Bitcoin Forum
November 11, 2024, 04:38:33 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: BitFury signals it's FIRST SegWit Block..  (Read 489 times)
spartacusrex (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 718
Merit: 545



View Profile
March 28, 2017, 02:13:34 PM
Last edit: March 28, 2017, 02:32:07 PM by spartacusrex
 #1

https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitfury-mines-its-first-segwit-block-armory-says-no-to-bitcoin-unlimited

I was wondering where this latest little pump was coming from..

And - BIP148 goes LIVE whether you're with us or against us on November 15th 2017.

Game ON!

..

Shaolin Fry (author of BIP 148 ) explained:

Quote
“Segwit increases the blocksize, fixes transaction malleability, and makes scripting easier to upgrade as well as bringing many other benefits. It is hoped that miners will respond to this BIP by activating Segwit early, before this BIP takes effect. Otherwise this BIP will cause the mandatory activation of the existing segwit deployment before the end of midnight November 15th 2017.”

Goatpig (Bitcoin Armoury) wrote:

Quote
“I disagree with BU's primary principle that the block size should be decided by user and miner vote. I disagree with the block size hard cap on the grounds that it is a magic number. Voting on a magic number does not improve upon this limitation. The only acceptable solution in my eyes is an algorithmic one. To imagine a technical metric is best discovered by popular vote is wishful thinking at best.”


Life is Code.
franky1
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 4396
Merit: 4761



View Profile
March 28, 2017, 02:27:17 PM
Last edit: March 28, 2017, 02:49:32 PM by franky1
 #2

title misleading

bitfury mines a block in favour of mandatory segwits activation by november 15th

they still have not mined an actual block in a segwit new blockformation and/or containint a segwit tx.
which is funny..



if all is so backward compatible.. just mine a real segwit block with a real segwit tx and show how much the compatibility promise really holds up.
afterall core are kings and perfect and nothing will go wrong.. (sarcasm)

dynamic implementations showed that without consensus dynamic wont split the network.. instead nodes just reject the block in 3 seconds and no drama.

so come on core. drop your pants and make a block and show what will happen.

unless you are afraid

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
spartacusrex (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 718
Merit: 545



View Profile
March 28, 2017, 02:33:50 PM
 #3

frank - as a free market proponent..

Why is it that whenever it looks like BU might actually win - bitcoin price tanks. And whenever it looks like CORE might actually win - bitcoin price recovers. Can you explain that ?

(I have changed the title - as you rightly pointed out - its just a signal.. .. wow.. we have some common ground after all.. )

Life is Code.
manselr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 1006


View Profile
March 28, 2017, 02:56:58 PM
 #4

frank - as a free market proponent..

Why is it that whenever it looks like BU might actually win - bitcoin price tanks. And whenever it looks like CORE might actually win - bitcoin price recovers. Can you explain that ?

(I have changed the title - as you rightly pointed out - its just a signal.. .. wow.. we have some common ground after all.. )


The explanation is rather simple: Buggy Unlimited jeopardizes the entire system with incompetent developers. The network can crash at any time.
 Regardless how much (centralized) hashing power is backing it up, if the software is shit then THE ENTIRE THING IS SHIT.

The value of bitcoin ultimately depends on how solid the software is, and Buggy Unlimited is based upon a flawed concept and the coders are shit to boot. It will NEVER work. Even if Jihad Wu gets 99.999999999% of the hashrate bought by the PBOC, users will go with Core and new miners will mine bitcoin with the new PoW as ChinaBU collapses.
franky1
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 4396
Merit: 4761



View Profile
March 28, 2017, 03:02:07 PM
Last edit: March 28, 2017, 03:42:25 PM by franky1
 #5

frank - as a free market proponent..

Why is it that whenever it looks like BU might actually win - bitcoin price tanks. And whenever it looks like CORE might actually win - bitcoin price recovers. Can you explain that ?

