You all can thank Roger Ver and Jihan Wu for crashing the market

[Rux]

i wonder who put those these guys to be in charge???

:/

if this is "decentralization" that everyone talks.. then we can all pack our bags and go search some other solutions besides cyrpto

can we, people, large part of btc network, vote/rule/riot for removing this guys who are only doing manipulation for some big guys

i mean if some idiot nerdlike think he can own BTC or controll it, then we all lost our way in crypto

[K128kevin2]

i wonder who put those these guys to be in charge???

They're not in charge.

[1Referee]

A lot of people - both part of Bitcoin core and not - seem to have forgotten the entire purpose behind Bitcoin.

In most cases egos and the financial benefit is what makes people go full retard - and with this I am referring to indeed Roger Ver and J. Wu, for walking the wrong way. Years ago you could say that Bitcoin's purpose was the only priority for high level Bitcoiners, but that's not the case anymore with stakes sitting at higher levels than ever. It's financial gains > egos > Bitcoin. Who suffers from this? As always, the users.

[Rux]

i wonder who put those these guys to be in charge???

They're not in charge.

I know that, but we all know they want to be, and thats not good.

From the novice perspective, they think that nobody cant control BTC...

and now they hear stuff like hard fork, split into two coins, and most important, price drop

i just wish btc stays btc....

[nelson4lov]

I'm damn tired of the debate thingy. Roger Ver and his whale friends are just misleading unsuspecting Bitcoin Users to make the switch and support BU. It's clear that they're only after Mining Monopoly and centralizing the network. Left to me alone, I prefer Segwit. A Hard fork will ruin Bitcoin entirely.


Too confused to chose a side with all these debates going around.

[rebel.salesman]

The dogs bark, but the btc goes on.

We've already seen shit like this before, for example, Bitcoin XT and Mike Hearn's bullshit.
Everything gonna be alright, fellas)

It's a good moment to buy some btc at the bottom.

[induktor]

I am worried
We are in a deadlock situation

IMHO:

- BU is dangerous, and it is growing (or was   ), I support CORE, but.
- Segwit turns BTC into an alt, a complex workaround for something that should be easy, but i agree with andreas that, it is ready now, and does not pose a risk of hard forking the network
- 8MB Blocks are the ideal solution, simple, clear, solves the problem, but it would most likely create a splitting of the network at this point, and we all know what that means.

So, I don't know what the solution is, if we had no risk of splitting the network 8MB blocks will be ideal.

[taxmanmt5]

The dogs bark, but the btc goes on.

We've already seen shit like this before, for example, Bitcoin XT and Mike Hearn's bullshit.
Everything gonna be alright, fellas)

It's a good moment to buy some btc at the bottom.

haha,  lets the shit barks and bitcoin will countiune to move forward. So all this all shit only for a day you were able to bring the bitcoin below 1000$ only for few hours. Go check price, its now again climblng. Thats was thier max. shot. Go get the life.

                                                         BITCOIN IS FOREVER

[iamnotback]

Re: RogerCoin

He went from Bitcoin Jesus to Bitcoin Antichrist LOL

RogerVer's BU is lonesomely incompetent. Expect a reversal back to Bitcoin Core soon. Last chance to buy under $1000 before the rocket leaves the launch pad to $2000+. (Caveat, make sure my linked point is technically correct first ... I'm waiting peer review...)

Bitcoin Unlimited is doomed now that I've shown it is based on faulty math. This is fundamental and the entire concept of unlimited block size is flawed. Once the market digests my revelation, there will be dumping of mining nodes for Bitcoin Unlimited. Roger Ver you really need to get better peer review of the projects you support. You are making so many YUGE technical errors and promulgating incorrect technical information. Shame on you.

If Bitcoin Unlimited is able to create blocks Core won't accept, then it becomes an alt and everybody sells it to buy BTC. Same as for ETC dumped to buy ETH.

Everybody who waited to dump ETC was a loser, so FOMO effect will take hold again.

BU is deadman walking. Probably won't even make it to HF based on my recent technical posts.

[btbrae]

Where can I track progress of the progress of this fork?

http://coin.dance/ has statistics on the node count (checks version string for core, unlimited, xt, classic) and on the version bits in mined blocks.

Thanks I didn't know about this site.

Look at that chinese volume on LocalBitcoins. Insane.

Many other countries too. Incredible graphs.

