Dear Bitcoin Miners

[Oznog]

Dear Bitcoin Miners:

I ask you please to defend your interests now.

Satoshi invented Bitcoin based only on proof-of-work.
You have control of the computing power.
Therefore, the correct functioning and future of Bitcoin depends on you.

Satoshi knew this would happen and decided to trust you because he assumed that you would always act for the benefit of your own interest.
Commissions of transactions - past, present and future - belong to you.

The developers, nodes, markets and the media do not have the control of the blockchain.
Only you can determine which is the real blockchain.

You have a great investment and a promising future.
But you have machines that only serve for this purpose.
If you do not do the right thing soon you will turn off the machines so as not to go bankrupt because of the high energy consumption and you will lose everything.

IMHO I suggest the following plan:
1. Hold meetings of miners in private (the same interests).
2. You must reach a consensus of a Mining Alliance of +75% to solve this crisis (zero-sum game).
3. Announce and consolidate that alliance in the text associated with the blocks.
4. Coordinate and compensate between you to neutralize the incorrect blockchain (hard is hard).
5. Acting forcefully, quickly and always in your own interest.

The great catastrophe is moving fast.
Please, do it now.

Sincerely,

[newIndia]

2. You must reach a consensus of a Mining Alliance of 75% to solve this crisis (same interests, zero-sum game).

U mean making the way of 51% attack?

[Oznog]

U mean making the way of 51% attack?

Yes.
50% for the true blockchain.
25% to neutralize the incorrect blockchain mining empty blocks.

This will resolve the conflict in days and with the minimum risk.
There is no other remedy.

[AgentofCoin]

U mean making the way of 51% attack?

Yes.
50% for the true blockchain.
25% to neutralize the incorrect mining empty blocks.

This will resolve the conflict in days and with the minimum risk.
There is no other remedy.

Spoken like a good little Maoist.

"The seizure of power by armed force, the settlement of the issue by war,
is the central task and the highest form of revolution. This Marxist-Leninist
principle of revolution holds well universally, for China and for all other countries."

Your whole belief system contradicts Satoshi's Consensus Mechanism.
It is not a form of war, but negotiation between different parties.

Stop talking about Satoshi.
He is spinning in his grave every time you talk.

[Lauda]

-snip-
The developers, nodes, markets and the media do not have the control of the blockchain.
Only you can determine which is the real blockchain.

This is complete, and utter bullshit from the BTU fanatics. "Oznog, I’m glad to see you’re not letting your education get in the way of your ignorance [1]". Go ahead already, FORK off right now. Create your stinky little altcoin. A lot of us are waiting here in the case that some exchange adopts it so we can dump it to the ground.
FYI: Nobody in their right mind is going to support this shitcoin. This is why it has been decided that it would be called BTU, just another altcoin version of Bitcoin.
[1] - Not my original work.

[Oznog]

Spoken like a good little Maoist.

Google Translator.

but negotiation between different parties.

In my opinion that "negotiation" has failed.

This is why it has been decided that it would be called BTU, just another altcoin version of Bitcoin.

WTF.
What I have come to say is that our opinion on what blockchain is Bitcoin is irrelevant.

[Lauda]

This is why it has been decided that it would be called BTU, just another altcoin version of Bitcoin.

WTF.
What I have come to say is that our opinion on what blockchain is Bitcoin is irrelevant.

No. The miners should be working towards and for consensus. Miners should not be led on by greed or lobbyist. Once miners start misbehaving, it is likely that a nuclear POW change would be implemented with the support of the economy, developers and miners. This would effectively make all their hardware worth null. This would surely be a fine lesson for malice behavior. 

[Oznog]

Miners should not be led on by greed

Ultimately, the miners will act in their own interest, as anyone would.

All this tries to confirm the last sentence of the last paragraph of the Satoshi's master document.
He is in last place because he knew that it was the most difficult and decisive machine-human challenge.

[AgentofCoin]

...

but negotiation between different parties.

In my opinion that "negotiation" has failed.

You do not understand.

The "negotiation" is Consensus.
You are saying Consensus is broken or failed, so now the Miners are going
to break Satoshi's rules and make their own rules. If they have resistance,
they will attack others as they attempt to gain total power.

