Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

if Chevron ain't making money now, what does that say for the rest of the real economy?:

[1714192602]

1714192602

[1714192602]

1714192602

[1714192602]

1714192602

[1714192602]

1714192602

[1714192602]

1714192602

[cypherdoc]

i smell desperation from the 1MB'ers.  

they love to flap their lips don't they?

btw, my poll is back over 73%.  tisk, tisk.

My much more accurate poll is running 40/60 at the moment.

such a ridiculously loaded question for a poll is insulting.

the fact that there XT is favored given how the question is framed, to me indicated that the majority of people see past the FUD supporting the proponents of limiting block-size for now.

precisely.  and they're gaining a better understanding of all the financial conflicts as well.  just watch Reddit; theymos got destroyed this morning touting the 1MB FUD story.  mercilessly too, all with great arguments, not just financial but technical too.

the only thing that has helped them recently is the all out effort using character assasination against everyone and even little 'ol me.  good for a few initial points but then over time a doomed strategy which ppl can see right thru and which eventually turns them off.  

bottom line is that they are out of ammo.  Mike & Gavin just need to sit back and watch them self destruct.

[Adrian-x]

i smell desperation from the 1MB'ers.  

they love to flap their lips don't they?

btw, my poll is back over 73%.  tisk, tisk.

My much more accurate poll is running 40/60 at the moment.

such a ridiculously loaded question for a poll is insulting.

the fact that there XT is favored given how the question is framed, to me indicated that the majority of people see past the FUD supporting the proponents of limiting block-size for now.

precisely.  and they're gaining a better understanding of all the financial conflicts as well.  just watch Reddit; theymos got destroyed this morning touting the 1MB FUD story.  mercilessly too, all with great arguments, not just financial but technical too.

the only thing that has helped them recently is the all out effort using character assasination against everyone and even little 'ol me.  good for a few initial points but then over time a doomed strategy which ppl can see right thru and which eventually turns them off.  

bottom line is that they are out of ammo.  Mike & Gavin just need to sit back and watch them self destruct.

I had to take a dig at you too ;-), i was feeling sorry for nullc.

what i have noticed though some reddit threads get owned by "bigger block proponents" and the opponents consed and dont venture in. and then there are the "limiting blocks for now" proponent threads and the increase blockers are down voted big time. its all rather polarized and entertaining to watch, not sure how much fundamentalism is brewing v education. but there are folks putting up a solid argument for increasing which is a positive sign.

[iCEBREAKER]

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.

Of course if that's *not* true and we are headed towards a messy/violent end to the petrodollar's death throes, perhaps preserving and enhancing BTC's diffuse/diverse/defensible/resilient properties is a better idea than forever committing every tip at every coffee shop to the MotherChain.

Forget about Gavincoin because the financial crisis is over, thanks to our brave heroic consumers binge watching Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad:



ATH BITCH!   

[TPTB_need_war]

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.

[TPTB_need_war]

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]

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]

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]

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

[tvbcof]

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]

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]

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!

[cypherdoc]

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

[TPTB_need_war]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.   

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/

 

[Adrian-x]

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.

[TPTB_need_war]

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.