[error08]

gets 2mb+ LOL
native key users will still bloat the bas block so that not many real users can move funds to segwit keys. then they wont be able to use those segwit keys because native base blockers are still ntive base block spamming. meaning hops of 2mb+ are low.. much like 7 years of 7txps...

ya mathematically possible to have both expectations of 2mb data and 7txps.. but reality will show that it wont get that far.

Reality will show Economic Consensus of BUcoin doesn't work, and it will crash.

Reality will show segwit is the best solution, it solves quadratic problem needed to raise the blocksize properly later on and allows for cool features.

Of course franky1 the bitcointalk expert knows better.

Thanks to Roger Ver and jihan wu then if they are really the reason behind last decline, it provides good chance to buy back at lower price and purchase more than we buy at ATH above $1200.

If it's true, I will support SegWit as well. No need for unlimited if 4mb will be enough, furthermore it is a solution come from devs team which we have to trust them. I'm wondering which side are you on?

[iamnotback]

@miscreanity, even if your $988 is violated and we move lower, it could still be an accurate channel if we view BTU+BTC as a combined price. We may end up getting BTU for free which we can trade for BTC. However, it appears BTU is not going to add the necessary replay attack prevention in order to get listed on the exchanges. BTU appears to understand that their coin will be sold off as an inferior altcoin if they add replay attack prevention. Seems like they are already admitting defeat and acting desperate maniacal now.

Although nobody likes the current problem with the 1MB blocks, an unlimited blocksize is not a viable technological solution. Sorry but incompetents aren't going to be trusted to lead Bitcoin. Roger Ver and Julian Wu are not competent enough to pull off what they attempted.

[European Central Bank]

- Segwit turns BTC into an alt, a complex workaround for something that should be easy, but i agree with andreas that, it is ready now, and does not pose a risk of hard forking the network

the whole reason segwit is a soft fork and not a hard fork is to stop it from becoming an alt. it's bitcoin just as it is now but with extra fixes and the potential for masses of new applications.

the problem that the unlimited miners seem to have is that it'll be just as it is now with that extra innovation that might cost them, even though it probably won't. still cheaper than a PoW change firing all of them.

there's uncertainty too of course. it's new code. as is the other one with alot less testing.

[franky1]

- Segwit turns BTC into an alt, a complex workaround for something that should be easy, but i agree with andreas that, it is ready now, and does not pose a risk of hard forking the network

the whole reason segwit is a soft fork and not a hard fork is to stop it from becoming an alt. it's bitcoin just as it is now but with extra fixes and the potential for masses of new applications.

they went soft to AVOID node voting.
they went soft and have bip9 that includes actively and intentionally banning pools/blocks if their activation happens to turn their 95% into 100%
they went soft and now super slitting hard with UASF that includes actively and intentionally banning pools/blocks and nodes to get their 100%

other implementations, xt, classic, bu, and others dont have active/intentional banning mechanisms.. they only activate with consensus of majority. the non-core implementations have set no deadlines, no intent to have sole control. only core want sole control

the problem that the unlimited miners seem to have is that it'll be just as it is now with that extra innovation that might cost them, even though it probably won't. still cheaper than a PoW change firing all of them.

there's uncertainty too of course. it's new code. as is the other one with alot less testing.

SW is a total re-write. new block formations, new rules new tx styles
other implementations are just tweaks. and easy to implement by anyone. but core refuse to give p their cntral control.

if you think bitcoin cannot survive without core, you are just admitting to yourself:
1. bitcoin is controlled by a group
2. bitcoins decentralised ethos has already been lost
3. bitcoin cant survive without the cartel paid for by DGC
4. that core are not independent because they refuse to walk away from their cabin fever filled corner office to independently help out anyone in bitcoin

[lifesfun]

In the cases that Roger (bitcoin.com ) and Jihan ( ant, via, and top ) are not state or corporate interest backed this attack is costing them lots of money/losses. Its unsustainable for the long term. We all know that their intentions have nothing to do #Bitcoin interests for decentralization due to #BU creating centralization through making only large players be able to mine and have proper bandwidth requirements. Note: If you think #bitcoin is centralized in terms of mining now, this is nothing compared to what it can be when you add large blocks.

