Bitcoin Forum
March 29, 2024, 01:06:45 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: it is Core, not Bitman blocking segwit  (Read 5363 times)
Alex.BTC
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42
Merit: 0


View Profile
April 09, 2017, 11:12:57 AM
Last edit: April 09, 2017, 08:53:22 PM by Alex.BTC
 #81

The fact was that agreement
was not bound to Maxwell nor to any other Core dev other than to who signed that
document. All signatory developers were not granted any authority to make future
development decisions by the Core dev group.

Then wtf was the point of the meeting? Just a few dev hanging around stroking each other's dicks?

There was a huge blocksize debate at the time, pressure was on Core to increase the blocksize limit, Blockstream/Core fucked everyone over by pretending to support 2MB block increase.
 
If nothing was agreed upon, then there would have been another meeting for the blocksize issue, but nope, Blockstream/Core played everyone, now nobody trust anything they say.

It seems to me that the miners were attempting to pull a fast one. They were trying
to get a handful of people to decide the future of the Bitcoin Network. During that
meeting, all invited parties told the miners they had no actual authority and the
miners got mad because they are ignorant as to how the Bitcoin development
community actually works. They thought they could dictate the future.

Now you're just shilling for Blockstream/Core.
The fact is the exact opposite. Blockstream/Core is still fucking everyone over by keeping blocksize at 1MB.

SegWit gets merged by Core without a word (and still have less support than BU).
Blocksize increase pull request instantly get closed by Blockstream co-founder on Github.

Why begin accusing me of being a paid troll or shill? The fact is you are the noob
who copies and pastes from other forums and websites and literally checks off
talking points as you go. Half the time your points have nothing to do with our
original conversation. Normal people do not resort to calling people shills or trolls.
But you do that to hide the fact that you likely are one.  Like I said in my original
post to Jonald, you are just here to “perpetuate the obfuscations”. But, if you are
not a paid shill or troll then you are prone to paranoid delusions.

That's the problem with you trolls, you spending too much time on personal attacks and too little on facts.

I just don't like watching people going around making idiotic statements with zero proof then act like they are some kind of know-it-all authority on the future. If you have a theory, post it as a theory, don't state it as a matter of fact, then go for bullshit gymnastics and personal attacks when someone ask you for proof.

I disagree with your analysis and conclusion.
In fact, it seems to have a major flaw.

According to my simple research chjj changed Ext Blocks code 1 hour and
21 minutes before Jihan commented that he loved Ext blocks. So, if that is true,
 that means Jihan likely got chjj to change the code and not Blockstream or
Maxwell.

So, you wrote a lot, and that is nice, but your time stamps do not match the
proper time line. If your conspiracy was to be correct then chjj should have
changed AFTER Jihan’s twitter posting, not BEFORE as he did.

This would also explain tany other issues and contradictions on the GitHub in
a reasonable way. In this case, chjj issued pull after Maxwell’s email to the
Core Devs could be seen as a “cover my ass” pull request. Either way, Jihan
twitter commented after the chjj change was made.

So as a non-technical person who hasn't gone deep into the details yet,
I think you are overall wrong due to timeline error.

I think I have shown simply that Jihan tweeted his love for Ext Block after chjj
change its code. Your facts were not complete and you jumped to conclusions.

If you play with timezones I am sure you can pull out different numbers.

But that is just more of the same nitpicking on trivial bullshit.

At the end of the day you just don't know what the exact time was when Jihan learned about Extension Block, and the exact time when he decided to support it, it could have been hours it could have been days.

The history of Extension Block is here:
https://medium.com/purse-essays/extension-block-story-619a46b58c24

The first commit of Extension Block was on Mar 23, 2017, it was a small commit, just a few lines, and it reads:
"This repository contains the specification for extension blocks with a BIP141 ruleset"

This proves Extension Block is base on BIP-141 right from the get go, so it was immune to ASICBoost right from the start, not hours or minutes ago.

I actually asked Christopher wtf was he doing on that botched edit, he said the edit was strictly within the context of the new stuff in extension block only, not the regular stuff, and he said he removed that line because it was redundant and overall the edit changed nothing.

Christopher wasn't aware of ASICBoost until Greg's proposal, he simply didn't know how it works, so he didn't know BIP-141 already implied ASICBoost immunity. His knee jerk reactionary edit later changed nothing, Extension Block was already immune to ASICBoost right from the start.

And it didn't matter what Chris knew, Jihan would know what BIP-141 means for ASICBoost.

This ASICBoost distraction is just a total bullshit, regardless of what Jihan did, if the code allow this shortcut, then any miners can build their own ASIC to use that shortcut, Jihan's patent only forbids others from selling it in China, not forbidding miners from building their own, so fix the damn code instead of blaming other people.

The blocksize increase is not the true issue since Jihan doesn’t even really care
about that either. He cares more about the potential loss of profits if ASICBoost
is restricted from the network. He basically said so in the Bitmain published
statement. He only cares about his patents while drapes himself in how he
doesn't want to harm the Bitcoin community, yet that is what he has been doing.

People who think that Jihan is a true believer of the blocksize increase is naïve
at best and a paid shill at worst. You have been used by a Chinese businessman
who thought he would use the blocksize issue as a pawn, including its adherents.
The very people Satoshi created the Bitcoin system to control, you are advocating
we should trust. The only thing you should trust is that they will try to find the
next block over their competitor.

The blocksize increase is the true issue, it has been for over a year, because it affects everyone's bottom line. It is ignorant for you to use tunnel vision and pin everything on ASICBoost when Jihan will also profit from a blocksize increase, there are many things in play here.

It doesn't matter who Jihan is, I expect him to do everything he can for his business, and right now he's speaking the truth and he's openly opposing BlockStream, and his words make sense, that's good enough for me.

That's what I don't like about you trolls, the blocksize limit is fucking up the network right now, it's already happening, and instead just acknowledging it, you idiots circle jerk around the issue then keep pointing fingers at someone else. Blockstream/Core is clearly the culprit here.


You twisted my words. So you are either not reading properly or doing it
intentionally. You are stating there is no evidence. Have you already looked into
this subject? Maybe you should publish your report on your findings, since you
claim there are no patterns or anything of any interest. I’m sure that would be
an interesting read, as much as your prior analysis ont chjj and the ext block
github was, Lol. You cited a "fact" that was based on only 3 months of data,
when the technology in question is over 2 years old.

You lack of imagination is remarkable.

You said Jihan have already used ASICBoost in production.
I asked you for proof.
You went for personal attack.
I out trolled you back.
Now you want a report?
What are you even on about?

You made the accusation.
I haven't seen any evidence.
So I asked you for them.
You talked shit.
So I dug a little, I found data that went against your claim.
So I showed that data to you, and asked you for evidence for your accusations again.
You tried to act like a smart ass, knowing full well you had nothing.
And instead of just man up and admit that.
You started 'lol'ing at the data I found.

