Bitcoin Forum
November 18, 2017, 07:01:13 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 [1371] 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2008801 times)
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 07:02:57 PM
 #27401

Pantera Capital explains the "three buckets" theory, though combining mining and VC as a single bucket: https://panteracapital.com/download/the-five-phases-of-bitcoin-ibnyc-keynote/

Thank you! That is very informative and helpful. It is important to consider that investment capital in the ecosystem is increasing while BTC is falling.

Coinlancer is Disrupting the Freelance marketplace!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 07:19:25 PM
 #27402

It takes a version of Bitcoin that scales to the point that every person on the planet can interact with it directly, to achieve the status that gold once held. To get there requires that bitcoin scales, while maintaining it's decentralized and thus independent nature.

One option to get there is to let the blockchain scale to accommodate everyone, this could look like the following and still be OK...

- ~100 P2P nodes that are independently sponsored and paid for to perform validation (these would be several large institutions such as MIT, remember it only takes 1 node to flag cheating)
- ~10 pools that receive fees from billions of transactions and are located in several regions (or preferably behind tor or something similar)
- ~100,000 small independent miners connected by stratum to pools, the true location of each miner is easily hidden. These miners live off of the massive number of fees generated

Incorrect. It requires 51% of the hashrate to flag cheating. Why do you guys repeatedly forget this Bitcoin 101 lesson?

If you do not understand why 10 pools enforced to be non-colluding by politics of the masses is the antithesis of decentralization, then there is nothing I could possibly write that you would actually try to comprehend.

Ditto if you do not understand why 100 pools permanently cited at home bases of the establishment are the antithesis of decentralization.

Distributed != decentralization.

The only way decentralization remains AUTONOMOUSLY resilient (i.e. without the political expectations which are inherently centralizing due to the Logic of Collective Action), is for the full nodes to be the small miners with no proxies such as pools as middle men. There is absolutely no way to achieve this within existing PoW consensus algorithms. I know the solution, but I am not revealing it today.

Another option to get there is to take transactions off-chain. This is the SC / lighting network path.

If I am not mistaken, the LN paradigm is only for setting up reused payment channels between a spender and a recipient, so it is inapplicable to a myriad of micropayments between all N possible participants in the system, because each setup has to go on the block chain. Thus it really isn't a general solution for micropayments, but rather a very specific solution for REAL TIME payments. I invented LN in 2014 also, and my application for it remains REAL TIME payments.

Side chains don't help you with micropayments unless you accept that micropayments will be done centralized on a special centralized SC. In other words, the decentralization of the consensus network design has to be accomplished no matter if you put it on a SC or in Bitcoin Core.

The problem with this option is the bitcoin main chain is starved for fees, and so the mining security mechanism is too small to effectively secure the network.

This is another reason that doing micropayments in a centralized SC is death for Core.

This thought process that small blocks will cause fee pressure and that will support a large mining community is just wrong. What will happen is bitcoin will not be used to the extent that it needs to be used to be secure.

That is true also. That is why I said it doesn't matter which direction you go on the block size issue, all paths lead to eating from my hand on the consensus network redesign (and when it is open sourced then everyone can copy it and refine it).

The argument for not increasing the block size is that it is better to move more slowly towards centralization and when it is clear that 1MB (or 8MB w/o automatic exponential scaling) has been too constricting, then consensus can increase it again. This allows time for real solutions to take form, such as mine. Whereas, if you open up the size to exponential scaling, then it is quite possible that the Coinbases, Circles, Paypals, 21 Incs, etc.. will be incentivized to flood the block chain with spam to force it to centralized before we get the chance to experiment (via pegged side chains) to find the optimum solution for scaling.

This is the way engineers think.

A bitcoin with 10s of billions of transactions a day each generating 1 penny in minimum transaction fee, will be much more secure than a bitcoin with a small number of transactions and slight fee pressure (at best) and where most fees are captured by SCs.