(I have changed the title - as you rightly pointed out - its just a signal.. .. wow.. we have some common ground after all.. )


1.
the price movement happens without very much actual coins moving it.
you cannot link Xwin = A y...win =B because there is actually no correlation.

neither has won. so the price speculation of just a few people who are dumb enough to trust exchanges (after 8 years of "we been hacked") is meaningless..

real value is not about the price or the bubble number of the market cap.
real value is based elsewhere.

anyone only loking at the fiat price and only choosing core because core will split the network in two(pretending its a victim, pre-mptive strike attack)
are only caring about short term FIAT drama.. not the longevity of bitcoin.

dynamics have many implementations that can all work on the same PEER playing field..
segwit sets up a TIER network

dynamics use native keypairs and tweaks
segwit needs users to move funds just to try achieving the segwit promises.. plus segwit is a complete rewrite basd on an elements altcoin of 2014-2015

segwit keypairs and block formation has never been used on mainnet. but dynamics has

dynamics have not needed to threaten or set deadlines or make things mandatory, or bypass node consensus
segwit has needed to threaten and set deadlines and make things mandatory, and bypass node consensus

core want everyone to rewrite their nodes to match the segwit elements2014 altcoin. and even then point fingers that other implementations are still not bitcoin and thus not be top tier.

yet the community know deep down that core can just change a few lines of code and be part of the peer network.. and even funnier. get to have all their sparkly features too.. but it involves core giving up their tier network and just becoming a equal peer.

..

anyway back to your question.
core cry when the price moves up and down and try making it sound important
meanwhile exchange move from $935 $933 by a user with just $302(324mbtc)
meanwhile exchange move from $933 $935 by a user with just $50(54mbtc)

(note trades measured in mBTC (0.001btc)

less than $302(324mbtc) to drop the price from $935 to $933
yep $302 to make the market cap change by $32,470,200.00

then ~$50(54mbtc) to ramp the price from $933 to $935
yep $50 to make the market cap change by 32,470,200.00

price movements are not a sign of any "community consensus".. but due to low funds being used and also the high increments per orderline causing the volatility($1 gap per increment)... making it easy to make the market volatile without needing large community/whales

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
franky1
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 4396
Merit: 4761



View Profile
March 28, 2017, 03:08:41 PM
Last edit: March 28, 2017, 03:22:13 PM by franky1
 #6

The explanation is rather simple: Buggy Unlimited jeopardizes the entire system with incompetent developers.

BU is just one of many implementations that took CORES 0.12, and made tweaks.
now knowing a few of them bugs didnt get fixed until core made 0.13. so ofcourse the core devs didnt think to also include them by patching their own older repo's to match.

EG core didnt fix 0.12, they called it dead and just put patch into 0.13. meaning anyone who uses 0.12 will still have cores bugs.
it wasnt core that fixed BU either. bu fixed a bug. but then core highlighted that not everyone with BU updated to the new version without the bug

but funnier part.. because BU and dynamic implementations believe in PEER diversity.. the bug didnt cause drama.. it just took out a few nodes while the rest of the network continued... you cannot say the same if everyone is FORCED to use the exact same core base code in cores tier network.. if core gets a bug.. expect bigger issues (such as the 2013leveldb update bug)

but the real question is. where are all of these "independent devs".
oh yea, they are dependant on gmaxwells leadership.

if you want true independent diverse decentralised bitcoin.. then dont throw all your dreams, kings and asskissing into one camp.. instead let there be no single camp and let the devs migrate freely without being tarnished by REKT campaigns if they are not in core camp.

remember devs are not immortal. devs do come and go, move onto different projects, get bored. etc. so dont kiss devs asses. just think about bitcoin as a diverse and OPEN decentralised network.

core mindset
"i pretend to be independent but refuse to independently review anything thats not gmaxwell sanctioned"
"i pretend to be independent but argue anything thats not gmaxwell sanctioned has not been independently reviewed"
"i pretend to be independent everyone should only use core"

total hypocracy and mindlessly handing control of the previously open divers peer network over to gmaxwells corporate tier network

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!