@RogerVer lets make a deal. At least 60k, my BTU for your BTC.

[Thatstinks]

Uuummmm you can already speculate on BTU coin if it becomes available for well under BTC price so a 1 for 1 trade is so ridiculous atm no one not even a moron would take that deal.

Roger can go order 130k BTU coin right now if it became available for less so the offer made by this guy is not serious. Rather shows how angry his is he skipped common sense to look cool.

[1715098997]

1715098997

[1715098997]

1715098997

[1715098997]

1715098997

[Peter R]

What I suspect will happen is that we'll eventually get a block larger than 1 MB in the blockchain and Core will adapt their codebase to permit its users track the most-work chain.  In other words, there will likely be no split--just an anticlimactic network upgrade to larger blocks.  In such a case, who wins the bet?  Or is the bet only valid in the case where there is a persistent split?

[jonald_fyookball]

Uuummmm you can already speculate on BTU coin if it becomes available for well under BTC price so a 1 for 1 trade is so ridiculous atm no one not even a moron would take that deal.

Roger can go order 130k BTU coin right now if it became available for less so the offer made by this guy is not serious. Rather shows how angry his is he skipped common sense to look cool.

Can you?  If so, I assume such an asset would go to zero if it becomes apparent that no split will occur.  Makes sense it would be lower than BTC since its very existence is speculative since we don't know if BU will gain the hashpower it needs -- or if it does, Core could prevent the split as Peter suggested by allowing bigger blocks.  I think the 1:1 proposed trade deal assumes a split network.

[RHavar]

What I suspect will happen is that we'll eventually get a block larger than 1 MB in the blockchain and Core will adapt their codebase to permit its users track the most-work chain.  In other words, there will likely be no split--just an anticlimactic network upgrade to larger blocks.  In such a case, who wins the bet?  Or is the bet only valid in the case where there is a persistent split?

It's absurd to think that there is not a single miner who will continue operating under the old network rules -- and that's all that it takes to create a persistent split.

It's seemingly this very lack of critical thought that leads to BU not being able to make even minor changes to the client without introducing bugs and vulnerabilities.

[Hatcher]

Yeah, as stated by Loaded, this exchange only occurs if the split happens. So if nothing happens, both parties save their money, it's a wash. Whereas if you buy these tokens on Bitfinex they will go to 0 if nothing happens. Therefore, if you're a BCU holder on Bitfinex you are taking considerably more risk.

[Onetallnerd]

What I suspect will happen is that we'll eventually get a block larger than 1 MB in the blockchain and Core will adapt their codebase to permit its users track the most-work chain.  In other words, there will likely be no split--just an anticlimactic network upgrade to larger blocks.  In such a case, who wins the bet?  Or is the bet only valid in the case where there is a persistent split?

Maybe spend more time fixing your client that's buggy as hell.

No one wants your trash.

[Thatstinks]

If youre Roger though there is no risk because BTU coin and a fork will happen, right?

Personally the only thing I hope to see tomorrow is the sun again.

[Paashaas]

Roger is messing up with the whales, this idiot is digging his own grave.

[Peter R]

What I suspect will happen is that we'll eventually get a block larger than 1 MB in the blockchain and Core will adapt their codebase to permit its users track the most-work chain.  In other words, there will likely be no split--just an anticlimactic network upgrade to larger blocks.  In such a case, who wins the bet?  Or is the bet only valid in the case where there is a persistent split?

It's absurd to think that there is not a single miner who will continue operating under the old network rules -- and that's all that it takes to create a persistent split.

It's seemingly this very lack of critical thought that leads to BU not being able to make even minor changes to the client without introducing bugs and vulnerabilities.

Alright: how about a small side bet for us little fish?  I bet you 1 BTC that--should the most-work blockchain include a single block larger than 1 MB--that no minority chain will make it beyond 2100 blocks (~2 weeks and the length of a difficulty adjustment) without either a difficulty reset or a change in the proof-of-work algorithm.  If I win, the 2 BTCs in escrow will be sent to me.  If you win, the 2 BTCs on both chains will be sent to you.  If nothing happens by December 31, 2017, we both get our 1 BTC back.

[the__bob]

Pretty simple logistics actually. Set up a penalty bond using Ethereum and a smart contract. Each lodge 100% or 50% or 25% of the total BTC value in ETH in the smart contract, failure of either side to honor the original deal, the ETH moves to the winning recipient. You can have a trusted multi sig fire it or an oracle. This way no one gets there grubby hands on multi millions worth of BTC regardless of how much trust they display today. Bonus is by the time y'all get your shit together ETH will be worth double it is today or even $100. So act quick work out the details secure your ETH at today's rate, lock it up and let the games begin. 

[darkangel11]

If youre Roger though there is no risk because BTU coin and a fork will happen, right?

Personally the only thing I hope to see tomorrow is the sun again.

Not really, because even if it happens a fork doesn't have to involve be. The fact that bu is leading at the moment doesn't have anything to do with the final outcome. Everything changes so fast in the bitcoin world we may see a new project arise next week, one that will be better than segwit and bu... There are many options, an update with 100% consent would be the best one, but it won't happen due to human nature...