It's like you have no idea how stupid you actually look.
And the funny part is you actually think people can't see through this shit.
Like at this point any of your insults actually do anything.

What's with the smartass teenager act anyway? Obviously you're not a teenager, who the fuck is going to respect some loud mouth finger pointing dumb fuck who can only ever talk shit.
If you see garbage posts (off-topic, trolling, spam, no point, etc.), use the "report to moderator" links. All reports are investigated, though you will rarely be contacted about your reports.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
jonald_fyookball (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302
Merit: 1004


Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political


View Profile
April 09, 2017, 12:39:01 PM
 #82

  So
thus, "now that Ext Block has been patched Jihan will not support it". It was not
intended to be read as you are reading it. I guess I should have said "Jihan CAN not
support it".
 

Thanks.

Gotcha.  Yeah , you made it sound that you were saying Jihan publicly stated that he
already changed his mind, which is not the case. 

We can agree to disagree on HK.  to me its just more evidence Core is full of BS.

 

AgentofCoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001



View Profile
April 10, 2017, 04:00:15 AM
 #83

The fact was that agreement
was not bound to Maxwell nor to any other Core dev other than to who signed that
document. All signatory developers were not granted any authority to make future
development decisions by the Core dev group.
Then wtf was the point of the meeting? Just a few dev hanging around stroking each other's dicks?
There was a huge blocksize debate at the time, pressure was on Core to increase the blocksize limit, Blockstream/Core fucked everyone over by pretending to support 2MB block increase.
If nothing was agreed upon, then there would have been another meeting for the blocksize issue, but nope, Blockstream/Core played everyone, now nobody trust anything they say.

I really don't understand why they went. I thought it was just to talk things over.
To explain their viewpoints and future goals/plans. Not to place anything in writing.
A few Core devs and Back of Blockstream do not have authority over the other Core
devs. I think it was a gigantic misunderstanding because of different issues.


It seems to me that the miners were attempting to pull a fast one. They were trying
to get a handful of people to decide the future of the Bitcoin Network. During that
meeting, all invited parties told the miners they had no actual authority and the
miners got mad because they are ignorant as to how the Bitcoin development
community actually works. They thought they could dictate the future.
Now you're just shilling for Blockstream/Core.
The fact is the exact opposite. Blockstream/Core is still fucking everyone over by keeping blocksize at 1MB.
SegWit gets merged by Core without a word (and still have less support than BU).
Blocksize increase pull request instantly get closed by Blockstream co-founder on Github.

I'm not shilling, that is my recollection at the time.

Yes, SegWit did get merged because the Core Devs agreed that is was worthy of
inclusion, but that doesn't mean it will be accepted, that is the community's choice.
That is what the miner's didn't understand at the HK meeting. The fact that SegWit
isn't already part of the protocol shows that the Core Devs during the HK meeting
were trying to be honest and reasonable. Devs are not all powerful. They can create
and propose, but if other devs, exchanges, miners, and users don't want that feature
it will not become the standard. In my opinion 2MB hardfork is more contentious in the
community than a SegWit softfork, but that is just my opinion. The expectations during
the HK meeting was way too high.

And yes, some BIPs about direct blocksize increases have been closed, but because the
plan is for optimizations first. The issue isn't about "trying to stop anything beyond 1MB",
since the whole community knows we will need to raise it eventually. A few small minority
of small blockers are "1MB 4EVAs!", but the rest of us want new ideas and optimizations
to the protocol that can increase TPS before we simply change the blocklimit with a hardfork.
It was always about optimizations and security, then onchain scaling. Bigblockers, like you I
presume, want that in reverse, which smallblockers think compromises security.

We, as a community, should request optimizations of the blockspace, before we increase
that space. If we can just bump it up all the time, there is no incentive to develop new
ideas and concepts to improve the protocol. SegWit may or may not be accepted as the
standard one day, but I accept that may be the reality and that should prove to you I am
not a shill for Core or Blockstream. I only want a decentralized and secure Bitcoin.
Though, I do support the current Core road map.


Why begin accusing me of being a paid troll or shill? The fact is you are the noob
who copies and pastes from other forums and websites and literally checks off
talking points as you go. Half the time your points have nothing to do with our
original conversation. Normal people do not resort to calling people shills or trolls.
But you do that to hide the fact that you likely are one.  Like I said in my original
post to Jonald, you are just here to “perpetuate the obfuscations”. But, if you are
not a paid shill or troll then you are prone to paranoid delusions.
That's the problem with you trolls, you spending too much time on personal attacks and too little on facts.
I just don't like watching people going around making idiotic statements with zero proof then act like they are some kind of know-it-all authority on the future. If you have a theory, post it as a theory, don't state it as a matter of fact, then go for bullshit gymnastics and personal attacks when someone ask you for proof.

The "facts" you listed at the time, was a combination of your opinions and issues
that haven't been fully understood yet. Your argument to me is like:

Alex.BTC: "FACT: Humans will never find aliens in the universe!"
AgentofCoin: "That is not a fact, that is yet to be determined."
Alex.BTC: "Oh yeah?! Then prove it! Find me an alien now!"
AgentofCoin: "What? I'm not even an astronomer or astronaut."
Alex.BTC: "You troll! See! I hate you trolls. You need to prove it now!"

That is why this is ridiculous because I'll let the experts prove me right or wrong.
But you were the one who was arguing there were no "facts". Which is backwards.
Either you are protecting Bitmain and Antpool, or you are just backwards here.


I disagree with your analysis and conclusion.
In fact, it seems to have a major flaw.

According to my simple research chjj changed Ext Blocks code 1 hour and
21 minutes before Jihan commented that he loved Ext blocks. So, if that is true,
 that means Jihan likely got chjj to change the code and not Blockstream or
Maxwell.

So, you wrote a lot, and that is nice, but your time stamps do not match the
proper time line. If your conspiracy was to be correct then chjj should have
changed AFTER Jihan’s twitter posting, not BEFORE as he did.

This would also explain tany other issues and contradictions on the GitHub in
a reasonable way. In this case, chjj issued pull after Maxwell’s email to the
Core Devs could be seen as a “cover my ass” pull request. Either way, Jihan
twitter commented after the chjj change was made.

So as a non-technical person who hasn't gone deep into the details yet,
I think you are overall wrong due to timeline error.

I think I have shown simply that Jihan tweeted his love for Ext Block after chjj
change its code. Your facts were not complete and you jumped to conclusions.

If you play with timezones I am sure you can pull out different numbers.
But that is just more of the same nitpicking on trivial bullshit.

At the end of the day you just don't know what the exact time was when Jihan learned about Extension Block, and the exact time when he decided to support it, it could have been hours it could have been days.
...

I looked online at twitter timezones and Githubs and according to my simple research,
twitter shows the time based on your timezone and GitHub is based on EDT. This means
that Jihan tweeted 1 hour and 21 minutes after chjj edited the Ext block code no matter
where you are in the world. That is all I was pointing out.

