Bitcoin Forum
March 28, 2024, 02:27:09 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: What happens first:
$65,000 - 59 (86.8%)
$48,000 - 9 (13.2%)
Total Voters: 68

Pages: « 1 ... 14797 14798 14799 14800 14801 14802 14803 14804 14805 14806 14807 14808 14809 14810 14811 14812 14813 14814 14815 14816 14817 14818 14819 14820 14821 14822 14823 14824 14825 14826 14827 14828 14829 14830 14831 14832 14833 14834 14835 14836 14837 14838 14839 14840 14841 14842 14843 14844 14845 14846 [14847] 14848 14849 14850 14851 14852 14853 14854 14855 14856 14857 14858 14859 14860 14861 14862 14863 14864 14865 14866 14867 14868 14869 14870 14871 14872 14873 14874 14875 14876 14877 14878 14879 14880 14881 14882 14883 14884 14885 14886 14887 14888 14889 14890 14891 14892 14893 14894 14895 14896 14897 ... 33203 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 26336473 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (170 posts by 1 users with 9 merit deleted.)
shmadz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1000


@theshmadz


View Profile
February 21, 2016, 03:17:22 AM

"not sure what you're trying to say quoting this 6month old post."

LOL - oops
1711636029
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711636029

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711636029
Reply with quote  #2

1711636029
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1711636029
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711636029

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711636029
Reply with quote  #2

1711636029
Report to moderator
1711636029
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711636029

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711636029
Reply with quote  #2

1711636029
Report to moderator
adamstgBit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037


Trusted Bitcoiner


View Profile WWW
February 21, 2016, 03:18:36 AM

if you insist on blindly following an idle, make sure hes brilliant



@Adam Do you have a response to this:

Cheapens UTXO creation, cheapens on-chain data, dis-incentivises cleanup. Perhaps more importantly dis-incentivises user protecting features like multisig or other forms of smart contracts. Prevents making use of the full capacity available.

Other compromises under consideration such as with respect to deployment timelines preclude making other changes that should be in the next hard fork but which require more engineering work or review.


make note of anyone loudly expressing frustration with this agreement and actively trying to stop it

its likely they are stupid.

FFS

no.

problem?


"Block size should be raised, but only in step with what can reasonably be accomplished with engineering improvements to ensure a decentralized, policy neutral network. All that we ask for is the time for due process, not ultimatums and hostile forks"

not sure what you're trying to say quoting this 6month old post.

but, free feel to continue to wasting your time talking to a penguin.

billyjoeallen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106
Merit: 1007


Hide your women


View Profile WWW
February 21, 2016, 03:22:24 AM



You can only double-spend your own coins (second time I told you this) exchanges typically require ass'y least 3 confirmations,  which means at 50% you'd essentially need to win 4 coin flips in a row  (3 to trick the exchange and the 4th to double-spend the coins) - which means you would only succeed in this attack 6.25 % of the time. Also, if this type of attack became common, exchanges would start to simply wait for 4,5,6 transactions or more...


Yeah, but China has ~75% hashpower, not 50%.  winning three bets in a row with 75% odds is a 42% chance, a heluva lot higher than 6.25% and I'm pretty sure the miners who get nationalized keep a good size pile of coins that could be double spent.  Even if they don't, The Chicoms could nationalize the Chinese exchanges too and then they have coins up the wazzu to dump. 

freshly mined coins can't be spent right away. I get that. What I'm saying is that doesn't matter in a well-executed 51% attack, because you can also verify bogus transactions.  If I was an evil Chinese Official, I could execute this attack with no more expertise than I now currently hold just by pointing guns at the right people. 

Ok new bja, since you're so nice and polite:

First: you need to win 4 in a row to double spend if the exchange requires 3 confirmations, and even if you succeed once, the exchanges will just start to ask for more confirmations if they are becoming victims of attacks. (I've explained this twice now, it seems you're not even trying)

Second: I never mentioned freshly mined coins, everyone knows you need 120 confirmations to spend newly issued coins.

Third: you cannot "verify bogus transactions" - any honest node on the network will identify and reject a bogus transaction.

Are you a bot? Or just a noob?

Go easy, Pal. I'm asking questions.  So an exchange can change requirements AFTER an attack has already happened. How much damage can be done before then?  Catastrophic damage.  Like the Mt.Gox hack of 2011 that sent the price from $32 to $2 and stayed there for a year. 

