Bitcoin 20MB Fork

[danielpbarron]

...
That aside, regardless of where the deal is struck, be it on the forum or AOL instant messenger, GPG would still be used to sign the contract.
...

You missed the main point. Sending money to MP means losing possession of those money and GPG will not stop MP to run away it them, while a smart contract will make it impossible for anyone to not fulfill the contract since the coins will be locked and will be released only when the contract conditions are met.

Ok. And who is the arbiter on whether the "smart contract" is fulfilled? You can't have a trustless trade, and markets are necessarily centralized.

Just so is the case with Bitcoins and markets : it makes perfect sense for the currency itself to be decentralized. It makes absolutely no sense at all for the marketplace to be decentralized. In fact, a decentralized market is about as much a market as a deenginized car is a car. The market is precisely where economic agents come together, that's what it does, it centralizes trade. Further, it is sensible for the currency itself to be as trustless as possible, and thus mechanisms that implement trustlessness are a net gain in that field. A market can never exist at all without trust, and so mechanisms that purportedly implement "trustlessness" are nothing but clunk in this field.

Do you really believe that MP will "run off" with 1k bitcoin? Or are you just trying to turn this into some colored coin thing? I mean, the guy has paid out four times that much in a single month's dividends!

[1715185591]

1715185591

[1715185591]

1715185591

[1715185591]

1715185591

[1715185591]

1715185591

[1715185591]

1715185591

[1715185591]

1715185591

[RoadStress]

Blending a pound of feces with a pound of pasta doesn't give you a kilogram of anything remotely edible.
What do you expect will come out of these mixers? Whitelisted coins?

I said it already 2 times. I would like to see the retard that will try to black list the coins. Considering that we can put mud very easily on all coins that will make the retard to stop using bitcoin since all of them will be dirty money.

So, how would you actually, in practice, create such a, ahem, "smart contract" ?

By developing software that does that and by assuring that we have enough block space to include all the rules. Why everything that you say has to be limited somehow? Why can't we have freedom to do whatever we want?

Ok. And who is the arbiter on whether the "smart contract" is fulfilled?

The blockchain will be the arbiter. Stop quoting MP who is spreading lies By quoting him you are in the same position like Icetard who was quoting HF staff members. Now all that he can do is eat a lot of shit because nobody is believing him and nobody takes his words into account. You will be in the same category once the 20MB fork will happen.

Do you really believe that MP will "run off" with 1k bitcoin?

Since nobody knows the exchange rate when the contract needs to end how come are you so sure he will not run off with 1k bitcoins? Even at a low exchange rate why do we need to trust MP or anyone into a decentralized network? Why shouldn't MP trust the other party of the contract?

We need to develop the smart contracts so that we know that we don't need to trust anyone in a contract. When the conditions are met the money are released automatically.

[davout]

Considering that we can put mud very easily on all coins that will make the retard to stop using bitcoin since all of them will be dirty money.

You can't. Because you cannot taint an unspent output I own, you sure can create an output that is spendable by one of my addresses, but you can't alter any of the outputs I can spend. Nothing forces me to mix your tainted output with my clean ones when I create a transaction.

By developing software that does that and by assuring that we have enough block space to include all the rules. Why everything that you say has to be limited somehow? Why can't we have freedom to do whatever we want?

This is so braindamaged I don't even know where to start.

[danielpbarron]

We need to develop the smart contracts so that we know that we don't need to trust anyone in a contract. When the conditions are met the money are released automatically.

What conditions? How does "the blockchain" magically know when they are met!? I take it you must have zero bitcoin because in order to trade you would have had to trust someone..

[RoadStress]

This is so braindamaged I don't even know where to start.

Isn't Bitcoin programmable money? Maybe I have the wrong information, but I know that I've heard Andreas say it many times. Is he wrong when he states that?

We need to develop the smart contracts so that we know that we don't need to trust anyone in a contract. When the conditions are met the money are released automatically.

What conditions? How does "the blockchain" magically know when they are met!? I take it you must have zero bitcoin because in order to trade you would have had to trust someone..

Well I know that Bitcoin is also being advertised as programmable money. Even if we don't have the tools now why do you think we will not have them in the future?

[davout]

This is so braindamaged I don't even know where to start.

Isn't Bitcoin programmable money? Maybe I have the wrong information, but I know that I've heard Andreas say it many times. Is he wrong when he states that?

Andreas is a fucktard. And the "programmable money" thing is a marketing gimmick that reddit likes to repeat ad nauseam.

[R2D221]

And the "programmable money" thing is a marketing gimmick

Actually, no, programmable money is an important part of Bitcoin. What do you think scripts are for?

[sed]

What I am reading from this offer is that you pay 3 MPcoin for every Gavincoin bought from MP. Not impressive.

I asked, and you are correct. My bad.

Good. Hopefully he will make a new public offer in the range of 750 current BTC in exchange for something like 3000 future gavincoins (1 mpcoin == 3 gavincoins).

With a fixed refund date where he gives back the 750 BTC + a small interest if the fork does not happen.

I don't know if I understood the entire subtext to this one, but if I did it's pretty funny.  So, that is to say, I think this is a joke and not serious right?