Not if it is centralized, and centralization is guaranteed with the current PoW consensus design as Bitcoin scales.

rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 07:56:58 PM
 #27403

It takes a version of Bitcoin that scales to the point that every person on the planet can interact with it directly, to achieve the status that gold once held. To get there requires that bitcoin scales, while maintaining it's decentralized and thus independent nature.

One option to get there is to let the blockchain scale to accommodate everyone, this could look like the following and still be OK...

- ~100 P2P nodes that are independently sponsored and paid for to perform validation (these would be several large institutions such as MIT, remember it only takes 1 node to flag cheating)
- ~10 pools that receive fees from billions of transactions and are located in several regions (or preferably behind tor or something similar)
- ~100,000 small independent miners connected by stratum to pools, the true location of each miner is easily hidden. These miners live off of the massive number of fees generated

Incorrect. It requires 51% of the hashrate to flag cheating. Why do you guys repeatedly forget this Bitcoin 101 lesson?

...

Lots of words that only demonstrate you do no understand what you are pontificating about.

Let me try to spell this out in very simple terms for you. Let's say in the future we had 100 full nodes, 10 pools and everyone else used SPV like wallets, and then 99 full nodes together with 9 pools decided to collude in order to cheat and allocate to themselves coins beyond the 21M limit.

In this scenario the corrupt chain would be the longest and yes what is worse is the P2P network would follow the corrupt chain since they are colluding together. Even worse is all bitcoin end-users would not be able to tell this since they only use SPV like wallets.

However as long as there remains one honest full node (let's say an MIT independently funded node, or a libertarian party funded node), that single honest full node would be able to easily generate concrete evidence of the corrupt transactions and easily present that evidence to the world for everyone to verify for themselves. Since this honest node monitors the network in real time, it could easily flag corruption in real time.

This in turn would expose the fraud and cause the majority of the 100K miners to switch over to an honest pools to rebuild on the valid chain. The pool could even be super honest about it and also include valid transactions from the corrupt chain to protect people not involved.

So yes, it only takes 1 single honest full node to expose to the whole world (including both users and miners) any corruption in the system.

This is the advantage of having every node capable of fully validating every aspect of the blockchain, and why that aspect allows the P2P network to centralize while still providing a robust system.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:00:27 PM
 #27404

However as long as there remains one honest full node (let's say an MIT independently funded node, or a libertarian party funded node), that single honest full node would be able to easily generate concrete evidence of the corrupt transactions and easily present that evidence to the world for everyone to verify for themselves. Since this honest node monitors the network in real time, it could easily flag corruption in real time.

The masses will ignore such evidence. They won't switch from their existing systems, e.g. Circle, Coinbase, Paypal, 21 Inc, etc..

How many times have I tried to explain the Logic of Collective Action upthread, but if you are determined to ignore reality, I can not force you to comprehend.

Politics is inherently centralizing. Duh! Look out the window and observe society now.

How smug are you now Smartypants.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:02:18 PM
 #27405

ugly ending to the day.  $DJT clearly has broken down.  get your Gavincoins while you can:

tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:09:51 PM
 #27406

both $DJI & $DJT accelerating to the downside now.

get yourself some Gavincoin.

but but but...

I heard the financial crisis is over, and soon magical NFLX bearing unicorns will frolic across the globe, bringing fiber to all the deserving children of Ukraine, Africa, Florida, and other formerly impoverished backwaters.  Since all is most assuredly well in fiat-land, it's not clear why we even need Bitcoin, except perhaps as yet another centralized payment rail to act as a retail POS gimmick for the amusement of hipsters/yuppies and profit of VC frat boys.
...

Several years ago I would not have guessed that Bitcoin's fundamental operational parameters would have been modulated by instantaneous NFLX stock quotes.  Even less so that this would make sense to the putative 'chief scientist' and half of the ecosystem participants (at least here on trolltalk.)  But there it is.


TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:15:29 PM
 #27407

And those who argued that USG and its derivative tentacles OECD have no power to enforce in far flung jurisdictions...and notice it happens precisely on the day that Armstrong had been predicting (since 1985) for the Sovereign Debt Big Bang (2015.75 = October 1, 2015)...

http://armstrongeconomics.com/archives/33889

Cayman Islands to Begin Reporting Everyone on October 1, 2015

The Cayman Islands’ Department of International Tax Compliance (DITC) has notified Cayman financial institutions of its intention to move forward with implementing the OECD’s Common Reporting Standard (CRS), with the introduction of local regulations by the Economic Confidence Model turning point – October 1, 2015. This of course will end banking in the Cayman Islands and will impact many hedge funds as well.

Like Switzerland, the Cayman Islands has surrendered its sovereignty to the tyranny of global taxation. The West is imploding all for taxation because those in power will NEVER reform; all they will ever do is raise taxes to line their own pockets while destroying the world economy.

The Cayman Islands is among 50 “early adopters” of the CRS that will begin the automatic exchange of tax information starting in 2017. Eleven other countries will start tax information exchange in 2018.

Under the CRS, as of September 2017, tax authorities in over 50 jurisdictions — in addition to the U.S. and U.K. — will be entitled to information on accounts that individuals or entities hold in a Reportable Jurisdiction, under the tax laws of that jurisdiction.

A Reportable Jurisdiction is one that has a multilateral or bilateral Competent Authority Agreement with other jurisdictions to provide information under the CRS and is on the OECD’s list of such jurisdictions.

iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834


[LOL2X]


View Profile WWW
June 25, 2015, 08:17:15 PM
 #27408

ugly ending to the day.  $DJT clearly has broken down.  get your Gavincoins while you can:

Enough of your silly FUD.  The financial crisis is over.  Our benevolent telecom overlords will, any second now, embark upon unprecedented roll outs of retail broadband infrastructure, all thanks to their massive post-Bernanke/Obamanomics budget surpluses.

NFLX and APPL are at all-time-highs, so stop moaning just because you picked the wrong horse.



GavinCoin is stagnating and doesn't even pay dividends!


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:18:55 PM
 #27409

we're not even under attack yet blocks continue to fill up:

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:22:26 PM
 #27410

we're not even under attack yet blocks continue to fill up:

Unless you correlate it with transaction fees paid, that is meaningless data because we don't know how much is spam.

Also if the owner of the coinbase for the block is the one inserting the spam, then the data would be meaningless even with transaction fees correlated (because the spam could be paying itself).

Non-engineers pontificate.

rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:23:52 PM
 #27411

However as long as there remains one honest full node (let's say an MIT independently funded node, or a libertarian party funded node), that single honest full node would be able to easily generate concrete evidence of the corrupt transactions and easily present that evidence to the world for everyone to verify for themselves. Since this honest node monitors the network in real time, it could easily flag corruption in real time.

The masses will ignore such evidence. They won't switch from their existing systems, e.g. Circle, Coinbase, Paypal, 21 Inc, etc..

How many times have I tried to explain the Logic of Collective Action upthread, but if you are determined to ignore reality, I can not force you to comprehend.

Politics is inherently centralizing. Duh! Look out the window and observe society now.

How smug are you now Smartypants.

So from your response it seems you acknowledge that yes my statement that it only takes a single honest full node to identify and communicate any corruption in the system to the world, is in fact correct and you were grossly incorrect in that long winded nonsense post of yours.

So you then fall back and say "but no one will care and thus you're wrong". First that is a different argument, second that position itself is absurd for numerous and obvious reasons.

God you really are a fucking child aren't you. Back to ignore.

BTW in the example I laid out Coinbase, Circle, Paypal, etc are not full node operators but light client users, they will want to work with honest systems because their users will expect them to work with honest system.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:27:47 PM
 #27412

However as long as there remains one honest full node (let's say an MIT independently funded node, or a libertarian party funded node), that single honest full node would be able to easily generate concrete evidence of the corrupt transactions and easily present that evidence to the world for everyone to verify for themselves. Since this honest node monitors the network in real time, it could easily flag corruption in real time.

