Hacks & puppets & forks - how to destroy bitcoin

[python_fan89]

IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.

[Hydrogen]

IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.

They can destroy bitcoin.

If they want to make it obvious they oppose innovation and progress which benefit civilization & make themselves look guilty.

They usually prefer to be described as philanthropists who donate money to charity and have a net positive effect on society, rather than the opposite.

I'm not certain they want to paint themselves as being villains with mass discontent on the horizon.

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.

They can destroy bitcoin.

If they want to make it obvious they oppose innovation and progress which benefit civilization & make themselves look guilty.

They usually prefer to be described as philanthropists who donate money to charity and have a net positive effect on society, rather than the opposite.

I'm not certain they want to paint themselves as being villains with mass discontent on the horizon.

There exists a great separation of powers by the users, developers, mining network in this decentralized framework of Bitcoin.

Destruction of Bitcoin need not be public nor make an organization villainous, they just need to introduce a proposal to be adopted to tilt this power structure involving change to Bitcoin's protocol (code).

A slight change of this control, and this is all about CONTROL, will open the doorway to begin the destruction of bitcoin.

Even if no change is made to code....another attack potential: central banks can sponsor (lend to "startups"/"entrepreneurs") organizations that'll cause a huge bouts of volatile events to keep away broad-mass-user-base: they would bid up prices like crazy to hold a signification portion of coins, and then unload the coins on the market either all at one time (huge drop in 1 week) or slowly to control volume over-time (ie 3 years of lower prices).

[Yakamoto]

IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.

It's at $38B, and there aren't a lot of companies that would be able to take on something with that value and destroy it without also destroying the value of the company. Most organizations couldn't even pull something like that off.

I am far more concerned about the power plays and lack of community interest that could result of the recent events dealing with the blocksize, but it's looking like it will be getting resolved so there is a fair amount of hope for that to go to the back burner and solve the issues we've been experiencing.

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

…then even a $50 billion market cap would still be seen as trivial in the financial assets arena where one bitcoin can easily go above $3,000 USD. But really, as the years pack on and integrity remains intact, the price would be infinity-bound.

...

How can a $50 billion market cap be trivial or seen as under-the-radar?
see here: link1 (http://i1.wp.com/money.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/all-the-worlds-money-and-markets.png?w=1346) or link2 (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/75/9b/63/759b63f98e8569498bee62738fda954b.jpg)

IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.

It's at $38B, and there aren't a lot of companies that would be able to take on something with that value and destroy it without also destroying the value of the company. Most organizations couldn't even pull something like that off.

I am far more concerned about the power plays and lack of community interest that could result of the recent events dealing with the blocksize, but it's looking like it will be getting resolved so there is a fair amount of hope for that to go to the back burner and solve the issues we've been experiencing.

Amazing how in 3-months bitcoin (mkt cap) approaching $50B so quickly....the level where I say BTC is not so trivial anymore.

True, villainous reputation would be labeled for any entity (or entities) working to attack or take down Bitcoin...but couldn't this same exact thing be achieved without any such labeling by simply changing the rules of the protocol (take-over without traditional mining - ie segwit)? Or even further centralizing need/cost of hardware for mining the protocol (blocksize)?

What is the current total size of the bitcoin blockchain?

Then why would there be a push for blocksizes to go larger? (more susceptible to spam attacks, blockchain bloat, requirement for more expensive capital hardware mining pools)

Why wouldn't there be a push for smaller blocksizes? Shouldn't the protocol decrease blocksize from 1mb to 750kb? (limit spam in a block, reduce bloat, increase decentralization)

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

...
Even if no change is made to code....another attack potential: central banks can sponsor (lend to "startups"/"entrepreneurs") organizations that'll cause a huge bouts of volatile events to keep away broad-mass-user-base: they would bid up prices like crazy to hold a signification portion of coins, and then unload the coins on the market either all at one time (huge drop in 1 week) or slowly to control volume over-time (ie 3 years of lower prices).

In light of recent cyber-attacks enabled by official government-entity backdoors, does anyone question the attempts to attach these evil acts to cryptocurrency since these 'hackers' then ask for payments in such? Wouldn't it be convenient for government-backed entities to set a plan to make things like Bitcoin look bad by using their contractors (hackers for hire) to use these exploits so that subsequently bad publicity would be spread on Bitcoin to general public around the world?

Isn't this made easy by all these global companies using USA-developed (China-made) computing infrastructure which has the backdoors the NSA/CIA requires for having such control?

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

There's been much hysteria during 2017 re: coming-deadlines....the first earlier this year around March, and the other being the looming Aug. 1, 2017,

What is the probability that nothing happens...normal Bitcoin stays Bitcoin and most hashing power remains with normal Bitcoin?

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

Just reiterating to watch the bitcoin 101 blackboard series:
youtube: link1 (https://youtu.be/Bhe61JaNFLU)


has anyone here watched it?