That breaks the system and makes bitcoins worthless.
Miner's attempts to gain power makes the whole system less secure and valuable.

[Oznog]

Consensus.

The consensus to which Satoshi refers in point 12 is only among the miners who have calculation power.

[AgentofCoin]

Consensus.

The consensus to which Satoshi refers in point 12 is only to the miners possessing calculation power.

What is Point 12?

No, Satoshi was talking about the network at the time.

When ASICs were created, those miners split their power with the
validator nodes that do not mine.

You are reading Satoshi literally and not how the ecosystem is today.
When BU made that invalid block a few weeks ago, the nodes rejected it
because the miners DO NOT control.

It is the validator node's rule set that controls.

ASIC Miners inadvertently gave half their power to Validator Nodes back in 2011.

[Oznog]

When ASICs were created, those miners split their power with the
validator nodes that do not mine.

Meeeeeeec. Error.
ASIC did not split the power.
It only lifted computer power to a new level.

Bitcoin is not proof-of-network, it's proof-of-work.

When BU made that invalid block a few weeks ago, the nodes rejected it
because the miners DO NOT control.

Nodes cost only $40/month or less.
If you're correct, how come no one has thought to buy a few thousand nodes for a few hours in the cloud to gain control of Bitcoin?

ASIC Miners inadvertently gave half their power to Validator Nodes back in 2011.

You say half the power? Exactly 50%? Why?
You should assume that the miners have the technical and economic ability to deploy the nodes as necessary.

[Iranus]

The developers, nodes, markets and the media do not have the control of the blockchain.
Only you can determine which is the real blockchain.

Shut up.  Miners' own interests are to keep Bitcoin alive, not to choose a scaling system that gives them the most profit.  Their interests are subjective and if they choose something which the markets and the nodes don't like, it will collapse.  The markets have the most power of all because they can decide to make miners' earnings worthless if they want to.  If miners go and choose BU and no one likes it they'll be mining dust.

IMHO I suggest the following plan:
1. Hold meetings of miners in private (the same interests).
2. You must reach a consensus of a Mining Alliance of +75% to solve this crisis (zero-sum game).

Miners don't all have the same interests or believe the same things about what's in their own interest because they're still people.  The fact that you think something so toxic just proves that you support Bitcoin's centralisation (as if a meeting of a few miners would make up 75% of the hash rate).

[Oznog]

Miners' own interests are to keep Bitcoin alive, not to choose a scaling system that gives them the most profit.  Their interests are subjective and if they choose something which the markets and the nodes don't like, it will collapse.  The markets have the most power of all because they can decide to make miners' earnings worthless if they want to.  If miners go and choose BU and no one likes it they'll be mining dust.

I totally agree with you.

The miners have the executive power.
But they are totally linked to the market price.

We can trust them.
They are many and I think they will cooperate.

[AgentofCoin]

When ASICs were created, those miners split their power with the
validator nodes that do not mine.

Meeeeeeec. Error.
ASIC did not split the power.
It only lifted computer power to a new level.
Bitcoin is not proof-of-network, it's proof-of-work.

You are very short sighted and incapable of thinking outside of the box.
You do not understand what I am saying. Your brain is already biased.

No one said anything about Proof of Network, though it could be argued that
the reason why miners can not hardfork on their own, like you believe, is because
a form of Proof of Network does indeed exists, metaphorically speaking.

When BU made that invalid block a few weeks ago, the nodes rejected it
because the miners DO NOT control.

Nodes cost only $40/month or less.
If you're correct, how come no one has thought to buy a few thousand nodes for a few hours in the cloud to gain control of Bitcoin?

They can and that could be a likely future.

If there were no Validator Nodes, Miners COULD do whatever they want, in theory.
The Validator Nodes PREVENT Miners from hardforking WITHOUT network Consensus.
You don't understand this or purposefully spreading misinformation to noobs.

ASIC Miners inadvertently gave half their power to Validator Nodes back in 2011.

You say half the power? Exactly 50%? Why?
You should assume that the miners have the technical and economic ability to deploy the nodes as necessary.

