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

[Elwar]

Price down...forum full of bcash FUD...

I forgot what I was supposed to program my bot to do in this situation. Final indicator will be if I start getting some large buy orders on localbitcoins.

[jbreher]

Exchanges do run their own nodes

Yes...

and would not accept the tx's stealing segwit claiming anyonecanspends from the rogue majority fork

You are speculating.

[JayJuanGee]

Pretty much this.

I wonder If any of these people will be able to make a public appearance after a coup like this.



See this photo?

Do you think any of these 3 are bold enough to trigger a world war and strong enough to survive through it? Are they brave enough to spend the rest of their lives in an underground bunker with the fears of getting killed at any second?

All I see here is 3 *aggots.

Yeah right.  You think that they can really generate enough folks to follow their narcisistic leadership path?  

It seems that your last sentence tells most of it... they are not inspiring enough.. maybe they need a new leader?  Gavin Andressen?  

[bitserve]

- Non-segwit transactions require 51% of the hashpower and a private key to steal. Segwit transactions just require 51% of the hashpower.

You statement is very confusing since you are taking about two things: a) 51% attack and b) stealing coins.
How can you steal coins without private keys on Bitcoin?  What kind of bull shit is this?
Please enlighten me!

You haven't been listening. A 51% miner gets to declare that what were formerly segwit transactions are now anyonecanspend transactions. After all, that would merely be reversion to the consensus rules that existed before segwit activation (by a so-called 'compatible soft fork'). What happens to an anyonecanspend transaction? It's output is literally assignable to anyone. If you are mining, you are you going to assign that value to other than yourself? If you solve the block, they're yours.

Funny thing however, is that it is arguably not stealing, as it is merely operating under the existing consensus rules. Ones that were universal before some misguided individuals promulgated the idea that they were something other than anyonecanspend.

A 51% miner could just increase the block reward to whatever arbitrary amount they feel like... or just start his own fork from scratch. Double spends, on the other hand, are more tricky to detect and would probably just pass. So the most profitable strategy for a 51% attacker would be to use double spends and not try to steal segwit addresses.

That is if we don't take into account that ANY 51% attack (even double spends) would severely impact the price of Bitcoin..... and I doubt a major player in mining (51% hello?) would have any motivation to even think about it.

[jojo69]

[Torque]

I'll agree that it is by no means known that they will do so. But it is also by no means known that they will not. Funny that for all the lip service Core gives to security, and the rather dim view that many if not most Core devs have of miners, that they would introduce such a vulnerability.

You mean a vulnerability like the 0 conf in BCash that allows double spends galore?

[becoin]

A 51% miner gets to declare that what were formerly segwit transactions are now anyonecanspend transactions.

Declare? What a funny bs... You can declare whatever you want. Nobody cares what you declare being a 51% or 99% miner. What matters is the tx signature!

[miner987]

51% HP is not enough for any reasonable attack. 75% maybe...

[JayJuanGee]

The miners and wealthy elites know what's coming (or what may come), so they're storing their coins in legacy addresses. So, only the plebs like us will be screwed, and no one will give a shit.

Signature:
I do not accept segwit outputs as payment, nor send them.

Some of us will be ok.

Who is going to wear that "theoretical" signature?

[Vin]

Oh joy. New bottom-testing ?

Bottoms again and again.
It`s boring 

[Last of the V8s]

The miners and wealthy elites know what's coming (or what may come), so they're storing their coins in legacy addresses. So, only the plebs like us will be screwed, and no one will give a shit.

Signature:
I do not accept segwit outputs as payment, nor send them.

Some of us will be ok.

Who is going to wear that "theoretical" signature?

moi. I've been wearing that for a good while.

[jbreher]

- Non-segwit transactions require 51% of the hashpower and a private key to steal. Segwit transactions just require 51% of the hashpower.

