousand other nodes across the network.

In a fiat transaction I need to trust the government and central bank, which do not have a great track record over the last hundred years. When was the last time the federal reserve was audited?

With Bitcoin you only have to trust the government and central bank of China.  Chinese miners caved to core. You think they wouldn't cave to their own government?  

I'm certain they would capitulate to their government. If they try to make a change or otherwise manipulate transactions their blocks will be rejected and we will fork.

Why can you not understand censorship resistance?

Maybe you can help me understand. So we fork, but we would have to fork away from SHA256 or they could just point to the new fork and doublespend again, right?

Forking seems to be a last resort thing, and there is no code or plan in place to make that kind of switch, to say nothing of no hashpower to secure the new fork, so it could take weeks or months and in the meantime, no Bitcoin.  During that time, could not the Chinese easily discover our new hashing algorithm and swamp the hashpools with more doublespending?

So please, explain this censorship resistance. How is this not a vulnerability?

Censorship resistance comes from the fact that change cannot be forced upon the bitcoin network. Anyone who refuses to accept the new blocks will simply do so and continue on their merry way. You can only double-spend bitcoin that you control. The people that are actually using bitcoin will simply continue to use bitcoin. Any strange blocks or attempt to re-write the blockchain will simply be ignored.

The fork is not last resort, the fork will happen as soon as the first block is formed that does not conform with the consensus rules.  

The network is secured by HASHPOWER! is this not obvious?  Does someone have a warehouse full of SHA512 ASICs laying around to secure the new fork if our hashpower gets compromised?

Even if it is, we can write the code for this new fork in 10 minutes? Convince everyone to use it (because convincing people of the need to upgrade is so damn easy).  I feel like the only sane guy in a loony bin!

or Inigo Montoya.

What is this term "censorship resistance?" I do not think it means what you think it means.

Yo, Dumbass, how much hashpower do you control? Zero? Ok then.

Shut up slave, you have no say in this. (Thank goodness)

Just sell all your coins and leave already. There, I've said it twice, I won't say it again.

(* how you like my version of whiny rage-quit? *)

[billyjoeallen]

Bitcoin: distributed decentralized money secured by cowardly miners concentrated in China.  There is no plan or code to switch security measures if they get compromised.

Awesome. This is where I keep my life savings.  I'm a fucking genius.

I've always assumed a majority of economically driven, rational miners.

Maybe that assumption is flawed.

So what happens when Bitcoin's market cap gets big enough to interfere with Chinese economic and monetary policy?  It would be naive to think they WOULDN'T compromise our security, if they had the means motive and opportunity to do so, which they do.

Miners are just people out trying to make a buck.  If they get threatened by the State, they will help launch a 51% attack, because it's the economically driven rational thing to do in that situation.

[billyjoeallen]

You gotta trust somebody

Right. with bitcoin I need to trust the integrity of the blockchain, that the record has not been tampered with. I can verify this myself, and I can cross-verify with several thousand other nodes across the network.

In a fiat transaction I need to trust the government and central bank, which do not have a great track record over the last hundred years. When was the last time the federal reserve was audited?

With Bitcoin you only have to trust the government and central bank of China.  Chinese miners caved to core. You think they wouldn't cave to their own government?  

I'm certain they would capitulate to their government. If they try to make a change or otherwise manipulate transactions their blocks will be rejected and we will fork.

Why can you not understand censorship resistance?

Maybe you can help me understand. So we fork, but we would have to fork away from SHA256 or they could just point to the new fork and doublespend again, right?

Forking seems to be a last resort thing, and there is no code or plan in place to make that kind of switch, to say nothing of no hashpower to secure the new fork, so it could take weeks or months and in the meantime, no Bitcoin.  During that time, could not the Chinese easily discover our new hashing algorithm and swamp the hashpools with more doublespending?

So please, explain this censorship resistance. How is this not a vulnerability?

Censorship resistance comes from the fact that change cannot be forced upon the bitcoin network. Anyone who refuses to accept the new blocks will simply do so and continue on their merry way. You can only double-spend bitcoin that you control. The people that are actually using bitcoin will simply continue to use bitcoin. Any strange blocks or attempt to re-write the blockchain will simply be ignored.