Everything you are writing now is irrelevant to your original posting to me. You claimed
that Jihan tweeted BEFORE chjj changed it as a blockstream conspiracy, when in fact, it
was the other way, which either means it is a Jihan conspiracy or just "coincidence".



This ASICBoost distraction is just a total bullshit, regardless of what Jihan did, if the code allow this shortcut, then any miners can build their own ASIC to use that shortcut, Jihan's patent only forbids others from selling it in China, not forbidding miners from building their own, so fix the damn code instead of blaming other people.

I don't know the patent laws in China, but in the West a patent doesn't only protect the
selling of the idea in product form, but also prevents you from construction and use. If for
example, Bitmain did patent ASICBoost and had the full rights to it, no one else in the
world is technically allowed to build, use, or sell a chip that uses the same configuration
without a license from Bitmain, otherwise that is patent theft. Maybe some will or could
do it, but bitmain could attempt to find them liable and get damages from that company.

For other miners not to be found liable, they need to create a new ASICBoost configuration
that is different from Bitmain's version and no miners are going to invest in R&D for that now,
IMO. Either Jihan opens up the rights to all parties for free or we need to patch the protocol.

Or its possible there could be a wind-down agreement where Jihan can use it for the next 3
years as long as he halves the usage every 1 year, in agreement to accept SegWit unpatched
now. Then in 3 years we patch ASICboost and have SegWit. Of course, Jihan might like that,
but bigblockers will not since they never get their blocksize increase. But it is just an idea for
fun for negotiation purposes. Maybe something along these lines could be negotiated.



The blocksize increase is not the true issue since Jihan doesn’t even really care
about that either. He cares more about the potential loss of profits if ASICBoost
is restricted from the network. He basically said so in the Bitmain published
statement. He only cares about his patents while drapes himself in how he
doesn't want to harm the Bitcoin community, yet that is what he has been doing.

People who think that Jihan is a true believer of the blocksize increase is naïve
at best and a paid shill at worst. You have been used by a Chinese businessman
who thought he would use the blocksize issue as a pawn, including its adherents.
The very people Satoshi created the Bitcoin system to control, you are advocating
we should trust. The only thing you should trust is that they will try to find the
next block over their competitor.
The blocksize increase is the true issue, it has been for over a year, because it affects everyone's bottom line. It is ignorant for you to use tunnel vision and pin everything on ASICBoost when Jihan will also profit from a blocksize increase, there are many things in play here.

It doesn't matter who Jihan is, I expect him to do everything he can for his business, and right now he's speaking the truth and he's openly opposing BlockStream, and his words make sense, that's good enough for me.

That's what I don't like about you trolls, the blocksize limit is fucking up the network right now, it's already happening, and instead just acknowledging it, you idiots circle jerk around the issue then keep pointing fingers at someone else. Blockstream/Core is clearly the culprit here.

I am not pinning everything on ASICBoost. It is just that it is an interesting puzzle piece
the community did not include in their mental equation as to why there is a stalemate.
When you add this ASICBoost element into it, things seem logical again.

It makes more sense that Jihan could block SegWit over an ASICBoost patch more than
truely wanting bigger blocks. Miners do not want bigger blocks. In the past, it took the Core
devs forever to get the miners to raise their soft caps. Weeks would go by and the miners
weren't paying attention. I think certain miners wanting bigger blocks now, is a myth.

Thinking that 1MB temporary cap is killing the network, is a large oversimplification of the
issues at hand. We need to balance the scaling with security over time. If we don't we could
both lose everything. We are trying to preserve the network and you wish to expand it in a
blind risk with fingers crossed that it works out and doesn't kill the golden goose. I do not
think Satoshi was all knowing. He was wrong sometimes and a piece of proof of that was
that Satoshi added the 1MB limit after Hal explained the logic of it. Satoshi changed his
mind sometimes and that is what must be kept in our minds as we go forward. If we
expand the blocksize, we can not do it on the logic of Satoshi from 2010, but data
and knowledge of 2017.



You twisted my words. So you are either not reading properly or doing it
intentionally. You are stating there is no evidence. Have you already looked into
this subject? Maybe you should publish your report on your findings, since you
claim there are no patterns or anything of any interest. I’m sure that would be
an interesting read, as much as your prior analysis ont chjj and the ext block
github was, Lol. You cited a "fact" that was based on only 3 months of data,
when the technology in question is over 2 years old.

You lack of imagination is remarkable.

You said Jihan have already used ASICBoost in production.
I asked you for proof.
You went for personal attack.
I out trolled you back.
Now you want a report?
What are you even on about?

You made the accusation.
I haven't seen any evidence.
So I asked you for them.
You talked shit.
So I dug a little, I found data that went against your claim.
So I showed that data to you, and asked you for evidence for your accusations again.
You tried to act like a smart ass, knowing full well you had nothing.
And instead of just man up and admit that.
You started 'lol'ing at the data I found.

It's like you have no idea how stupid you actually look.
And the funny part is you actually think people can't see through this shit.
Like at this point any of your insults actually do anything.

What's with the smartass teenager act anyway? Obviously you're not a teenager, who the fuck is going to respect some loud mouth finger pointing dumb fuck who can only ever talk shit.

No one should listen to me. I'm not here to get followers or something.
I came to learn and talk. We are talking now because we disagree about things.

You have provided no facts or data for anything you have stated prior, only opinion.
You want me, a noob, to analysis Antpool's block data in the blockchain and I don't
even know how to parse that data automatically with python code and all that. There
are more qualified members of this community who can do all forms of data mining
and also interpret that data correctly.

If you want me to cite some info from the community already I will:

 - Antpool's stratum has code for covert and overt ASICBoost implemented
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/63yo27/some_circumstantial_evidence_supporting_the_claim/dfy5o65/
 - Electrum Wallet dev(s) says AntPool blocks/txs consistent with ASICBoost
https://twitter.com/ElectrumWallet/status/849974808259559425
 - Four AntPool blocks that have the same Coinbase string data.
https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/63yo27/some_circumstantial_evidence_supporting_the_claim/dfydbca/

Those are just three different issues (I didn't include stuff about empty blocks).

Now, I will assume that you will say these people are biased or not trustworthy
because they are from Bitcoin reddit or they support Core or Blockstream and that
is fine, but once again I will advise you to be patient and eventually someone who is
independent and scientific will have pulled all the data and analyze it, and will
conclusively determine whether there is anything or there is nothing there.

By you arguing that it is my sole responsibility is ridiculous. That is like telling the
person who calls 911 to prove that there is an emergency before they will send the
police or ambulance. There are people who are experts who are working on this
issue and analyzing it right now. The Bitcoin world doesn't fall only on my shoulders,
but all of ours. Those who are capable will rise and help the community to determine
the truth.

You were the one who was prejudging the situation by telling people the facts were
that there is no evidence. I only said to you, that is currently still being determined.
Your the one who needs to prove that your original "facts" were facts, which I
disproved in my prior posting and determined to be 1 fact out of your 6 possible facts.