[adaseb]

How come none of you noticed that he replied and seems like he accepted the deal.

MemoryDealers=RogerVer

This sounds like a great deal for both of us.  I look forward to ironing out the exact details and terms.  I'm super busy for the next 48 hours,  but would love to connect after that.

[jonald_fyookball]

How come none of you noticed that he replied and seems like he accepted the deal.

MemoryDealers=RogerVer

This sounds like a great deal for both of us.  I look forward to ironing out the exact details and terms.  I'm super busy for the next 48 hours,  but would love to connect after that.

I noticed.  I think its a great.  Both willing to put their money where their mouth is.

[epiphy]

While this is pretty amazing and popcorn worthy for the community, and you are uniquely positioned to make such a bet... Wouldn't it be more prudent to invest some of those risked coins to improve the bitcoin ecosystem? 40k coins buys a lot of developer time! It's enough to start and fund several bitcoin startups.

If you aren't confident in the Unlimited devs, you could even make a small fund to help pay better developers to make BU's code more confidence inspiring (which could reduce peoples fears and the risks of the fork, reducing price fluctuations), or conversely invest it in the Core team if you'd prefer they be our stewardesses. Or create a new Bitcoin startup. Or some other thing (marketing, tools, API's, etc) to grow bitcoin adoption. Either way there's gotta be a million better ways to risk these coins that could be productive for everyone... Improving the overall health of bitcoin makes your substantial stash of coins worth more too.

[RHavar]

Alright: how about a small side bet for us little fish?  I bet you 1 BTC that--should the most-work blockchain include a single block larger than 1 MB--that no minority chain will make it beyond 2100 blocks (~2 weeks and the length of a difficulty adjustment) without either a difficulty reset or a change in the proof-of-work algorithm.  If I win, the 2 BTCs in escrow will be sent to me.  If you win, the 2 BTCs on both chains will be sent to you.  If nothing happens by December 31, 2017, we both get our 1 BTC back.

The terms are rather unfair to me (e.g. if the fork happens just before the deadline, then it's impossible for the minority chain to mine 2100 blocks) but I'll overlook that. As long as I also win if BU makes a failure of its fork (i.e. after some time miners realize the BTC chain is worth more, with lower difficulty -- so they switch back). In that circumstance by the end of the year BTC will be the fork with the most proof-of-work, even though at one time it was a minority.

Anyway, I'm happy with 1 BTC and will go as high as 100 BTC.  May I suggest Dooglus as an escrow, but I'll take anyone of the standard escrows here.

[misterbigg]

Wouldn't it be more prudent to invest some of those risked coins to improve the bitcoin ecosystem?

He's already improved the bitcoin ecosystem by saving his coins instead of spending them.

[Peter R]

Alright: how about a small side bet for us little fish?  I bet you 1 BTC that--should the most-work blockchain include a single block larger than 1 MB--that no minority chain will make it beyond 2100 blocks (~2 weeks and the length of a difficulty adjustment) without either a difficulty reset or a change in the proof-of-work algorithm.  If I win, the 2 BTCs in escrow will be sent to me.  If you win, the 2 BTCs on both chains will be sent to you.  If nothing happens by December 31, 2017, we both get our 1 BTC back.

The terms are rather unfair to me (e.g. if the fork happens just before the deadline, then it's impossible for the minority chain to mine 2100 blocks) but I'll overlook that. As long as I also win if BU makes a failure of its fork (i.e. after some time miners realize the BTC chain is worth more, with lower difficulty -- so they switch back). In that circumstance by the end of the year BTC will be the fork with the most proof-of-work, even though at one time it was a minority.

Anyway, I'm happy with 1 BTC and will go as high as 100 BTC.  May I suggest Dooglus as an escrow, but I'll take anyone of the standard escrows here.

Good point, if the fork happens just before the deadline then how about we wait up to 4 months for the minority chain to mine 2100 new blocks.  If the minority chain doesn't mine 2100 blocks by then, we'll call it dead and I win the bet. 

Regarding your term that if a fork happens, but BU reorgs so that the most-work chain no longer contains a block > 1 MB, I might be OK with that, but it's a bit unfair to me because what if we just get a random 1.1 MB block like we saw with bitcoin.com?  I could see that happening again, and I don't think that should count as a fork.  How about we define a "fork attempt" as occurring once the large block chain has at least 72 blocks built on top of it?

I am happy with Dooglus as escrow.

[muyuu]

What I suspect will happen is that we'll eventually get a block larger than 1 MB in the blockchain and Core will adapt their codebase to permit its users track the most-work chain.  In other words, there will likely be no split--just an anticlimactic network upgrade to larger blocks.  In such a case, who wins the bet?  Or is the bet only valid in the case where there is a persistent split?

Dream on.

Both your bluff and Ver's have just been called.

[Blazed]

Problem is Roger will have a BU node to accept the payment and it is only a 50/50 chance it will be online when they trade. How will Roger verify the coins were sent?

[Holliday]

Problem is Roger will have a BU node to accept the payment and it is only a 50/50 chance it will be online when they trade. How will Roger verify the coins were sent?

Don't worry, I'm sure Ver's node is one of the "critical nodes".