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

Just reiterating to watch the bitcoin 101 blackboard series:
youtube: link1 (https://youtu.be/Bhe61JaNFLU)

IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.

It's at $38B, and there aren't a lot of companies that would be able to take on something with that value and destroy it without also destroying the value of the company. Most organizations couldn't even pull something like that off.

I am far more concerned about the power plays and lack of community interest that could result of the recent events dealing with the blocksize, but it's looking like it will be getting resolved so there is a fair amount of hope for that to go to the back burner and solve the issues we've been experiencing.

Bitcoin has crossed $50B cap and is not so trivial anymore. Also, the market has been clear this week re:August 1st  release of BCC (larger blocksize fork) and BCC has been DUMPED, people getting rid of BCC as fast as they can  and instead buying some real Bitcoin (BTC).

I held off responding hoping others would reply to the thread.

You make a lot of excellent points. I wish I had something to contribute but not so much.

If I was to apply an economic model to this discussion, I would aim for a type of thermoeconomic context. I believe that's the future and the best model to use.

But to be honest, I'm an amateur when it comes to economics/markets/trading & I've been severely slacking off for a long time now.

To the point of economics/markets/trading, look at the practical use-case of Bitcoin; a global store of value asset that may be transmitted via a communications channel.

To illustrate how global, I asked which country people were from in this small forum, of those who spoke out, in two days the following tally;
9 responded from Phillippines
5 responded from Indonesia
3 responded from India
2 responded from USA
1 from Ukraine
1 from Bangladesh
1 from East Timor

the above was a count of posters from here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1853019.0

I'll revisit the extensive and increasingly global characteristics of Bitcoin from this thread to update the tally soon.

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

Hacks.

Barry Silbert companies again tainting a good thing of segwit into hardfork-backdoored-altcoin:

PSA: Beware of S2xGarzik-Coin hardfork (and similar Silbert DCG-backed failures ie Garzikcoin aka BIP 100, Bitcoin Unlimited)
These attacks of using "community" urgency have been relentless since 2015:


People, please stay educated and be mindful of software you are supporting to run a full node.

Although altcoins of XT, Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin Cash, etc have failed to take-over real Bitcoin, please don't be complacent with ramifications of future hard-forks.

From Chainalysis now Skry now Bloq now Segwit2x (Jeff Garzik):

    Founded in 2014, Chainalysis is the leading provider of Anti-Money Laundering software for Bitcoin. With offices in New York and Copenhagen, we work with global financial institutions, like Barclays and Bitcoin exchanges to enable every stakeholder to assess risk in this new economy.
credit: baronofbitcoin

s2x-garzikcoin: Opens door for AML, easy identification, etc. Things so traditional authorities identify you, classify you, and shut you down, FREEZE YOUR ASSETS, lock you up.  Just because they don't like you for not supporting the traditional Bank Swift network or a Bankchain.

Bitcoin's consensus system and natural economic incentives PROTECT the real bitcoin.

Nothing bad happened after the BCC split, in fact the price increased and we even got free coins.

So I guess there will be nothing bad in a SegWit2x fork, and we will have more free coins to hold.

There certainly will be if the present percentage of miners pushes it through. Corecoin would have to change PoW to stand a chance of being usable. It would slow to a crawl if it lost that much mining power.

Bitfury is already having second thoughts about the New York Agreement. You will see the first mining camps start defecting from the agreement after segwit locks in.

In any case, it's irrelevant. Whales will dump on GarzikCoin, killing the price and thus forcing them to go back to mining the legacy chain. GarzikCoin doesn't stand a chance and will become another dumb altcoin, and everyone involved will be forever hated because they will be responsible of crashing the price in the middle of an all time high for no reason other than rushing a hardfork for an unnecessary blocksize increase while putting Jeff Garzik, someone that works in a blockchain spying tool, in charge.

Repeated History: Reading references (emphasis mine);
http://www.contravex.com/2015/08/29/the-economics-of-sinking-garzikcoin-aka-bip-100/
Adam T. says:   
August 30, 2015 at 8:49 AM   

“pre-emptive strike” — best characterization I’ve seen yet to describe the odd feeling of urgency from certain parties.
Reply   

    Pete Dushenski says:   
    August 30, 2015 at 10:11 AM   

    Odd indeed. Almost like these overgrown children seriously imagine that Bitcoin didn’t reach escape velocity 2.5 years ago and that they can rewrite history if only they obtain enough “consensus” on social media. Must suck to think that’s how the world works.

[hv_]

Oh wei - did 'real' bitcoin had Segwit or not ?

So a base protocol does not need such specs as SW  or max block size

We are in the middle of finding this out - it's hard work and sadly too much fights.

[sindikat]

There's been much hysteria during 2017 re: coming-deadlines....the first earlier this year around March, and the other being the looming Aug. 1, 2017,

What is the probability that nothing happens...normal Bitcoin stays Bitcoin and most hashing power remains with normal Bitcoin?