I want an investigation and you want no investigation. The question is, as a Bitcoiner,
why don't you want to know the result of an investigation? Maybe you will be proven
right. Why are you against that? That is the problem here. You don't seek truths.

I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4172
Merit: 4357



View Profile
April 10, 2017, 04:19:46 AM
 #84

?? blockstream devs have no control ??

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips
Quote
People wishing to submit BIPs, first should propose their idea or document to the mailing list. After discussion they should email Luke Dashjr <luke_bipeditor@dashjr.org>. After copy-editing and acceptance, it will be published here.
luke JR.. oh look blockstream (p.s just a couple months ago it was gmax)

hmm who moderates the mailing list
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/bitcoin-dev-moderation
Quote
To post a message to all the list members, send email to bitcoin-dev-moderation@lists.ozlabs.org.
Bitcoin-dev-moderation list run by rusty at rustcorp.com.au
 
ozlabs... i wonder... oh look rusty russel

so thats LJR and RR of blockstream employment.
so whats next. hmm
oh the technical discussion category on this forum
oh look gmaxwell

so thats LJR,  RR and GM of blockstream employment.


separate matter..


have you then seen the segwit activation proposals
bip9, if gets no vote.. dont realise the community said no, do UASF

UASF, if gets no vote.. dont realise the community said no, dont give up, push harder until the end of 2018
Quote
Can BIP148 be cancelled?

Yes. In the event that the economic majority does not support BIP148, users should remove software that enforces BIP148. A flag day activation for SegWit would be the next logical steps and require coordination of the community, most likely towards the end of 2018.

seems blockstream can control what happens. and can only take no for an answer when its them saying no

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
AgentofCoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001



View Profile
April 10, 2017, 04:20:44 AM
 #85

  So
thus, "now that Ext Block has been patched Jihan will not support it". It was not
intended to be read as you are reading it. I guess I should have said "Jihan CAN not
support it".
Thanks.

Gotcha.  Yeah , you made it sound that you were saying Jihan publicly stated that he
already changed his mind, which is not the case. 

We can agree to disagree on HK.  to me its just more evidence Core is full of BS.

If Jihan publicly stated/tweeted that he is now against "Patched Ext Blocks", it would be
obvious to the community why, and it would hurt his credibility with big blockers, IMO.

But I would like to add that the fact that he hasn't tweeted "I love Patched Ext Blocks",
could also be equally as telling. If I was Jihan and truly innocent and being set up, I would
agree to using "Patched Ext Blocks" and tweet that and shove it up my enemies asses. Since
he has not it makes me wonder, since it would be to his advantage, IMO. Which then adds
to my increasing belief that Jihan may truly be against SegWit because it hurts an ASICBoost
future that he has already invested load of money into.

As for the HK agreement, we can agree to disagree. I wasn't there and I really don't know
what was going on. All I know is that the whole community was watching that event and
ultimately no one was going to be happy, since the situation is too complex for a spur of
the moment written napkin agreement.

I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
AgentofCoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001



View Profile
April 10, 2017, 04:37:57 AM
 #86

?? blockstream devs have no control ??

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips
Quote
People wishing to submit BIPs, first should propose their idea or document to the mailing list. After discussion they should email Luke Dashjr <luke_bipeditor@dashjr.org>. After copy-editing and acceptance, it will be published here.

hmm who moderates the mailing list
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/bitcoin-dev-moderation
Quote
To post a message to all the list members, send email to bitcoin-dev-moderation@lists.ozlabs.org.
Bitcoin-dev-moderation list run by rusty at rustcorp.com.au
 
ozlabs... i wonder... oh look rusty russel

so thats LJR and RR of blockstream employment.
so whats next. hmm
oh the technical discussion category on this forum
oh look gmaxwell

so thats LJR,  RR and GM of blockstream employment.

I will look into this further and later, since I don't have time now.

But superficially, I would think that if the Core mailing list is "gated" by a
core dev who is also a blockstream employee, then another non employed
voluntary Core dev should be given equal right to add new commenters to the
mailing list to prevent any biased situations or accusations of conflict(s). The
same would apply to mailing for BIP issuance. If Gavin was in that position
and still working with MIT, I would request that a voluntary Core dev was
co-mailer with Gavin. That would be a reasonable accommodation, IMO. It
would definitely alleviate a lot of issues and accusations outright.

When it comes moderators of Bitcointalk, I don't really care since Theymos
owns it and he can appoint anyone he wishes as a moderator. Thought obviously,
sections that deal with complex issues like technical and development should be
moderated by people who at least understand Bitcoin on a higher level. I think
Theymos added Achow now, which I think is appropriate.

Personally, as for the Core mailing list and BIP procedures, there should be
some adjustments and accommodations made, based on my simple understanding
and what you outlined. But remember Franky, I'm a noob with no power, so... I'm
only telling you what I would do, if I could.


I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
Alex.BTC
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42
Merit: 0


View Profile
April 10, 2017, 04:48:22 AM
 #87

I really don't understand why they went.

Yes you do, don't play dumb now.

Yes, SegWit did get merged because the Core Devs agreed that is was worthy of
inclusion, but that doesn't mean it will be accepted, that is the community's choice.
That is what the miner's didn't understand at the HK meeting. The fact that SegWit
isn't already part of the protocol shows that the Core Devs during the HK meeting
were trying to be honest and reasonable. Devs are not all powerful. They can create
and propose, but if other devs, exchanges, miners, and users don't want that feature
it will not become the standard. In my opinion 2MB hardfork is more contentious in the
community than a SegWit softfork, but that is just my opinion. The expectations during

LOL that's a new low even for you.

Like you're just going to sit there with a straight face and ignore the fact that SegWit is stuck in the mud because Blockstream/Core thought they could fuck over both miners and nodes at the same time.

Blockstream ignored nodes and went softfork because they thought they got miners in their pockets, even though they already fucked them over with the 1MB, that's how arrogant Blockstream/Core were, that's what fucked them.

That is why this is ridiculous because I'll let the experts prove me right or wrong.
But you were the one who was arguing there were no "facts". Which is backwards.
Either you are protecting Bitmain and Antpool, or you are just backwards here.

I am saying you talk a lot of shit but there were never anything to back it up.

After I bated you I now know for sure you're the kind of troll that looks into every detail trying to win an argument. But you just couldn't find any evidence to support your claims, that's why you had to play dumb all the time.

By the way, how does it actually feel to have to talk like a dumb fuck all the time, knowing everything that comes out of your mouth is bullshit and everyone else can see through it?

If I have to do that I'd probably quit within a week.


I looked online at twitter timezones and Githubs and according to my simple research,
twitter shows the time based on your timezone and GitHub is based on EDT. This means
that Jihan tweeted 1 hour and 21 minutes after chjj edited the Ext block code no matter
where you are in the world. That is all I was pointing out.

