BIP-110 Split (continued)

[DaveF]

And they are talking about holding miner rewards even longer:
https://xbt.live/news/xbt-coinbase-lock-extension-vote/

I don't want to brag but I voted with both accounts to extend that  
Just as I did in the other pool, I think I've chosen one year or was it 180 days, no matter what, the longest period!
If it gets decided by two votes I will die laughing, imagine a suitcoiner how they call us deciding their fate!

Also, they are beyond recovery:

Way more motivated then I am.
Will poke fun of them a bit here and there, and when things pop up in my feed I'll take a look but even just trying to follow that disaster on discord gave me a headache.
Besides, as we have seen it really does not matter what else happens, luke will force it because of "reasons" if it's what he wants.

Other then this thread and some scattered things that as I said pop up in my feed, I really don't see much about 110 anymore.

So far they have only the one exchange who they first attacked and got delisted from within a week of the original listing. The exchange eventually relisted them though.

That was an interesting chain of events that one might even call a publicity stunt.
Who would have heard of this unknown exchange without this drama? Also if we check their site now, interestingly enough 93% of their total trading volume belongs to LukeCoin ($641k out of $689k). So it was a successful stunt.... for now!

They got lucky I'll give them that and for now they are making good money on fees. There really is no downside for them. Even if lukecoin dies it's made them decent money and from what I have read they have people mining the coin to exchange addresses so they will have a more captive audience when (if?) the mined coins mature.

-Dave

[athanred]

they have people mining the coin to exchange addresses

Yes, they really must hate exchanges. First, they sold a lot of splitted coins, to claim unsplitted ones, and now, because of new coinbase locking rules, they can sell locked coins for unlocked ones. And then, it can artificially increase the price, so they can pump it, to allow Luke getting back at least some coins he lost.

US government made the Bitcoin transaction in accordance with the Blake2b hard-fork yesterday

Yes, of course. I can also claim everyone uses my coin, if I would use compatible signatures, and keep replaying a lot of BTCs transactions.

Other forks can say exactly the same thing. I guess the government must also use these ones:

Bitcoin Purity: https://mempool.bitcoinpurity.org/tx/9194d9de95703bd6d43997e0f1341896314e6586650a6ae179371f2dc10dfd3d
eCash Alpha Testnet: https://explorer.alpha.ecash.ninja/tx/9194d9de95703bd6d43997e0f1341896314e6586650a6ae179371f2dc10dfd3d
eCash Beta Testnet: https://explorer.beta.ecash.ninja/tx/9194d9de95703bd6d43997e0f1341896314e6586650a6ae179371f2dc10dfd3d

Yeah, definitely the government is busy doing all transactions on all forks. Sure. And it is not just a consequence of P2P peers replaying it from mainnet. Of course.

Edit:

I voted with both accounts to extend that

Yes, they should just burn all coinbase rewards, and claim, that the total supply should be set to 20 millions, instead of 21, because it was like that in the original pre-release code from 2008.

By the way: even if all coinbase transactions will be burned forever, then people can still deal with it. For example: centralized pools now claim the coinbase, and split it later. Instead, people can simply send fees directly to some Proof-of-Work address, and make a lottery on top of it. And because they didn't touch SHA-256 inside the Script for calculating sighashes, then old miners could be used to claim these coins.

Also, if there will be no monetary reward, then guess what: the only use case will be related to pushing data. Because if you mine, and get zero coins, then what you can do? Just include transactions, and push data, because you are not rewarded anyway. And then, all transactions could use zero fees, and simply be sent directly to the proper miners, to avoid stupid rules.

[pooya87]

They got lucky I'll give them that and for now they are making good money on fees. There really is no downside for them. Even if lukecoin dies it's made them decent money and from what I have read they have people mining the coin to exchange addresses so they will have a more captive audience when (if?) the mined coins mature.

-Dave

It's definitely been a win-win situation specially for this tiny exchange. Their trading volume is already up and rising. More than doubled since my last post ($1.58 million) specially now that BLuke is being pumped which could bring in more volume (more people are incentivized to dump it soon).