The masses will ignore such evidence. They won't switch from their existing systems, e.g. Circle, Coinbase, Paypal, 21 Inc, etc..

How many times have I tried to explain the Logic of Collective Action upthread, but if you are determined to ignore reality, I can not force you to comprehend.

Politics is inherently centralizing. Duh! Look out the window and observe society now.

How smug are you now Smartypants.

So from your response it seems you acknowledge that yes my statement that it only takes a single honest full node to identify and communicate any corruption in the system to the world, is in fact correct and you were grossly incorrect.

So you then fall back and say "but no one will care and thus you're wrong". First that is a different argument, second that position itself is absurd for numerous and obvious reasons.

God you really are a fucking child aren't you. Back to ignore.

BTW in the example I laid out Coinbase, Circle, Paypal, etc are not full node operators but light client users, they will want to work with honest systems because their users will expect them to work with honest system.

Real engineers don't piecemeal analysis in order to delude themselves. Now you've just demonstrated for all astute readers that you are disingenuous (and have an agenda which defies the logic of decentralization).

If there is an incentive to collude, then those establishment vulture capital oligarchs (e.g. Peter Thiel, Larry Summers, etc) who've been funding Coinbase, Circle, Paypal, etc will be involved in the collusion with those permanently sited full nodes of the establishment that you proposed. This is the way the corruption of politics works. Duh.

The fact that 2/3 of the voters here are so easily deluded by your political obfuscation of the logic, shows that for sure the people can not react correctly to evidence. They can be fooled and moved on to Sybil attacked pools for example (how many times per day do you think people will play Whack-A-Mole before exhaustion sets in Smartypants).

This is why Bitcoin has already failed, because it has fallen to political control.

Edit: also you assume that the nature of an attack on the network would be "corrupt transactions" which are easy to prove. However, the nature of the attack that is most disconcerning is where the monopoly is censoring transactions. This will be impossible for any minority node to prove with evidence.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:42:05 PM
 #27413

we're not even under attack yet blocks continue to fill up:

Unless you correlate it with transaction fees paid, that is meaningless data because we don't know how much is spam.

Also if the owner of the coinbase for the block is the one inserting the spam, then the data would be meaningless even with transaction fees correlated (because the spam could be paying itself).

Non-engineers pontificate.

engineers, pfft! 

what kinda "engineer" would even pontificate that the miner is inserting spam into his own blocks when the blocks are coming from different pools and he can't possibly be producing so many consecutive blocks on his own? 

dude, you're just a sham.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834


[LOL2X]


View Profile WWW
June 25, 2015, 08:44:23 PM
 #27414

we're not even under attack yet blocks continue to fill up:

Unbelievable!  It's almost as if subsidizing spam/noise transactions creates more of them.   Huh

We need 20MB++ blocks ASAP, because God forbid it costs more than a penny to use Bitcoin's seemingly magical, unprecedentedly powerful settlement system (which is based on the most secure and well distributed database in history).

Why should any of the exorbitant expense of running nodes and miners be passed on to consumers?  After all, growth at all costs is more important than closing loops and weaning the network off block rewards.

Bitcoin is like a shark; it must keep moving or die.  As with Uber, it must stay two steps ahead of the regulators.

Oh, wait: http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/17/uber-drivers-deemed-employees-by-california-labor-commission/

Nevermind: http://www.coindesk.com/ny-bitcoin-business-45-days-bitlicense/

 Cheesy


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:44:39 PM
 #27415


This is why Bitcoin has already died, because it has fallen to political control.

it hasn't fallen, the BIP process of political control you support is actually in jeopardy and if / hopefully when it changes to a distributed consensus, Bitcoin will be more secure for it.

I'm not sure what TPTB need war actually means, I presumed it was a warning, but that was obviously my mistake, you seem to be promoting the idea as a positive outcome.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:46:00 PM
 #27416

we're not even under attack yet blocks continue to fill up:

Unless you correlate it with transaction fees paid, that is meaningless data because we don't know how much is spam.