Everything you are writing now is irrelevant to your original posting to me. You claimed
that Jihan tweeted BEFORE chjj changed it as a blockstream conspiracy, when in fact, it
was the other way, which either means it is a Jihan conspiracy or just "coincidence".

I baited you, the edit was the bait, BIP-141 was the net, you still don't get it?

You're now trying to wiggle around by using the idiotic assumption that Jihan only learned about Extension Block the last minute and voiced its support immediately. That is, by making the assumption that the whole time since March, Jihan never learned about what Extension block was until the moment before he voiced his support.

But the bait was Extension Block had always been immune to ASICBoost. The github edit would throw you off because you're the kind of shill that play dumb and repeat bullshits, but secretly you're actually looking at all possible details for a rebuttal. That's how I exposed you as a paid shill.

You know exactly what bullshit you're talking about, you're intentionally talking like a dumb fuck all the time, because that's your job.

You don't have the technical understanding of BIP-141, that's why you fell for the edit. That is the long con you fell for, I gave you a detail you'd bite on, but once you bite on it, you're already inside the net.

The idea that a business man like Jihan wouldn't look over Extension Block at least a few times and think over it for a few days before voicing his support, is hilarious.

You've mistaken Jihan for some Blockstream troll where everything they say online is decided at the last minute, base on whatever they could see at the time.

I don't know the patent laws in China, but in the West a patent doesn't only protect the
selling of the idea in product form, but also prevents you from construction and use. If for
example, Bitmain did patent ASICBoost and had the full rights to it, no one else in the
world is technically allowed to build, use, or sell a chip that uses the same configuration
without a license from Bitmain, otherwise that is patent theft. Maybe some will or could
do it, but bitmain could attempt to find them liable and get damages from that company.

For other miners not to be found liable, they need to create a new ASICBoost configuration
that is different from Bitmain's version and no miners are going to invest in R&D for that now,
IMO. Either Jihan opens up the rights to all parties for free or we need to patch the protocol.

Or its possible there could be a wind-down agreement where Jihan can use it for the next 3
years as long as he halves the usage every 1 year, in agreement to accept SegWit unpatched
now. Then in 3 years we patch ASICboost and have SegWit. Of course, Jihan might like that,
but bigblockers will not since they never get their blocksize increase. But it is just an idea for
fun for negotiation purposes. Maybe something along these lines could be negotiated.

Irrelevant, putting patent in product helps win patent lawsuits, it's that simple.

The funny thing about you trolls is you guys keep assuming Jihan is the only guy on the planet who can build ASIC chips that use ASICBoost. Patent doesn't stop any nameless mining farm from building their own ASICBoost rigs, ASICBoost existed for years, anyone could have been using it for years. That's why this ASICBoost bullshit is just another obvious distraction.

If Blockstream/Core don't like ASICBoost, they should just change the fucking code.

I am not pinning everything on ASICBoost. It is just that it is an interesting puzzle piece
the community did not include in their mental equation as to why there is a stalemate.
When you add this ASICBoost element into it, things seem logical again.

It makes more sense that Jihan could block SegWit over an ASICBoost patch more than
truely wanting bigger blocks. Miners do not want bigger blocks. In the past, it took the Core
devs forever to get the miners to raise their soft caps. Weeks would go by and the miners
weren't paying attention. I think certain miners wanting bigger blocks now, is a myth.

Yeah, let's all just act like a bunch of dumb fuck again and just ignore the fact so many people is ditching SegWit because they are pissed at Blockstream/Core.

Let's all repeat ASICBoost in every paragraph and make accusations like a bunch of completely uninformed retards.

No one should listen to me.

This is the first time I am agreeing with you.
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4172
Merit: 4357



View Profile
April 10, 2017, 05:39:51 AM
Last edit: April 10, 2017, 06:03:58 AM by franky1
 #88

Theymos added Achow now, which I think is appropriate.

lol you think achowe is unbiased?

also a mod should only be moderating language/scams/virus risks.
no tech knowledge needed.

moderating message based on tech is censoring out tech.

P.S
But remember Franky, I'm a noob with no power, so... I'm
only telling you what I would do, if I could.

my comments to you were not in any way about thinking you had power. its more about correcting your rhetoric so that you dont
just turn into a blockstream puppet on a string.

but i am glad you are actually open minded enough to not just be spoon fed by the blockstreamists

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
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2017, 06:12:16 AM
 #89

With Jihan now actively attacking Litecoin to prevent Segwit from being activated, the statement in the thread title is pretty much disproven. Bitmain is holding two networks hostage. It is time for a revolution.

-snip-
but i am glad you are actually open minded enough to not just be spoon fed by the blockstreamists
Do please comment how Blockstream is at fault for LTC too, even though there is zero relevance for that situation.

Comedy relief: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9O9bVQq1eY

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4172
Merit: 4357



View Profile
April 10, 2017, 06:15:38 AM
 #90

With Jihan now actively attacking Litecoin to prevent Segwit from being activated, the statement in the thread title is pretty much disproven. Bitmain is holding two networks hostage. It is time for a revolution.


lol
proof?
oh. and dont make it a reddit post from some random guy or a tweet from a random guy

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
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2017, 06:20:02 AM
 #91

With Jihan now actively attacking Litecoin to prevent Segwit from being activated, the statement in the thread title is pretty much disproven. Bitmain is holding two networks hostage. It is time for a revolution.
lol
proof?
oh. and dont make it a reddit post from some random guy or a tweet from a random guy
The hashrate on both pools from Jihan started severely increasing as soon as the network started going above 70% of the threshold (75% required). Due to this, Segwit is not likely to activate on Segwit anymore (as the combined hashrate of his pools is now >25%). FYI, statements like these are fine when you link up to several people as sources and just verify via recent mining data. It is also likely that LTC is going to test out UASF before Bitcoin, see here: https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/pull/300

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4172
Merit: 4357



View Profile
April 10, 2017, 06:51:49 AM
 #92

FYI, statements like these are fine when you link up to several people as sources and just verify via recent mining data.

antpool litecoin less than 9%
yawn

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
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2017, 06:54:56 AM
 #93

FYI, statements like these are fine when you link up to several people as sources and just verify via recent mining data.
antpool litecoin less than 9%
yawn
This is proof again, that you do not do enough research, but just spew bullshit. LTC1BTC and Antpool are owned by Jihan. The hashrate on both pools has grown exponentially ever since the other miners were about to activate Segwit.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4172
Merit: 4357



View Profile
April 10, 2017, 07:13:05 AM
 #94

This is proof again, that you do not do enough research, but just spew bullshit. LTC1BTC and Antpool are owned by Jihan. The hashrate on both pools has grown exponentially ever since the other miners were about to activate Segwit.