You are looking at the immediate consequences. But bitcoin has earned its credibility in the last 8 years. Of course there is inertia. All of the events listed does not add credibility of bitcoin and can really kill the credibility.

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

There's been much hysteria during 2017 re: coming-deadlines....the first earlier this year around March, and the other being the looming Aug. 1, 2017,

What is the probability that nothing happens...normal Bitcoin stays Bitcoin and most hashing power remains with normal Bitcoin?

You are looking at the immediate consequences. But bitcoin has earned its credibility in the last 8 years. Of course there is inertia. All of the events listed does not add credibility of bitcoin and can really kill the credibility.

That is a great point, Bitcoin has been so entrenched and well-established that its King status will never go away. Bitcoin's 10 year anniversary is not that far away and that will be a nice milestone.

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

Since Bitcoin has reached escape velocity back in 2013 (no government and no banks can ever shut it down), there have been many scare tactics to subvert Bitcoin OR to shake weak-handed newbies from their BTC.

Today's headline (and there'll be plenty more from banks/ceos/governments as the future years come -yet bitcoin will grow and grow);

"JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon says bitcoin is a fraud that ... - CNBC.com"
Courtesy of Comcast/General Electric companies.

[jekjekman]

Hacks will surely destroy everything that is up and running online in the internet and bitcoin is not an exemption with this though but bitcoin is reaching its 1st decade anniversary and the recent years for it was tough but it survived so the next years will be more challenging and bitcoin will become more stronger more than ever to all its aspect.

naysayers will tell what they want to spread and they will do it again and again until they die because they are happy to do it but to those who really believe in what great will happen in the future of bitcoin will surely benefit.

[Hydrogen]

Odd indeed. Almost like these overgrown children seriously imagine that Bitcoin didn’t reach escape velocity 2.5 years ago and that they can rewrite history if only they obtain enough “consensus” on social media. Must suck to think that’s how the world works.

They've had a lot of success with that. People really believe russia hacked the US elections despite all evidence pointing to an internal leak inside the DNC. People believe there are more than 2 genders simply because of gender fluidity campaigns on tumblr. People believe travel bans designed to keep terrorists out of the country are racist. They believe Trump was planning to put gays and transgenders in concentration camps because social media campaigns spread those lies.

It might seem silly to think our collective lack of knowledge and education could be taken advantage of. Looking around the world however that's exactly what is happening and it does seem to be very effective.

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

Bitcoin reached escape velocity 4-years ago in 2013 which means it cannot be stopped - cannot make it illegal or legal - governments/banks do not matter. Bitcoin cannot be controlled.

On the opposite end of the spectrum the global fiat system broke a couple of decades ago.
Fiat around the world is heavily infested with:
-regulatory burden on fiat banks & system (incredibly costly)
-insurance fraud
-false claims and insurance losses
-unemployment & other welfare costs
-inflating fiat to keep stock market rising and to keep house-prices from collapsing
-financing conflicts, bombs, and "aid"
-stabilize regions after natural disasters
-keeping monopolies with internet access centralized and search engine crawlers centralized
-money laundering
-chargebacks
-frivolous legal costs (lawsuits bogging the system down)
-state-sponsored corruption and unofficial corruption (governments and gangs, banks and conartists)
-retirement obligations (debasement in value to keep up with payments from government or other retirement-obligations)
-fake credit (goods being transacted with credit-loss, replaced by inflation of monetary base rather than bringing perpetrators & source to justice)
-costs of auditors and budgetors and accountants to governments and businesses

Bitcoin, systemically, is free from these burdens.

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

Hacks will surely destroy everything that is up and running online in the internet and bitcoin is not an exemption with this though but bitcoin is reaching its 1st decade anniversary and the recent years for it was tough but it survived so the next years will be more challenging and bitcoin will become more stronger more than ever to all its aspect.

naysayers will tell what they want to spread and they will do it again and again until they die because they are happy to do it but to those who really believe in what great will happen in the future of bitcoin will surely benefit.

Do you read what you write before you post? That's alot of confused unrelated things to pull in together. Bitcoin has been around for nearly 10 years and no one in that 10 years has ever been able to successfully hack the Bitcoin protocol and make any Bitcoins nor stop the system from working.

Meanwhile you see everything else in the world seeming to be getting hacked.

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

Why are people on the forum trying to link enemies of Bitcoin to being Satoshi Nakamoto? Doesn't anyone decipher between bullshit sources vs legit sources? Don't they look at history and see people like Mike Hearn and Craig Wright have tried to subvert/destroy Bitcoin?

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

Highly recommend those who are new/learning to watch this intro bitcoin video:
bitcoin 101:https://youtu.be/Bhe61JaNFLU

Also global money history: history of money/centralbanks: https://vimeo.com/8757743 or link2 https://youtu.be/UrJGlXEs8nI