Also, there are MILLIONS of coins on Chinese exchanges that the Chicoms can gain the access to anytime they want.  This may seem like a different issue, but a coordinated crackdown in China wouldn't leave the exchanges alone.  Bitcoin activity in China presents a single point of failure and a security vulnerability. Surely you can see this.  Are you suggesting that it WON'T happen or that it CAN'T happen?
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115



View Profile
February 21, 2016, 03:22:39 AM
Last edit: February 21, 2016, 03:52:20 AM by BlindMayorBitcorn

Deadlines don't mean anything to him (this particular Core dev who is unhappy about the new 'consensus'). The old quote is context. It illustrates the consistency of his belief that a HF won't happen until certain other problems/technical challenges are met.

Bro Huh
adamstgBit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037


Trusted Bitcoiner


View Profile WWW
February 21, 2016, 03:24:49 AM

if you insist on blindly following an idle, make sure hes brilliant



@Adam Do you have a response to this:

Cheapens UTXO creation, cheapens on-chain data, dis-incentivises cleanup. Perhaps more importantly dis-incentivises user protecting features like multisig or other forms of smart contracts. Prevents making use of the full capacity available.

Other compromises under consideration such as with respect to deployment timelines preclude making other changes that should be in the next hard fork but which require more engineering work or review.


make note of anyone loudly expressing frustration with this agreement and actively trying to stop it

its likely they are stupid.

FFS

no.

problem?


"Block size should be raised, but only in step with what can reasonably be accomplished with engineering improvements to ensure a decentralized, policy neutral network. All that we ask for is the time for due process, not ultimatums and hostile forks"

not sure what you're trying to say quoting this 6month old post.

but, free feel to continue to wasting your time talking to a penguin.



Deadlines don't mean anything to him (this particular Core dev who is unhappy about the new 'consensus'). The old quote is context. It illustrates the consistency of his belief that a HF won't happen until certain other problems/technical challenges are met.

Also:

Bro Huh

how does that make you feel?
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115



View Profile
February 21, 2016, 03:29:17 AM
Last edit: February 21, 2016, 04:00:38 AM by BlindMayorBitcorn

how does that make you feel?
http://imgur.com/nla6W7A
adamstgBit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037


Trusted Bitcoiner


View Profile WWW
February 21, 2016, 03:49:33 AM

shmadz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1000


@theshmadz


View Profile
February 21, 2016, 03:52:07 AM



You can only double-spend your own coins (second time I told you this) exchanges typically require ass'y least 3 confirmations,  which means at 50% you'd essentially need to win 4 coin flips in a row  (3 to trick the exchange and the 4th to double-spend the coins) - which means you would only succeed in this attack 6.25 % of the time. Also, if this type of attack became common, exchanges would start to simply wait for 4,5,6 transactions or more...


Yeah, but China has ~75% hashpower, not 50%.  winning three bets in a row with 75% odds is a 42% chance, a heluva lot higher than 6.25% and I'm pretty sure the miners who get nationalized keep a good size pile of coins that could be double spent.  Even if they don't, The Chicoms could nationalize the Chinese exchanges too and then they have coins up the wazzu to dump. 

freshly mined coins can't be spent right away. I get that. What I'm saying is that doesn't matter in a well-executed 51% attack, because you can also verify bogus transactions.  If I was an evil Chinese Official, I could execute this attack with no more expertise than I now currently hold just by pointing guns at the right people. 

Ok new bja, since you're so nice and polite:

First: you need to win 4 in a row to double spend if the exchange requires 3 confirmations, and even if you succeed once, the exchanges will just start to ask for more confirmations if they are becoming victims of attacks. (I've explained this twice now, it seems you're not even trying)

Second: I never mentioned freshly mined coins, everyone knows you need 120 confirmations to spend newly issued coins.

Third: you cannot "verify bogus transactions" - any honest node on the network will identify and reject a bogus transaction.

Are you a bot? Or just a noob?

Go easy, Pal. I'm asking questions.  So an exchange can change requirements AFTER an attack has already happened. How much damage can be done before then?  Catastrophic damage.  Like the Mt.Gox hack of 2011 that sent the price from $32 to $2 and stayed there for a year. 