LTC1BTC = Jiang Zhuoer.... not jihan

have a nice day with yourself readdit reddit scripts that are meaningless & unbacked

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
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2017, 07:17:02 AM
Last edit: April 10, 2017, 07:38:12 AM by Lauda
 #95

LTC1BTC = Jiang Zhuoer.... not jihan
My bad. I've improperly expressed myself. Jihan is pointing hashrate to both of those pools (of which 1 he owns). Besides, how hard is it to appoint *insert random name* as a pool *founder* in the name of decentralization? Jihan did it on Bitcoin with 3 or 4 pools anyways (see Antpool, ViaBTC, BTC.TOP). Roll Eyes

have a nice day with yourself readdit reddit scripts that are meaningless & unbacked
You've read that Jiang Zhuoer is the founder from a news article. So much for your "backed" bullshit. Roll Eyes

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
Iranus
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 533


Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform


View Profile
April 10, 2017, 12:11:41 PM
 #96

FYI, statements like these are fine when you link up to several people as sources and just verify via recent mining data.

antpool litecoin less than 9%
yawn
Jihan's motives for blocking Litecoin SegWit are extremely strong.  If Litecoin's SegWit went through, all of his power would start crumbling in front of his eyes from the amount of miners that actually support SegWit - clearly a huge amount of BU's hashrate on Bitcoin is just Jihan Wu. So what's to stop him manipulating Litecoin, with a much lower total hashrate, so that it doesn't put pressure on him to give up with BU on Bitcoin?  Why wouldn't he do that?

All Jihan needs to do is control just enough mining power to stop Litecoin from going over the 75% threshold, and he can make a tidy profit in the process.  Why do you think Litecoin's SegWit has been hovering around 70% for ages?

..Stake.com..   ▄████████████████████████████████████▄
   ██ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄            ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██  ▄████▄
   ██ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██████████ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██  ██████
   ██ ██████████ ██      ██ ██████████ ██   ▀██▀
   ██ ██      ██ ██████  ██ ██      ██ ██    ██
   ██ ██████  ██ █████  ███ ██████  ██ ████▄ ██
   ██ █████  ███ ████  ████ █████  ███ ████████
   ██ ████  ████ ██████████ ████  ████ ████▀
   ██ ██████████ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██████████ ██
   ██            ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀            ██ 
   ▀█████████▀ ▄████████████▄ ▀█████████▀
  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███  ██  ██  ███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
 ██████████████████████████████████████████
▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄
█  ▄▀▄             █▀▀█▀▄▄
█  █▀█             █  ▐  ▐▌
█       ▄██▄       █  ▌  █
█     ▄██████▄     █  ▌ ▐▌
█    ██████████    █ ▐  █
█   ▐██████████▌   █ ▐ ▐▌
█    ▀▀██████▀▀    █ ▌ █
█     ▄▄▄██▄▄▄     █ ▌▐▌
█                  █▐ █
█                  █▐▐▌
█                  █▐█
▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀█
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄██▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀██▄
▄█▀       ▐█▌       ▀█▄
██         ▐█▌         ██
████▄     ▄█████▄     ▄████
████████▄███████████▄████████
███▀    █████████████    ▀███
██       ███████████       ██
▀█▄       █████████       ▄█▀
▀█▄    ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄  ▄▄▄█▀
▀███████         ███████▀
▀█████▄       ▄█████▀
▀▀▀███▄▄▄███▀▀▀
..PLAY NOW..
AgentofCoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001



View Profile
April 12, 2017, 12:39:06 AM
Last edit: April 12, 2017, 12:50:01 AM by AgentofCoin
 #97

Yes, SegWit did get merged because the Core Devs agreed that is was worthy of
inclusion, but that doesn't mean it will be accepted, that is the community's choice.
That is what the miner's didn't understand at the HK meeting. The fact that SegWit
isn't already part of the protocol shows that the Core Devs during the HK meeting
were trying to be honest and reasonable. Devs are not all powerful. They can create
and propose, but if other devs, exchanges, miners, and users don't want that feature
it will not become the standard. In my opinion 2MB hardfork is more contentious in the
community than a SegWit softfork, but that is just my opinion. The expectations during
LOL that's a new low even for you.
Like you're just going to sit there with a straight face and ignore the fact that SegWit is stuck in the mud because Blockstream/Core thought they could fuck over both miners and nodes at the same time.
Blockstream ignored nodes and went softfork because they thought they got miners in their pockets, even though they already fucked them over with the 1MB, that's how arrogant Blockstream/Core were, that's what fucked them.

I can sit here with a straight face because I believe it. If I didn't then I would
be arguing for the opposite position. Your interpretation of events are too simplistic
to be reality. If it was then the reality is boring and people didn't try hard enough
to do as you claim. If it really was a conspiracy, you wouldn't ever see it coming.

SegWit was set to 95% miner Consensus which is very high.
They did this because they understood it needs to be a high threshold for multiple
different issues and for overall network safety. The fact that they placed it that high,
shows they are not just ramming it in.

SegWit softfork was a compromise of the two separate issues, tps increase and  
retaining decentralization. If it doesn't go forward, it is because the community is not
ready for it or because certain miners are purposefully blocking it for their own self
interests that are not consistent with the interests of the community.

Core Developers didn't think they had miners in the pockets, they thought miners
were rational people who wanted security with value increase in the network. They
didn't think certain miners would risk the destruction of the network for simple 2MB.
That is illogical, and thus why people now think ASICBoost makes more sense. 2MB
bring no where near the amount of profit as ASICBoost 100 million USD extra profit
does.

If the miners are truly innocent, they are dumb for playing right into the
conspirators' hands. All they have to do it denounce ASICBoost and accept the patch.
Then they will eliminate their enemies, yet they do not. This is because they are not
innocent, but likely caught red handed. The miners are acting like bad politicians now.
Miners should make public statements as to their positions on a patch. Their silence
on this specific issue is telling and only fuels the communities doubts of them.

They are their own worse enemies. They do not seek correction, they double down.


That is why this is ridiculous because I'll let the experts prove me right or wrong.
But you were the one who was arguing there were no "facts". Which is backwards.
Either you are protecting Bitmain and Antpool, or you are just backwards here.
I am saying you talk a lot of shit but there were never anything to back it up.
After I bated you I now know for sure you're the kind of troll that looks into every detail trying to win an argument. But you just couldn't find any evidence to support your claims, that's why you had to play dumb all the time.
By the way, how does it actually feel to have to talk like a dumb fuck all the time, knowing everything that comes out of your mouth is bullshit and everyone else can see through it?
If I have to do that I'd probably quit within a week.

Every comment you say has some personal attack against me. That's a sign of a weak
argument and a bullshit artist. Looking into every detail is what people are supposed to
do. The fact that you consider that a negative aspect is bizarre to me. You are so simplistic
that your current statements contradict what it means to have critical thinking and
understanding.

In addition, your statements about me playing dumb: Where am I playing dumb? Has it
occurred to your little brain that I don't know everything, unlike how you conduct yourself,
and thus there are gaps in my full knowledge? I guess not since you are determined to
define me as a troll or something, so that your prior incorrect arguments could be salvaged
to be true to the ignorant reader. Your arguments only convey to those readers that you don't
really care about Bitcoin and the overall community, only your own interests and those of your
employers.