You statement is very confusing since you are taking about two things: a) 51% attack and b) stealing coins.
How can you steal coins without private keys on Bitcoin?  What kind of bull shit is this?
Please enlighten me!

You haven't been listening. A 51% miner gets to declare that what were formerly segwit transactions are now anyonecanspend transactions. After all, that would merely be reversion to the consensus rules that existed before segwit activation (by a so-called 'compatible soft fork'). What happens to an anyonecanspend transaction? It's output is literally assignable to anyone. If you are mining, you are you going to assign that value to other than yourself? If you solve the block, they're yours.

Funny thing however, is that it is arguably not stealing, as it is merely operating under the existing consensus rules. Ones that were universal before some misguided individuals promulgated the idea that they were something other than anyonecanspend.

A 51% miner could just increase the block reward to whatever arbitrary amount they feel like...

But that would not be employing previous consensus rules. It would be a completely new fabrication.

[mymenace]

Pretty much this.

I wonder If any of these people will be able to make a public appearance after a coup like this.



See this photo?

Do you think any of these 3 are bold enough to trigger a world war and strong enough to survive through it? Are they brave enough to spend the rest of their lives in an underground bunker with the fears of getting killed at any second?

All I see here is 3 *aggots.

Yeah right.  You think that they can really generate enough folks to follow their narcisistic leadership path?  

It seems that your last sentence tells most of it... they are not inspiring enough.. maybe they need a new leader?  Gavin Andressen?  

He is the one leading them

they all follow his code

ideological views

everything

oh and CIA (Some old defunct organization being overun by patriots)

[jbreher]

You mean a vulnerability like the 0 conf in BCash that allows double spends galore?

BCH does not have any zero conf vulnerability that BTC avoids. You know that, right?

[jojo69]

[Last of the V8s]

I say we nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

[RayX12]

Nobody is going to steal my coins, they are on a Bitcoin address. so fuck you all who continue to FUD about nothing but theories of 51% attack and making Bitcoin worthless.
I sense there is an effort to tank the price to lower lows so they can fill they bags.

[TReano]

For the current leg, and I repeat myself yet again, why was segwit better than simply doubling the blocksize? Nobody seems willing to explain that bit, for whatever reason.

Answer why doubling the block size is even needed at this point in time. With actual logic and facts to back your argument.

Because using LN requires opening channels on chain. To do this in a decentralized fashion, LN can onboard no more than several hunnert thousand peeps per day.

Several hundred thousand peeps opening/closing LN channels per day seems a bit overkill currently, don't you think?

Currently? Yes.

But I thought LN was supposed to be a scalability solution. And eliminate the benefit of bigger blocks.

hahahahahahahaha

[JayJuanGee]

Welp. We know how high level money and power works. When it's financially worthwhile to do so, someone will get together the required processing power and buy off the proper authorities and make an honest attempt to steal segwit coins. Whether it succeeds or fails, it will be a big blow to the faith people have in the system (bitcoin in all its forms, authorities, moneyed people (us, even if simply by association)).

Just the first line in your post sold it for me. What in the actual fuck.

I feel dumb. I've been a segwit cheerleader without knowing all the facts. I see now that some of it is tribalism, as you mentioned earlier.

Anyway, it's what we've got now, and I still support Bitcoin. I won't be keeping my cold storage coins in a segwit address though.

Seems like you are transitioning over to the darkside, infofront?

Your skepticism seems a bit overkill, and you should keep in mind that part of the power of any attack on bitcoin, including segwit as an implementation would be to scare many of us not to use, it, and then the attackers are able to win the battle... So even if you have some skepticism of segwit, it might be prudent of you to support the actual (rather than hypothetical) direction of bitcoin by storing a portion of your coins on segwit, even if, you decide to follow through and store the vast majority in legacy addresses (out of your likely exaggerated fears).

May I introduce you to Rosewater?

[Rosewater Foundation]

I'm too dejected to come up with something snappy. Someone do me a solid, tell Jay to fuck himself with some style. k thx