Also if the owner of the coinbase for the block is the one inserting the spam, then the data would be meaningless even with transaction fees correlated (because the spam could be paying itself).

Non-engineers pontificate.

engineers, pfft!  

what kinda "engineer" would even pontificate that the miner is inserting spam into his own blocks when the blocks are coming from different pools and he can't possibly be producing so many consecutive blocks on his own?  

dude, you're just a sham.

Did you not see the word "also". If even 1 of those could be a miner inserting spam into his own blocks, then my statement was not in error.

I presented multiple orthogonal statements. This seems to confuse your pea brain.

Also in the event the monopoly has GHash.io's 51% of the hashrate (probably greater than 51% by now, hidden behind Sybil attack pools), then yes indeed the monopoly could have consecutive blocks.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:49:44 PM
 #27417

we're not even under attack yet blocks continue to fill up:

Unless you correlate it with transaction fees paid, that is meaningless data because we don't know how much is spam.

Also if the owner of the coinbase for the block is the one inserting the spam, then the data would be meaningless even with transaction fees correlated (because the spam could be paying itself).

Non-engineers pontificate.

engineers, pfft! 

what kinda "engineer" would even pontificate that the miner is inserting spam into his own blocks when the blocks are coming from different pools and he can't possibly be producing so many consecutive blocks on his own? 

dude, you're just a sham.

Did you not see the word "also". If even 1 of those could be a miner inserting spam into his own blocks, then my statement was not in error.

I presented multiple orthogonal statements. This seems to confuse your pea brain.

Also in the event the monopoly has GHash.io's 51% of the hashrate (probably greater than 51% by now, hidden behind Sybil attack pools), then yes indeed the monopoly could have consecutive blocks.

Go stick your broomstick up your ass again Smartypants. You seem to be quite proficient at fucking yourself.

no, dipshit. 

for you, as a supposed engineer which i doubt, to even consider a possibility that is not possible shows that you aren't worth a damn in terms of Bitcoin technical understanding.
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:51:32 PM
 #27418

However as long as there remains one honest full node (let's say an MIT independently funded node, or a libertarian party funded node), that single honest full node would be able to easily generate concrete evidence of the corrupt transactions and easily present that evidence to the world for everyone to verify for themselves. Since this honest node monitors the network in real time, it could easily flag corruption in real time.

The masses will ignore such evidence. They won't switch from their existing systems, e.g. Circle, Coinbase, Paypal, 21 Inc, etc..

How many times have I tried to explain the Logic of Collective Action upthread, but if you are determined to ignore reality, I can not force you to comprehend.

Politics is inherently centralizing. Duh! Look out the window and observe society now.

How smug are you now Smartypants.

So from your response it seems you acknowledge that yes my statement that it only takes a single honest full node to identify and communicate any corruption in the system to the world, is in fact correct and you were grossly incorrect.

So you then fall back and say "but no one will care and thus you're wrong". First that is a different argument, second that position itself is absurd for numerous and obvious reasons.

God you really are a fucking child aren't you. Back to ignore.

BTW in the example I laid out Coinbase, Circle, Paypal, etc are not full node operators but light client users, they will want to work with honest systems because their users will expect them to work with honest system.

Real engineers don't piecemeal analysis in order to delude themselves. Now you've just demonstrated for all astute readers that you are disingenuous (and have an agenda which defies the logic of decentralization).

If there is an incentive to collude, then those establishment vulture capital oligarchs (e.g. Peter Thiel, Larry Summers, etc) who've been funding Coinbase, Circle, Paypal, etc will be involved in the collusion with those permanently sited full nodes of the establishment that you proposed. This is the way the corruption of politics works. Duh.

The fact that 2/3 of the voters here are so easily deluded by your political obfuscation of the logic, shows that for sure the people can not react correctly to evidence. They can be fooled and moved on to Sybil attacked pools for example (how many times per day do you think people will play Whack-A-Mole before exhaustion sets in Smartypants).

This is why Bitcoin has already failed, because it has fallen to political control.