BTW, you just admitted that you are a paid shiller/troller, from your "I'd quite in a week"
if you had to "play the dumb fuck routine" comment. As I said before, no one can pay
enough to deal with you, I just do it to correct the record.

To any reader (which is not likely anymore) they can see I have not make any crazy claims.
My only major claim was to "wait till there is a proper investigation" before claiming there is
no ASICBoost issue here. But for some unknown reason, that is a threat or seen as inappropriate
to you and others, which only fuels that movement due to the defensive nature you take.



I looked online at twitter timezones and Githubs and according to my simple research,
twitter shows the time based on your timezone and GitHub is based on EDT. This means
that Jihan tweeted 1 hour and 21 minutes after chjj edited the Ext block code no matter
where you are in the world. That is all I was pointing out.

Everything you are writing now is irrelevant to your original posting to me. You claimed
that Jihan tweeted BEFORE chjj changed it as a blockstream conspiracy, when in fact, it
was the other way, which either means it is a Jihan conspiracy or just "coincidence".
I baited you, the edit was the bait, BIP-141 was the net, you still don't get it?
You're now trying to wiggle around by using the idiotic assumption that Jihan only learned about Extension Block the last minute and voiced its support immediately. That is, by making the assumption that the whole time since March, Jihan never learned about what Extension block was until the moment before he voiced his support.
But the bait was Extension Block had always been immune to ASICBoost. The github edit would throw you off because you're the kind of shill that play dumb and repeat bullshits, but secretly you're actually looking at all possible details for a rebuttal. That's how I exposed you as a paid shill.
You know exactly what bullshit you're talking about, you're intentionally talking like a dumb fuck all the time, because that's your job.
You don't have the technical understanding of BIP-141, that's why you fell for the edit. That is the long con you fell for, I gave you a detail you'd bite on, but once you bite on it, you're already inside the net.
The idea that a business man like Jihan wouldn't look over Extension Block at least a few times and think over it for a few days before voicing his support, is hilarious.
You've mistaken Jihan for some Blockstream troll where everything they say online is decided at the last minute, base on whatever they could see at the time.

Lol. I think this rant of yours is one of the better ones so far.

First, you told me you set a trap, then I "wiggled out" of it by proving your argument
wrong, and instead of admitting that and moving on, now you are saying you had a
secondary trap within the first trap, like this is the movie "Inception" or something, lol.
Now you can only explain your failures by saying I'm acting dumb and repeating bullshits
when in actuality all I did was showed your original conspiracy theory was based on incorrect
timeline information. You were wrong and now creating a misdirection. This is a clear tactic
not of someone with good faith.

You just keep doubling downing on falsehoods after falsehoods, and also with attacks on
myself to cover your own weak original argument. This is somewhat enjoyable because people
like you and hwat you are doing is proving to the community there are either a paid shill
campaign occurring or just a malicious intelligence agent causing confusion.

You have changed your original argument and can't admit that because you are a weak child
who needs to cover their flaws like a child who mistakenly shat their pants. Grow up and
admit that your Ext Block GitHub Conspiracy was proven wrong by one sentence from me.
Don't change the subject to how what a wonderful and rational businessman Jihan is and
how he thinks and what he did or did not do. You don't know jack shit about Jihan and if
you did its only because you are Jihan himself, or he pays you and tells you how to proceed.



I don't know the patent laws in China, but in the West a patent doesn't only protect the
selling of the idea in product form, but also prevents you from construction and use. If for
example, Bitmain did patent ASICBoost and had the full rights to it, no one else in the
world is technically allowed to build, use, or sell a chip that uses the same configuration
without a license from Bitmain, otherwise that is patent theft. Maybe some will or could
do it, but bitmain could attempt to find them liable and get damages from that company.

For other miners not to be found liable, they need to create a new ASICBoost configuration
that is different from Bitmain's version and no miners are going to invest in R&D for that now,
IMO. Either Jihan opens up the rights to all parties for free or we need to patch the protocol.

Or its possible there could be a wind-down agreement where Jihan can use it for the next 3
years as long as he halves the usage every 1 year, in agreement to accept SegWit unpatched
now. Then in 3 years we patch ASICboost and have SegWit. Of course, Jihan might like that,
but bigblockers will not since they never get their blocksize increase. But it is just an idea for
fun for negotiation purposes. Maybe something along these lines could be negotiated.
Irrelevant, putting patent in product helps win patent lawsuits, it's that simple.
The funny thing about you trolls is you guys keep assuming Jihan is the only guy on the planet who can build ASIC chips that use ASICBoost. Patent doesn't stop any nameless mining farm from building their own ASICBoost rigs, ASICBoost existed for years, anyone could have been using it for years. That's why this ASICBoost bullshit is just another obvious distraction.
If Blockstream/Core don't like ASICBoost, they should just change the fucking code.

No, your statement is incorrect, Patents are not to win but as a claim of ownership
and deterrent. If you willing violate the patent owner's rights or just unaware of them,
you are equally liable. Ignorance of the law is not a defense. You are ignoring whole
aspects of patent law and its different purposes, just to make your argument reflect
better upon ASICBoost patent holders. Patent holders not only created this legal issue,
but are also the only ones who can alleviate those legal issues.

I stated some patent theory and different possibles such as Jihan freely opening his patent
for any miner to use. Instead of agreeing with me, which you should have, you say I'm wrong
and think it is irrelevant. Then argue that miners should build their own chips, likely in
violation of those patent owners rights and patent laws. That is a joke. Next you are going
to argue that those miners should pay license fees to the ASICBoost patent holders, lol.

That will never happen not only for legal reasons but also because no non-ASICBoost miner
will do the R&D into this now or pay licensees fees. It is easier to patch this exploit and
everyone continues as is. Your suggestion overall creates a new paradigm within the Bitcoin
Mining community which condones cheating and exploiting the code as a new standard. Now
on one hand this is good since it helps discover exploitable aspects in mining that can be used
by attacking state actors, but if those discoveries are allowed to be the standard future mining
implementation, then that is bad for Bitcoin's future for many different reasons.
So it must be patched. If you are fine with that, then we can agree there.



I am not pinning everything on ASICBoost. It is just that it is an interesting puzzle piece
the community did not include in their mental equation as to why there is a stalemate.
When you add this ASICBoost element into it, things seem logical again.

It makes more sense that Jihan could block SegWit over an ASICBoost patch more than
truely wanting bigger blocks. Miners do not want bigger blocks. In the past, it took the Core
devs forever to get the miners to raise their soft caps. Weeks would go by and the miners
weren't paying attention. I think certain miners wanting bigger blocks now, is a myth.
Yeah, let's all just act like a bunch of dumb fuck again and just ignore the fact so many people is ditching SegWit because they are pissed at Blockstream/Core.
Let's all repeat ASICBoost in every paragraph and make accusations like a bunch of completely uninformed retards.