[ABCbits]

I don't want to brag but I voted with both accounts to extend that  
Just as I did in the other poll, I think I've chosen one year or was it 180 days, no matter what, the longest period!

Please spare the hashers, they just want to dump their mined coin as soon as possible while the price is high

They got lucky I'll give them that and for now they are making good money on fees. There really is no downside for them. Even if lukecoin dies it's made them decent money and from what I have read they have people mining the coin to exchange addresses so they will have a more captive audience when (if?) the mined coins mature.

-Dave

It's definitely been a win-win situation specially for this tiny exchange. Their trading volume is already up and rising. More than doubled since my last post ($1.58 million) specially now that BLuke is being pumped which could bring in more volume (more people are incentivized to dump it soon).

Is there any user-friendly wallet and public electrum server for BTCB2 coin yet? Last time i checked, power user who don't want to run BTCB2 node create multiple different transaction on specific order. Has it changed since then? If no, higher price alone isn't enough to make majority BTC holder dump their BTCB2 coin.

[athanred]

Is there any user-friendly wallet and public electrum server for BTCB2 coin yet?

That's one reason, why hard-forks are bad. Suddenly, they have to update all tools in the entire ecosystem, to have a working coin.

If all you need, is just splitting the coins, then simply use the wallet you already have, and sign two conflicting transactions. You only need a little bit of already splitted dust, or violating any BIP-110 rule, to make it. And if you send coins to yourself first, then you risk only transaction fees in practice.

Has it changed since then?

There is no need to change it, because that kind of community thinks, that everyone, or almost everyone, should run a node, or even mine the coins. So they do. And miners can easily split any coins, by using newly minted ones, because it always works.

Anyway, the good, old methods works fine since the split, before they even changed the mining algorithm. And you don't need to have the chain, to use them. I guess making more user friendly tools on top of Bitcoin Core CLI commands is all we need in practice. Which means turning these console commands to some GUI version should solve the problem: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5590674.msg67025339#msg67025339

[Munshi Prem Chand]

It's definitely been a win-win situation specially for this tiny exchange. Their trading volume is already up and rising. More than doubled since my last post ($1.58 million) specially now that BLuke is being pumped which could bring in more volume (more people are incentivized to dump it soon).

Remember that the exchange wants you to trade whether the price goes up or down. They make money either way. They dont really care if late buyers are left holding the bag after price has fallen.

This doesnt necessarily require any sort of conspiracy either. Entities that control the liquid supply of a token will benefit from pumping its price even if it subsequently falls. Thus when you see freshly minted or unlocked coins being funneled to exchange addresses it can be a sign that those coins are about to be sold into maximum market enthusiasm.

Likewise a low cap coin that sees its total traded volume suddenly double (or more) might seem exciting, but in fact its often a sign of just how thin the market really is and how little money it takes to pump or dump the price. Keep an eye on the order book to get a sense of liquidity conditions.

Is there any user-friendly wallet and public electrum server for BTCB2 coin yet? Last time i checked, power user who don't want to run BTCB2 node create multiple different transaction on specific order. Has it changed since then? If no, higher price alone isn't enough to make majority BTC holder dump their BTCB2 coin.

Of course you could still have high priced token on very thin orderbook with poor exit liquidity.

Another gotcha with this coin is that transfer/claim process is very technically challenging (needing to craft your own txs, running full node, etc.) and may keep most people from being able to "sell". Essentially acting as a sort of lockup, except without smart contract. More than 95% of people are probably casual holders that would be filtered out before attempting to sell. People left (miners, early claimers) are technically capable of claiming/transferring their LukeCoins.

This might also be reflected in the trading stats on the exchange, as the "$641k" in volume and the stat that "93% of volume is LukeCoin" might not indicate "this coin is popular", but instead mean "this is the only liquid venue for a very small circle of people who can actually access their coins." In which case it would just be same few coins getting passed around, and maybe looking at unique addresses trading token (amongst other onchain metrics) would be more telling than the volume stats to indicate popularity/demand.