Edit: also you assume that the nature of an attack on the network would be "corrupt transactions" which are easy to prove. However, the nature of the attack that is most disconcerning is where the monopoly is censoring transactions. This will be impossible for any minority node to prove with evidence.

Go stick your broomstick up your ass again Smartypants. You seem to be quite proficient at fucking yourself.

The only thing of substance that you said there is

Quote
However, the nature of the attack that is most disconcerning is where the monopoly is censoring transactions. This will be impossible for any minority node to prove with evidence.

1) Censoring attacks do not work unless you have 100% of the miners. It only takes a single pool/miner not colluding the break the censor and include the transactions.
2) Yes it is easy to verify and communicate censor attacks (if they even are pulled off) by an honest node. That node would have the valid transactions, with fees, that are never added to blocks. It doesn't take long to start to ask why there is a pool of transactions not confirming or are only in blocks that are being orphaned from the MC.

Again, you simply do not understand anything about Bitcoin or the dynamics of how it works. These are 101 concepts you can't seem to grasp. Your only replies are attacks without saying anything of substance (and the little you do say is easy to show as wrong) or constant changes to your position on what matters.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:51:45 PM
 #27419

we're not even under attack yet blocks continue to fill up:

Unless you correlate it with transaction fees paid, that is meaningless data because we don't know how much is spam.

Also if the owner of the coinbase for the block is the one inserting the spam, then the data would be meaningless even with transaction fees correlated (because the spam could be paying itself).

Non-engineers pontificate.

engineers, pfft!  

what kinda "engineer" would even pontificate that the miner is inserting spam into his own blocks when the blocks are coming from different pools and he can't possibly be producing so many consecutive blocks on his own?  

dude, you're just a sham.

Did you not see the word "also". If even 1 of those could be a miner inserting spam into his own blocks, then my statement was not in error.

I presented multiple orthogonal statements. This seems to confuse your pea brain.

Also in the event the monopoly has GHash.io's 51% of the hashrate (probably greater than 51% by now, hidden behind Sybil attack pools), then yes indeed the monopoly could have consecutive blocks.

Go stick your broomstick up your ass again Smartypants. You seem to be quite proficient at fucking yourself.

no, dipshit.  

for you, as a supposed engineer which i doubt, to even consider a possibility that is not possible shows that you aren't worth a damn in terms of Bitcoin technical understanding.

Okay readers can surely see how dumb you are with that response.

Orthogonal is in the dictionary. Engineers naturally think in orthogonal vectors, because it is necessary for doing our job correctly. You go back to your profession with eyes, if you want to stop making a total fool of yourself here in our area of specialization.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:53:40 PM
 #27420

we're not even under attack yet blocks continue to fill up:

Unless you correlate it with transaction fees paid, that is meaningless data because we don't know how much is spam.

Also if the owner of the coinbase for the block is the one inserting the spam, then the data would be meaningless even with transaction fees correlated (because the spam could be paying itself).

Non-engineers pontificate.

engineers, pfft! 

what kinda "engineer" would even pontificate that the miner is inserting spam into his own blocks when the blocks are coming from different pools and he can't possibly be producing so many consecutive blocks on his own? 

dude, you're just a sham.

Did you not see the word "also". If even 1 of those could be a miner inserting spam into his own blocks, then my statement was not in error.

I presented multiple orthogonal statements. This seems to confuse your pea brain.

Also in the event the monopoly has GHash.io's 51% of the hashrate (probably greater than 51% by now, hidden behind Sybil attack pools), then yes indeed the monopoly could have consecutive blocks.

Go stick your broomstick up your ass again Smartypants. You seem to be quite proficient at fucking yourself.

haha.  digging yourself deeper and deeper with BS.

look at the chart i posted above; 6 out of 8 consecutive blocks is 75%.  so acc to you, it's possible we have a pool collusion attack going on now involving 75% of miners with each block coming from a different pool's address?  lol, you are a dumbass.
Pages: « 1 ... 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 [1371] 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 ... 1558 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!