For the record, majority of the economies support SegWit and already implemented the
code into their systems. Majority of Exchanges and wallets are all waiting for the activation.
So, the only people who currently are "ditching" SegWit are the large miners who are holding
it hostage for certain "unknown" reasons. They want the community to think it is over a 2MB
HK Agreement which is too simplistic to take seriously. No normal person can believe that.



No one should listen to me.
This is the first time I am agreeing with you.

That's too bad because if you paid attention, you wouldn't have wasted your time trying to
fight someone who is probably one of the few real people in the community who stands by
Bitcoin for reasons that go beyond the lowly animalistic reasons. I think bitcoin will have
future importance that your brain has not anticipated yet. Bitcoin wasn't made for this century.
There is a higher purpose than just as a simple payment processor. That was trap you fell into.


I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4172
Merit: 4357



View Profile
April 12, 2017, 01:41:16 AM
 #98

have a nice day with yourself readdit reddit scripts that are meaningless & unbacked
You've read that Jiang Zhuoer is the founder from a news article. So much for your "backed" bullshit. Roll Eyes

nope.
i actually went to the document where Jiang Zhuoer himself was writing.

the thing i do is if i see something.. i find the source. if someone says the source is a news article. i then look at a news article and find that news articles source. and i go right back to the real source.

sometimes these things are circle jerks where one "news" site is just quoting another news site which has quoted a reddit post from someone not involved, who then quotes another news site which has quoted another non-involved person.. and i just facepalm it.

but hey. maybe thats because my concentration span can last longer than 2 paragraphs and i dont just take things on face value, nor 'trust' something because 'it must be backed because 100+ people acknowledge it.

for instance i have yet to see any time that a release from core actually get 100 'Acks'
for instance i have yet to see any time that a release from core actually get 100 'Acks' and where those 100 people have read every single line of code.

for instance. there is a guy that put a pull request to mention gitian in a document to get himself named as 'one of the 100' contributors. but i know for sure he has not read every single line of code.. care to guess who im talking about, or am i being too subtle?

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
Sadlife
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 269



View Profile
April 12, 2017, 02:14:05 AM
 #99

where did you read this, can you provide the link?
Im just confuse after they've been found out using an exploit called asicboost and was so against of segwit
And now they've decided to support it?


         ▄▄▄▀█▀▀▀█▀▄▄▄
       ▀▀   █     █
    ▀      █       █
  █      ▄█▄       ▐▌
 █▀▀▀▀▀▀█   █▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█
█        ▀█▀        █
█         █         █
█         █        ▄█▄
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█   █
  █       ▐▌       ▀█▀
  █▀▀▀▄    █       █
  ▀▄▄▄█▄▄   █     █
         ▀▀▀▄█▄▄▄█▄▀▀▀
.
CRYPTO CASINO
FOR WEB 3.0
.
▄▄▄█▀▀▀
▄▄████▀████
▄████████████
█▀▀    ▀█▄▄▄▄▄
█        ▄█████
█        ▄██████
██▄     ▄███████
████▄▄█▀▀▀██████
████       ▀▀██
███          █
▀█          █
▀▀▄▄ ▄▄▄█▀▀
▀▀▀▄▄▄▄
  ▄ ▄█ ▄
▄▄        ▄████▀       ▄▄
▐█
███▄▄█████████████▄▄████▌
██
██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀████▀▀▀▀▀▀████
▐█▀    ▄▄▄▄ ▀▀        ▀█▌
     █▄████   ▄▀█▄     ▌

     ██████   ▀██▀     █
████▄    ▀▀▀▀           ▄████
█████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
▀███████████████████████▀
██████▌█▌█▌██████▐█▐█▐███████
.
OWL GAMES
|.
Metamask
WalletConnect
Phantom
▄▄▄███ ███▄▄▄
▄▄████▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀████▄▄
▄  ▀▀▀▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄▀▀▀  ▄
██▀ ▄▀▀             ▀▀▄ ▀██
██▀ █ ▄     ▄█▄▀      ▄ █ ▀██
██▀ █  ███▄▄███████▄▄███  █ ▀██
█  ▐█▀    ▀█▀    ▀█▌  █
██▄ █ ▐█▌  ▄██   ▄██  ▐█▌ █ ▄██
██▄ ████▄    ▄▄▄    ▄████ ▄██
██▄ ▀████████████████▀ ▄██
▀  ▄▄▄▀▀█████████▀▀▄▄▄  ▀
▀▀████▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄████▀▀
▀▀▀███ ███▀▀▀
.
DICE
SLOTS
BACCARAT
BLACKJACK
.
GAME SHOWS
POKER
ROULETTE
CASUAL GAMES
▄███████████████████▄
██▄▀▄█████████████████████▄▄
███▀█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████▌
█████████▄█▄████████████████
███████▄█████▄█████████████▌
███████▀█████▀█████████████
█████████▄█▄██████████████▌
██████████████████████████
█████████████████▄███████▌
████████████████▀▄▀██████
▀███████████████████▄███▌
              ▀▀▀▀█████▀
AgentofCoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001



View Profile
April 12, 2017, 02:17:39 AM
 #100

Theymos added Achow now, which I think is appropriate.
lol you think achowe is unbiased?
also a mod should only be moderating language/scams/virus risks.
no tech knowledge needed.
moderating message based on tech is censoring out tech.

Well, as for being unbiased, it doesn't matter. Moderators have a right to their
opinion too as long as they don't abuse their mod powers to prevent your opinion.
If you are not breaking any rules or anything and they maliciously delete your posts
or etc, then you should message Theymos or a higher mod with that evidence.

Whether anything will be done is unknown to me, but I think as long as a mod doesn't
step over certain lines, it should be fine.

But I do think Mods for the Development and Technical Sections need people who are
knowledgeable in such, since if I was a mod there and you started talking computer
programming nonsense that didn't actually mean anything, I wouldn't know the
difference. You wouldn't put an Spanish only speaker as the mod for the Korean
sub-boards, right? Lol. That is why I think Dev and Tech boards need fluent mods.



But remember Franky, I'm a noob with no power, so... I'm
only telling you what I would do, if I could.
my comments to you were not in any way about thinking you had power. its more about correcting your rhetoric so that you dont
just turn into a blockstream puppet on a string.
but i am glad you are actually open minded enough to not just be spoon fed by the blockstreamists

Yes. I want what is fair. I don't want imbalance in the Bitcoin network or the
community. Some problems are inevitable, such as the blocksize debate because
there is two separate ideologies vying for the single chain and future, but that
doesn't mean we should feed into the things that exacerbate some problems.

If fair accommodations could be made in some situations, they should be done.
It is better to do those to appease unhappy parties, than to inflame issues that
can spiral out of control and create future unknown problems.

I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 »  All
  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!