In the case that they are state sponsored backed, then the worst case is they do try and fork. The network will split between core and BU. In this event some exchanges will list both, most companies that build btc software or provide btc related services will still only work on #Bitcoin. Most nodes will stay with Bitcoin as well. The hashrate might drop in half temporarily but will stabilize around 75% as large centralized players will mine #BU and less competition + lower hashrate makes old miner hardware becomes profitable or worth the risk to mine. #Segwit will soon instant apply on Bitcoin around this time. After this BU will try and use half of there hash to cause problems but it wont work as they have to have some hardware left over to keep BU hashrate on. Most #Bitcoin supporters will sell all the BU coins to and perform different attacks, financially, mining power, node attacks on BU. BU will survive past this as does any altcoin but the threat attackers will be bankrupted or if state sponsored realize that they are getting diminishing returns. #bitcoin price with segwit and payment channels will start to really have a large effect during this time and innovation will start exponentially due to the increase ability to do smart contracts and payment channels, and side chains due to the upgrade.

So the point is Bitcoin will survive in the worst case, not because of the community intent, which helps, but because of natural selection and market forces.

[iamnotback]

Who will mine BTU if they refuse to add replay attacks protection, thus no exchanges will add BTU, and thus there is no liquid market to sell the mined tokens?

The miners who are stupid enough to mine the BTU HF are going to go bankrupt.

[franky1]

In the cases that Roger (bitcoin.com ) and Jihan ( ant, via, and top ) are not state or corporate interest backed this attack is costing them lots of money/losses.

attack?

non-core implementations have been running for years and have no intention to ban and split the network controversially/bilaterally.. otherwise they would have already.
also they would have set deadlines and added code to intentionally split the network.

however non-core devs have just run as normal, no threats no banning/split code.. all they have is the usual bitcoin consensus code.

it is core that fear losing their stronghold and having to either drop themselves down to a decentralised equal playing field with the other diverse nodes or split off and have a core only network. and we know what they prefer.

remember core did not exist before 2013. core is not the sole implementation running bitcoin.. but they want to be.(thus removing diversity)

they have been desperate to rock the boat and try poking the bear to get non-core teams to split. but those other implementations refuse because they understand and want diverse decentralised bitcoin to survive. not hand power to only core by walking away.

wake up to the bait and switch of core pointing the finger the other way for their own intentions just to play a fake victim card when core pull the ban trigger to cause the split

[jonald_fyookball]

SW is a total re-write. new block formations, new rules new tx styles
other implementations are just tweaks. and easy to implement by anyone. 
 

many people here do not understand this important fact or its implications.

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

A lot of people - both part of Bitcoin core and not - seem to have forgotten the entire purpose behind Bitcoin.

In most cases egos and the financial benefit is what makes people go full retard - and with this I am referring to indeed Roger Ver and J. Wu, for walking the wrong way. Years ago you could say that Bitcoin's purpose was the only priority for high level Bitcoiners, but that's not the case anymore with stakes sitting at higher levels than ever. It's financial gains > egos > Bitcoin. Who suffers from this? As always, the users.

Thank you OP. @Bitcoin_Mafia_Me @1Referee Yes, I'd suggest those needing refreshment on purpose of bitcoin to read up here: Hacks & puppets & forks - how to destroy bitcoin: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1834310.msg18256120#msg18256120 

...but I cannot recall a time when so many bitcoiners were using bitcoin for just purchasing gas, coffee, using as small ATMs - so I'd humbly challenge that notion.

SW is a total re-write. new block formations, new rules new tx styles
other implementations are just tweaks. and easy to implement by anyone. 
 

many people here do not understand this important fact or its implications.

Thank you.

[danherbias07]

Bitcoin doing great?  You mean only being in the hands of rich, greedy, mining farms?  how is that doing ok?  Tell me what do THEY do for bitcoin except for lining their own pockets.  Bitcoin wasn't created just so the rich could own most of it.  Control how it moves.   But go ahead and keep shoveling them money.

The greedy rich own fiat.  Now the greedy rich own Bitcoin.  is wasn't supposed to be like this.

Do you think BU will not be owned by rich?.The same will happen to BU as well after it become as valuable in price as bitcoin is today.
Money begets money after all.Rich become richer because they can buy anything anytime and manipulate them.

Yeah and if they can creatr chaos like that it will be a hard problem. This is one example. Even their tweets have come here with just someone reading it and now it can spread more creating more chaos and making some of us duml specially the panic seller. Then what? They will be switching to those BS.