The fork is not last resort, the fork will happen as soon as the first block is formed that does not conform with the consensus rules.  

The network is secured by HASHPOWER! is this not obvious?  Does someone have a warehouse full of SHA512 ASICs laying around to secure the new fork if our hashpower gets compromised?

Even if it is, we can write the code for this new fork in 10 minutes? Convince everyone to use it (because convincing people of the need to upgrade is so damn easy).  I feel like the only sane guy in a loony bin!

or Inigo Montoya.

What is this term "censorship resistance?" I do not think it means what you think it means.

Yo, Dumbass, how much hashpower do you control? Zero? Ok then.

Shut up slave, you have no say in this. (Thank goodness)

Just sell all your coins and leave already. There, I've said it twice, I won't say it again.

(* how you like my version of whiny rage-quit? *)

So your response is to call me a dumbass? That doesn't seem like a real answer. Do you have a logical answer to my concerns?  Does anybody?

There is a difference between Bitcoin being uncensored and being censorship resistant. We are currently uncensored, but at the mercy of a government that will not allow banks in that country to even hold bitcoin accounts or allow their citizens to do anything with this currency except speculate on it.  This is not exactly a huge selling point. 

[blunderer]

... you are an enemy of bitcoin.

[JayJuanGee]

Bitcoin: distributed decentralized money secured by cowardly miners concentrated in China.  There is no plan or code to switch security measures if they get compromised.

Awesome. This is where I keep my life savings.  I'm a fucking genius.

ignored ... i don't know who has taken over the BJA account but it is clear now your aim is to FUD and stir shit at every turn, big-block war pumping, now something new to pump FUD ... you are an enemy of bitcoin.

No one has taken over his account.   He's a fucking attention whore whinner, and he his ongoing conduct shows that he has always been one.

Surely, he has had some good posts and contributions over the years, but he just wants attention, and then he talks his book, and really, he tends to take away much more than he gives in his various seemingly spontaneous emotional outbursts.  

7/10 of the time he is a glass half full kind of guy, which maybe makes him (if lucky) a 3.5 on a 10 scale...  

[adamstgBit]

Let's look at Adam's poll: 79 percent support the compromise. Totally too small of a samples size, but just for shits and giggles, let's assume that is representative. 75% is NOT consensus, but 79% is?

on bitcointalk poll 60% = consensus

60% is a pass, we can't expect everyone to understand the question, and answer it correctly. ( i kid... sorta )

ok that was a lame answer here a better thought out one..


poeple hitting that "no" option are most likely just not entirely clear as to what the options are, and had they been at the meetingS, discussing and arguing face to face with all the knowledge we expect our leaders to possess, they would have actually agreed. we can call it consensus when the top 1% most informed all agree i guess. it's really crazy to expect everyone to be 100% well informed & have given the question the appropriate amount of thought.

... you are an enemy of bitcoin.

and then there this guy



80% approval ! wowzers this is it.

[ImI]

interesting! mark friedenbach seems to not like the consensus that was reached today. if he stands as example gmax could also oppose the consensus.

https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/46po4l/we_have_consensus_in_april_we_get_sw_3_months/d074dh7

will they do their own fork now?

[shmadz]

So your response is to call me a dumbass? That doesn't seem like a real answer. Do you have a logical answer to my concerns?  Does anybody?

There is a difference between Bitcoin being uncensored and being censorship resistant. We are currently uncensored, but at the mercy of a government that will not allow banks in that country to even hold bitcoin accounts or allow their citizens to do anything with this currency except speculate on it.  This is not exactly a huge selling point.  

Yes, you're a dumbass. Bitcoin exists not at the mercy of some gov't, bitcoin exists despite gov't or malicious actors.

Simple example for you: Alice wants to send money to Bob, but China won't allow it. China owns 90 percent of hash power so China is able to delay the transaction for nine out of ten blocks, but eventually the transaction goes through and Bob gets paid. It took 90 minutes instead of 10 minutes but still 3 days faster than bank ( actually, China controls 100% of bank, so... Yeah, that's censorship resistance.)