Another limited reply:
I remember thinking nullc was nullius due to the similarity!! i did later see that it was Gregory Maxwell.
To be clear, I had my heart set on “nullius” as a favoured nym for a future project years before I ever heard of nullc. My attachment to the nym is why I made the mistake of beginning to use it
without checking for collisions with existing use. (I’m not the “nullius” on Reddit, either; I’ve never had a Reddit account.)
I’ll take it as quite a compliment if you mistook Gregory Maxwell for me!
I wanted to add that this discussion also puts light to the fact that this "dishonest miner" scenario is kept in check because normal users, small merchants CAN run full nodes. That should explain why keeping block size within sustainable limits is important. A lower block size keeps the entry-barrier for running a full node as low as possible.
Good point. Thus, is it any wonder that
Jihan and co
are leading big-blockers?
Cui bono?
[Snipped long quote from Mircea Popescu. — nullius]
Im not too familiar with this but apparently MP got a lot of bitcoins, and these guys are not trying to scam anyone with shitcoins (forks included) and as far as I understand they are trying to do what's best for bitcoin, so I value their opinion on the matter. I would like to know what you think and why there are big discrepancies with Core, because these must be real technical reasons, since again, they aren't selling their own scamtoken, as Roger and co do.
Thank you for focusing on “real technical reasons”. In the twentieth post I made to this forum as a “Newbie”, I wrote:
So as for ulterior motives to oppose Segwit. What overt arguments are advanced by the anti-Segwit side?
On the presumption that Segwit-haters must have at least some plausible excuse for their position, I have spent far too many hours searching the Net and reading what they say. My objective: Find even one good reason to oppose Segwit on technical grounds. Yet despite my such efforts, I have never seen a valid technical argument against Segwit.
Now, let’s see what “real technical reasons” are offered by the evidently intelligent gentleman of whom you speak:
Mircea Popescu’s primary technical argument against Segwit is,
“There’s a one Bitcoin reward for the death of Pieter Wuille.” (Dr. Pieter Wuille, a/k/a sipa, is one of the principal codesigners of Segwit; he is gmaxwell’s esteemed colleague.)
The first party to produce a verifiable death certificate for one Pieter Wuille, aka sipa, last known to exist somewhere around KU Leuven in Belgium will receive payment of 1 (one) Bitcoin to any valid* Bitcoin address of his specification.
===
* Valid Bitcoin addresses start with a "1".
Well, there are your “real technical reasons”, cellard. The red colour is here presented exactly as Popescu put it on his blog. To show that this was a
serious technical argument, he PGP-signed it; the following has been confirmed by me to bear a signature dated 2015-12-10T14:25:01Z from Popescu’s PGP key, fingerprint 0x6160E1CAC8A3C52966FD76998A736F0E2FB7B452:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
The first party to produce a verifiable death certificate for one Pieter Wuille, aka sipa, last known to exist somewhere around KU Leuven in Belgium will receive payment of 1 (one) Bitcoin to any valid* Bitcoin address of his specification.
===
* Valid Bitcoin addresses start with a "1".
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWaYs9AAoJEIpzbw4vt7RSp90P/Rp55mjGxsEKthZM5Qrl0JP2
rO28IWuZ/GErDPhZF1xrBE8l2X6S/nYjnIxFnhORBhJLC6c2puF6iyN4PAj0aqDn
cZWq7Ghm4DHy2Mq51zVITIsVOVJvsTT5f9Sg0q+C6Ior8+VXQGjRuG+ERyvkd1bk
GMHQCBlDYk8706slPxXBYxODxqJCHpx4/530/NKUY0jLab/W1Kh6U38NLi1xYZ+I
g6iAEnNa7Sf7Am1QsjUiZGsvBZeBmMyqQiynjIM302CBCo60BGgjlT7X0goHAHGq
YSUiPOSnA328GncdocRWPKsuyADI0Wv8bmrUjcydGQ+WG39P4XqxpWLEr1rwVE18
73Sa7bScahOtljZWK4Dcfsezz/IL64Pe34e2ZU5aqNMdoykOCCsvGUvqnsvK8oOy
0Jgf1c8EBzI7j/xrZVP/YPXWAuSriIkpk1hqALZSWGvQXt3ExQd5fx9vFDnBRUo/
ajRo3dY78o6Fit4ynDlMzOymNx9z/k81U+NCGtPLgglDvcqjSyFZubS4TGVBlrv6
CxjVUJ1A4hsBUH8gpP97KZ8HmxZOlworbhZMAUZAekEg7WZhmmk2wVWZFfWK1+60
PmOa/NrfNUvVO8YJBQLGVDA0vlLywKx5ifgRq6+VykYRs7GbdKe1as3glkXyrooI
M85j/tKGmtrckZVRndMJ
=DDdo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
that unlike most of the anti-Segwit crowd, Popescu is against P2SH, too. He really means it when he claims that the only valid Bitcoin addresses start with a “1”.
Caveat lector. Generally, Popescu states many truths, including a few controversial ones; he liberally mixes that with half-truths, innuendo, bare assertions of questionable factuality (or worse), and occasionally, outright nonsense. He is obviously intelligent. He excels at showmanship. He is probably effective at overawing and brainwashing many readers. I have no idea what his game is, and he is not sufficiently important for me to attempt divining his motives.
The first draft of this post followed the foregoing with a long discussion of Popescu and his tirades against Segwit and otherwise, including some links to choice bits amidst his voluminous writings. I also thought to discuss the IRC log you quoted (which, by the way, had been quoted by another poster with derision toward Popescu—did you not notice when you quoted that?). But I must ask, is that really necessary?
My long search for a valid technical argument is at an end; for I have found the ultimate argument of Segwit-haters: “There’s a one Bitcoin reward for the death of Pieter Wuille.” Thank you, Mr. Popescu.
You know, this is a recurring topic. In a thread in December titled “Segwit is a 51% attack on Bitcoin”, I myself offered some more valid technical arguments against Segwit, equal in soundness to all anti-Segwit arguments I have ever seen:
Segwit sinner, dare ye blaspheme Bitcoin Jesus? If you squint at it hard enough, you can see a
666 in the Segwit logo. It is hidden and double-crossed inside itself within an ancient Satanic symbol called the Iron Knot of Thermopylae:
And if you play the Segwit jingle backwards, you can hear it say, “Hail Satan!”
The number 51 is also clearly a reference to
Area 51. If Segwit is a
51% attack against Bitcoin, as OP so cogently explained, then how could the grey aliens not be involved!? Try explaining
that away, Segwit shill.
I know this is all true, because I read it on /r/btc.
But that’s not the worst. There is a frightening secret to Segwit; but I can’t tell you about it, because theymos would ban me.