In theory, yes they gave away half their power away, to a new entity.
In a very basic sense, since percentages are not determinable, it is like saying that
miners gave validator node operators the power of VETO. If a miner does something,
the validator nodes can, if they disagree with that action, VETO that miner's action.
If majority of Validator Nodes all VETO, that Miner's action is negated entirely.

The Miner's power is contingent on the Validator Nodes not using their VETO.
A softfork, as opposed to hardforks, prevent validator nodes from VETO.
Since BU Miners are using a hardfork, out of necessity, there is the ability to VETO.

Miner's ability to deploy their own nodes doesn't matter since the others will still VETO.
Miners would need to operate about 150k (or more, IDK) nodes for a few months to
year to override.

[Oznog]

new entity
percentages are not determinable
power of VETO

What it has sounds like an ALTCOIN.
Why not create your ALTCOIN based on your ideas?

Miner's ability to deploy their own nodes doesn't matter since the others will still VETO.

As far as I know all wallets only count positive confirmations, ignoring the others.
So what you say is not possible.

[AgentofCoin]

new entity
percentages are not determinable
power of VETO

What it has sounds like an ALTCOIN.
Why not create your ALTCOIN based on your ideas?

Ha Ha, you really are as blind as a SPV Miner.
What I described is what Bitcoin is doing currently, what you are saying is an Altcoin.
To prove me wrong, you have to go hardfork at 51% Consensus, but the whole Bitcoin
community already knows you don't have the balls, that is why the Bu Miners are using
the BU Validator Node Network. You can not hardfork without it.

Miner's ability to deploy their own nodes doesn't matter since the others will still VETO.

As far as I know all wallets only count positive confirmations, ignoring the others.
So what you say is not possible.

Confirmations are irrelevant.
It is number of decentralized independent ledgers all signalling for their choice,
then either approving or negating the proposed changes.
Confirmations has nothing to do with what I am saying.


I would like to point out and thank you for not addressing anything else I have stated,
but that you only take small snippets of my overall argument and only address those.
That isn't how normal conversations or arguments are performed, and are usually done
by those who are not interested in learning but just propagandizing or FUDing.

[franky1]

blah blah blah OP just reads reddit doomsdays rhetoric..

..
now to correct him with reality.

pools do not control bitcoin..
pools just collate data.

if they do not collate it in a way that NODES accept.. its rejected in 3 seconds..
need proof?

Code:

2017-01-29 06:59:12 Requesting block 000000000000000000cf208f521de0424677f7a87f2f278a1042f38d159565f5
2017-01-29 06:59:15 ERROR: AcceptBlock: bad-blk-length, size limits failed (code 16)

there... gone in 3 seconds.
need more proof?
https://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocks

as for thinking node consensus is not needed.

its core who have bypassed a node vote. remember its just a vote. nothing more.
pools didnt create the vote, pools did not create the code. pools did not beg to bypass node votes.
core and only core done that.

pools are 71% abstaining/vetoing. because nodes are not ready.
infact pools could vote. but pools even with 100% VOTE still would not actually MAKE new blocks unless they knew NODES would accept it. so pools are holding off and waiting unofficially for node consent.

if core want to resolve things.. there are 2 options

1. PROVE how backward compatible things are by getting their partner BTCC to make a segwit block with a segwit confirmed tx in it.. worse case rejected in 3 seconds.. best case nothing bad. and it instills confidence.
2. make it dynamic segwit. that way when people realise segwit activation day solved nothing(due to needing users needing to do other things beyond segwit activation).. atleast people are then able to move on with dynamics rather than waiting another 2 years for core to make more excuses

[Oznog]

IMHO I suggest the following plan:
1. Hold meetings of miners in private (the same interests).
2. You must reach a consensus of a Mining Alliance of +75% to solve this crisis (zero-sum game).
3. Announce and consolidate that alliance in the text associated with the blocks.
4. Coordinate and compensate between you to neutralize the incorrect blockchain (hard is hard).
5. Acting forcefully, quickly and always in your own interest.

https://coin.dance/blocks

I never imagined that in the second phase of the plan there would be a mining consensus greater than 85%.

More than enough to neutralize with empty blocks the bad blockchain.

Without precedents. Good job miners!

Developers who like takeovers can only change the PoW algorithm desperately or checkmate.