Also, there are MILLIONS of coins on Chinese exchanges that the Chicoms can gain the access to anytime they want.  This may seem like a different issue, but a coordinated crackdown in China wouldn't leave the exchanges alone.  Bitcoin activity in China presents a single point of failure and a security vulnerability. Surely you can see this.  Are you suggesting that it WON'T happen or that it CAN'T happen?

1: how much damage? I would expect no more than 20 or 30 grand, exchanges have limits, especially on untrusted/unverified accounts and especially when you try to withdraw. Gox was only one incompetent exchange, and no one who was doing their own due diligence should have been affected. Everyone now should understand the risks of trusting your money to a thief party. (LOL, auto-correct gets it right this time Wink

2:  from $32 to $2 and stayed there for a year.  HA! Now I know you're not bja ... "as low as possible for as long as possible" is my motto. Another 4 years below 500 would be fantastic.

3: there are MILLIONS of coins on Chinese exchanges  - really? Are you sure? There are only like 15 million coins total right now. Don't be fooled by volume when there is 0 fee trades available.

4: I understand that China currently holds a controlling interest in bitcoin. If they do anything crazy that would compromise bitcoin (like proposing an 8mb increase, and then doubling till 8GB) then we can worry, but as you can see with the current debate, it is not easy to co-opt bitcoin.

((Plus, I don't really care too much. My coins are old, they'll spend on both chains after the fork, whichever fork wins. Also, as I've said before: if you're worried about this shit you are simply not diversified enough. Many other projects and assets are doing very well for astute investors and speculators.))

It's been a real pleasure, you're much nicer than the old bja. Welcome to the wall observer.
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1743


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
February 21, 2016, 04:00:51 AM

Coin



Explanation
adamstgBit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037


Trusted Bitcoiner


View Profile WWW
February 21, 2016, 04:09:25 AM






it's going to take a while to sink in fully.

did this really happen???


good night bitcoin!
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115



View Profile
February 21, 2016, 04:12:34 AM
Last edit: February 21, 2016, 04:25:11 AM by BlindMayorBitcorn

Maaku is the bird with the angry word. He seems to want to wait, until things like confidential transactions and other features that need to be hard forked in are ready. Maybe. Huh







@shmadz I thought yours were a peace-loving people Huh
Ps. Good infoes tho!
Quote from: shmadz
First: you need to win 4 in a row to double spend if the exchange requires 3 confirmations, and even if you succeed once, the exchanges will just start to ask for more confirmations if they are becoming victims of attacks. (I've explained this twice now, it seems you're not even trying)

Second: I never mentioned freshly mined coins, everyone knows you need 120 confirmations to spend newly issued coins.

Third: you cannot "verify bogus transactions" - any honest node on the network will identify and reject a bogus transaction.
shmadz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1000


@theshmadz


View Profile
February 21, 2016, 04:17:07 AM


good night bitcoin!

Good night Adam.

(Btw, it's never over)
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1743


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
February 21, 2016, 05:00:54 AM

Coin



Explanation
billyjoeallen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106
Merit: 1007


Hide your women


View Profile WWW
February 21, 2016, 05:28:22 AM


4: I understand that China currently holds a controlling interest in bitcoin. If they do anything crazy that would compromise bitcoin (like proposing an 8mb increase, and then doubling till 8GB) then we can worry, but as you can see with the current debate, it is not easy to co-opt bitcoin.


If China holds controlling interest, then China holds control. Bitcoin isn't a honey badger anymore. It's a panda bear. 

We can disagree on blocksize or even the vision for Bitcoin's future, but nobody wants hashpower concentrated in one political jurisdiction. Hashpower secures Bitcoin. If the hashpower isn't secure, then neither is Bitcoin.

What's worse is that there is no way to fix this without massively increasing mining outside of China, which isn't economically viable without an electricity cost parity or advantage. 



ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1743


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
February 21, 2016, 06:00:54 AM

Coin



Explanation
AZwarel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 401
Merit: 280


View Profile
February 21, 2016, 06:04:22 AM

who voted no?  Cheesy

I haven't checked to verify, but I'd guess MP and the rest of La Serenissima will have their say.

Anyone who thinks a hard fork will not be contentious just isn't paying attention.

am i the only one that thinks it won't be contentious?