[satscraper]

Is there any user-friendly wallet and public electrum server for BTCB2 coin yet?

Just a few names which I know.

 Bitcoin Knots (wallet is integrated into node of the same name, latest release v29.4.2.knots20260508), Shrike (the fork of Sparrow focused on Blake2b, latest release 2.5.5-blake2b.27), Shulcrum (the fork of Fulcrum, latest release 2.1.2-blake2b.1),

Shrike may offer connections to public server ^{I guess}, but this should be checked ^{which is still in my plans for future}  .

[ABCbits]

Shrike may offer connections to public server ^{I guess}, but this should be checked ^{which is still in my plans for future}  .

I see, but the most important question is whether there's any public Electrum server instance for this altcoin. Most people can't or don't want install either full node wallet or electrum server. If it's exist, more people may consider dumping their BTCB2 coin.

[DaveF]

Shrike may offer connections to public server ^{I guess}, but this should be checked ^{which is still in my plans for future}  .

I see, but the most important question is whether there's any public Electrum server instance for this altcoin. Most people can't or don't want install either full node wallet or electrum server. If it's exist, more people may consider dumping their BTCB2 coin.

That is an obstacle for a lot of people at the moment. Probably kind of deliberate because if it was quick and easy to dump I could see a lot of people doing it.
But, have to put in some work and....nah.


https://x.com/JoshuaFortezza/status/2108987570021597609
So many people cheering for the 1 year maturity date.

That is just going to be funny as more and more people drop off.

-Dave

[stompix]

I see, but the most important question is whether there's any public Electrum server instance for this altcoin. Most people can't or don't want install either full node wallet or electrum server. If it's exist, more people may consider dumping their BTCB2 coin.

When I played with dust on that to move my blake coins also I added fulcrum.kilombino.com to the server list on Shrike, I was way to bored to install another node, as I already had to grab another clean laptop from storage at that time so probably there are a few others.
Not recommending any of them to be honest, so pay with it at your own risk.

https://x.com/JoshuaFortezza/status/2108987570021597609
So many people cheering for the 1 year maturity date.

I'm one of those guys posting once or twice a day on Discord supporting this, I'm barely holding my laptop while I call moderates there suitcoiners!
As the great Sun Tompix said, troll the morons till they make the mistake you want them to!

That aside:
Guy who is spamming blake2b with those pics, if you read this, you know, there is also porn outthere  !!!!!

[DaveF]

That aside:
Guy who is spamming blake2b with those pics, if you read this, you know, there is also porn outthere  !!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTJvdGcb7Fs

edit: https://bitfiles.io/btcb2/be026ebf3dfc966efdf28fec58ed43384102c2bf5d6227b2b14a4554f25c98bd


-Dave

[stompix]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTJvdGcb7Fs
edit: https://bitfiles.io/btcb2/be026ebf3dfc966efdf28fec58ed43384102c2bf5d6227b2b14a4554f25c98bd

-Dave

Loooool!!!!!!!
How empty is that chain that even with 1/3 of the blockspace you can upload 4mb of data on it so easily?

Oh, wait, seems like our former forum collegue has realized this:
https://x.com/LapiuPepe/status/2109458918623555748

It's not looking good. If we ignore the replayed transactions which are going to go away gradually, and we look at the transactions only on the XBT chain, here are some of the results:

- 59% of the tx outputs on XBT are dust (1000 sats or less) or of 0.8¢ or less
- 93% of the tx inputs on XBT are dust amounts, under 0.8¢.
- 88% of the XBT transaction size is spam.
- 99.9% of multisig inputs on XBT are spam.
- 99.6% of dust inputs on XBT are spam.

My god, it's worse than what I was thinking of!
So if we take out replayed tx from the equation, that chain is just a bunch of JPGs?

[MoparMiningLLC]

My god, it's worse than what I was thinking of!
So if we take out replayed tx from the equation, that chain is just a bunch of JPGs?

pretty much - but hey LapiuPepe says they will fix it!

[athanred]

So many people cheering for the 1 year maturity date.

I think they should just fork again, because they did it recently, and they are used to it. Users will be fine, miners will adjust, and opposing miners should just run URSF, if they disagree, right? Blocking all coinbase rewards is a soft-fork anyway. It can be signalled like before, and it can be coded to activate unconditionally, even if miners disagree. And if again, there would be 2.5% of miners, supporting locking their coins for a year, then yet another Proof of Work change can be done, because why not.

That's how things look like, once you accept, that hard-forking is a good idea, and should be done to solve problems, where even soft-forks are not needed (like: processing a subset of the mainnet traffic).

[satscraper]

Shrike may offer connections to public server ^{I guess}, but this should be checked ^{which is still in my plans for future}  .

I see, but the most important question is whether there's any public Electrum server instance for this altcoin. Most people can't or don't want install either full node wallet or electrum server. If it's exist, more people may consider dumping their BTCB2 coin.

If it were me, I would deploy Knots node on one of my spare machines and connect Shrike and shazam. But people are different, I agree. Some prefer to eat skewered meat while others just smell it. Frankly, I am still inclined to wait for about half a year and see what happens. The sum I could get from dumping right now is not so significant as to force me to hurry.

[DaveF]

My god, it's worse than what I was thinking of!
So if we take out replayed tx from the equation, that chain is just a bunch of JPGs?

pretty much - but hey LapiuPepe says they will fix it!

The sad part really is that if they had presented their case and had everyone reject it but then just quietly moved off and done their thing like eCash is doing they probably would have been left alone.

But, pretend to be BTC, call people names, insult people, harass the developers and so on people are going to hit back.

If it were me, I would deploy Knots node on one of my spare machines and connect Shrike and shazam. But people are different, I agree. Some prefer to eat skewered meat while others just smell it. Frankly, I am still inclined to wait for about half a year and see what happens. The sum I could get from dumping right now is not so significant as to force me to hurry.

And that should really worry them. How many people are sitting on enough BTC to dump the price to just about nothing (and keep it there) but are just waiting because it's not worth the time and effort to deal with it. Once that happens how many others are going to go "Oh shit, let me get out now" and then move and dump theirs. Kind of like a bank run but for crypto.

A couple of thousand BTC would drop the price to sub $200. Which for most of us would be a lot. But a couple of long term holders with a couple of hundred start dumping how many others would follow.

I think they should just fork again, because they did it recently, and they are used to it. Users will be fine, miners will adjust, and opposing miners should just run URSF, if they disagree, right? Blocking all coinbase rewards is a soft-fork anyway. It can be signalled like before, and it can be coded to activate unconditionally, even if miners disagree. And if again, there would be 2.5% of miners, supporting locking their coins for a year, then yet another Proof of Work change can be done, because why not.

That's how things look like, once you accept, that hard-forking is a good idea, and should be done to solve problems, where even soft-forks are not needed (like: processing a subset of the mainnet traffic).

Well they are going to have at least a couple more. 1 for the maturity change and another to probably change the algo once some miner someplace spins up a bunch of older blake miners and then uses stratum to mine instead of datum so you have to block that somehow. Oh, and then don't forget have to block the dust & gambling fork. Anything else they can fork for?

-Dave

[MoparMiningLLC]

the forums held funds are around 1100 Bitcoin, right? Imagine if they went and dumped their BIP110 shitcoin...

[ObeyKnock]

Recent interview with Bob Burnett (Barefoot Mining) on why he stepped back from BIP-110 and sees no real path for the Blake2b chain:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWWizyXVuh4

[satscraper]

Shrike may offer connections to public server ^{I guess}, but this should be checked ^{which is still in my plans for future}  .

I see, but the most important question is whether there's any public Electrum server instance for this altcoin. Most people can't or don't want install either full node wallet or electrum server. If it's exist, more people may consider dumping their BTCB2 coin.

The answer to you question was not long in coming.  I have deployed Shrink on one of my spare machines running Xubuntu, and after short search found the private server that allows outside connections. All the necessary details are in the image below. I think there are other similar servers, so in fact there is no need at all to deploy your own one to dump  BTCB2 coin if you have such need.