No. By definition, it can not be. HF can only happen if 90%+ thinks it is the way to go. Which makes it uncontentious by default.
shmadz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1000


@theshmadz


View Profile
February 21, 2016, 06:06:07 AM


4: I understand that China currently holds a controlling interest in bitcoin. If they do anything crazy that would compromise bitcoin (like proposing an 8mb increase, and then doubling till 8GB) then we can worry, but as you can see with the current debate, it is not easy to co-opt bitcoin.

If China holds controlling interest, then China holds control. Bitcoin isn't a honey badger anymore. It's a panda bear. 
We can disagree on blocksize or even the vision for Bitcoin's future, but nobody wants hashpower concentrated in one political jurisdiction. Hashpower secures Bitcoin. If the hashpower isn't secure, then neither is Bitcoin.
What's worse is that there is no way to fix this without massively increasing mining outside of China, which isn't economically viable without an electricity cost parity or advantage. 

It is funny, how you fear the Chinese. BTW, Chinese are much more strongly defensive of their right to have paper money. They would never roll over and accept gov't controlled money accounts like they're doing in Europe. As if having the majority of hash power in the country that has the majority of the world population is somehow a problem. And yet the U.S.is actually the most repressive country on earth. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/19/apple-fbi-encryption-battle-san-bernardino-shooting-syed-farook-iphone

What exactly is your agenda, new BJA?
billyjoeallen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106
Merit: 1007


Hide your women


View Profile WWW
February 21, 2016, 06:21:03 AM


4: I understand that China currently holds a controlling interest in bitcoin. If they do anything crazy that would compromise bitcoin (like proposing an 8mb increase, and then doubling till 8GB) then we can worry, but as you can see with the current debate, it is not easy to co-opt bitcoin.

If China holds controlling interest, then China holds control. Bitcoin isn't a honey badger anymore. It's a panda bear. 
We can disagree on blocksize or even the vision for Bitcoin's future, but nobody wants hashpower concentrated in one political jurisdiction. Hashpower secures Bitcoin. If the hashpower isn't secure, then neither is Bitcoin.
What's worse is that there is no way to fix this without massively increasing mining outside of China, which isn't economically viable without an electricity cost parity or advantage. 

It is funny, how you fear the Chinese. BTW, Chinese are much more strongly defensive of their right to have paper money. They would never roll over and accept gov't controlled money accounts like they're doing in Europe. As if having the majority of hash power in the country that has the majority of the world population is somehow a problem. And yet the U.S.is actually the most repressive country on earth. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/19/apple-fbi-encryption-battle-san-bernardino-shooting-syed-farook-iphone

What exactly is your agenda, new BJA?

The Chinese government is somewhat hostile towards Bitcoin and freedom in general.
In China, it is illegal to:

buy bitcoin or sell bitcoin with a bank account
trade goods and services for bitcoin

They have strong capital controls which we know Bitcoin can be used to evade.
They have a history of cracking down on freedom movements (Tiananmen Square massacre)
They have a history of nationalizing industries
They are in the midst of an economic downturn that could easily turn into a recession
They have economic and monetary policies that will be difficult to enforce if bitcoin achieves a substantially higher market cap.

Long story short, there's no way Bitcoin can grow without achieving more Government and PBoC hostility.

There's no way bitcoin can grow without more network congestion. 

Taken together, it means Bitcoin is a suborbital vehicle and the moon is not reachable.
Chef Ramsay
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001



View Profile
February 21, 2016, 06:50:05 AM

Sad
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,   Cool LOL
You know you quoted a bitch, now you can be happy about that.
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1743


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
February 21, 2016, 07:01:43 AM

Coin



Explanation
Pages: « 1 ... 14797 14798 14799 14800 14801 14802 14803 14804 14805 14806 14807 14808 14809 14810 14811 14812 14813 14814 14815 14816 14817 14818 14819 14820 14821 14822 14823 14824 14825 14826 14827 14828 14829 14830 14831 14832 14833 14834 14835 14836 14837 14838 14839 14840 14841 14842 14843 14844 14845 14846 [14847] 14848 14849 14850 14851 14852 14853 14854 14855 14856 14857 14858 14859 14860 14861 14862 14863 14864 14865 14866 14867 14868 14869 14870 14871 14872 14873 14874 14875 14876 14877 14878 14879 14880 14881 14882 14883 14884 14885 14886 14887 14888 14889 14890 14891 14892 14893 14894 14895 14896 14897 ... 33203 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!