[iCEBREAKER]

I don't really care for this point about Tor myself, but from what I understand it's not that *users* should be able to hide behind Tor, what is being argued is that *miners* should be able to do so. And the argument is that it becomes much more difficult with a bigger block size.

Both users and miners must be able to access BTC via darknets and/or shitty 3rd world DSL/ISDN. 

BTC isn't super-gold if we can't secure or use it through hardened and/or foreign channels, and it's at the mercy of traffic-shaping packet-sniffing JBT.gov-beholden Equation-Group-accommodating ISPs.  Especially when the MegaUpload/PirateBay-style crackdowns begin!

BTC's darknet presence keeps its clearnet counterpart honest.  Without a darknet presence to serve as a last ditch and sanity check, all kinds of FUD emerge w/r/t how BTC will react upon being confined to clearnet.

Even if the connection is fast enough for >>20MB blocks, many ISPs banhammer users for running a server at home.  Some of them monitor activity to seek and destroy node-like usage. 

And just wait until ISPs become liable for allowing customers to run 'money-laundering' servers at home.  "ZOMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN!" says President Hillary...

Whatever the intent of GavinCoin, its effects are insidious and pernicious.  Bitcoin with no darknet option/refuge/sanctuary is no Bitcoin at all.

[iCEBREAKER]

the switch from "0% of block advertising gigablocks" to "95% of block advertising gigablocks (*)" will not happen overnight.

It will take months, if not years. The discussion will continue, and each and every one of the (very few) miners that are actually mining (not "hashing") will make the conscious choice to accept the gigablocks or to not accept them.

Once 95% of them say "we're OK with gigablocks", then the situation is settled. The fork happens, and the MPcoin with its stratospheric difficulty and ridiculous hashrate has no other choice than to hard fork itself to reduce the difficulty, but then it risks being raided by malicious miners, who will have fun double spending on it, rewriting the full history starting from the fork as many times as they want, and other funny stuff.

(*) : I don't know why Gavin's proposal is to fork at 80% of hashing power, when the other hard forks happened or will happen at 95%. I think it's a mistake since with 20% of the hashrate, MPcoin could have a serious chance to survive for some time, when with 5% it will surely die within days, if not hours, after the fork.

You don't know what will or won't "happen overnight."  Especially when all hell breaks out as the Great Schism erupts into a hot Bitcoin Civil War.

MP & Co have tremendous financial (and personal) incentives to force the GigaBlock issue sooner than later, or at another time of their choosing.

They have the resources and expertise to fake and/or otherwise hasten the mere appearance of sufficient acceptance, in order to lure the Gavincoiners into MP's deathtrap.  Multiple wisenheimers will compete for the privilege of paying the ~20BTC in fees to create the first GavinTainted BloatBlock as soon as it's possible.   And then the games begin...as we let slip the dogs of war. 

Luckily, we don't even need an expensive PITA MPEX account to profit from the chaotic fun.

Someone will set up a Gavincoin Exploitation Fund pass-through, where all you have to do is send BTC to its address, with your payout wallet in the comment field....   

[iCEBREAKER]

(*) : I don't know why Gavin's proposal is to fork at 80% of hashing power, when the other hard forks happened or will happen at 95%. I think it's a mistake since with 20% of the hashrate, MPcoin could have a serious chance to survive for some time, when with 5% it will surely die within days, if not hours, after the fork.

i think its just what he does, throwing random numbers knowing that 95% is less likely considering decentralization.

Gavin is an excellent random number generator.  He puts Geiger counter entropy to shame.   

[R2D221]

You don't know what will or won't "happen overnight."  Especially when all hell breaks out as the Great Schism erupts into a hot Bitcoin Civil War.

You guys keep seeing a war (now it has a name: The Bitcoin Civil War) where there is none.

MP & Co have tremendous financial (and personal) incentives to force the GigaBlock issue sooner than later, or at another time of their choosing.

They have the resources and expertise to fake and/or otherwise hasten the mere appearance of sufficient acceptance, in order to lure the Gavincoiners into MP's deathtrap.  Multiple wisenheimers will compete for the privilege of paying the ~20BTC in fees to create the first GavinTainted BloatBlock as soon as it's possible.   And then the games begin...as we let slip the dogs of war.

Wait, what? Why would the opponents of the 20MB fork help them create them in the first place? I fail to see any kind of logic here.

Luckily, we don't even need an expensive PITA MPEX account to profit from the chaotic fun.

Someone will set up a Gavincoin Exploitation Fund pass-through, where all you have to do is send BTC to its address, with your payout wallet in the comment field....

Your conspiracy theory is so convoluted I can't manage to understand how this will bring any benefit to anyone at all. Unless, of course, they were doing it for teh lulz.

[yampi]

20MB? why not 1 gig blocks?

We could even have masternodes that charge fee to store blocks that have transactions associated with your bitcoin addresses.
It's horrible enough that you have to store blocks with spent outputs even though we have checkpoints, now the average user will have gigabytes of blocks to download and serve?

[iCEBREAKER]

Why would the opponents of the 20MB fork help them create them in the first place? I fail to see any kind of logic here.

Because (as we already extensively explained and discussed) MP & Co stand to make a fortune by facilitating and exploiting GavinCoin's failure.

The world is not bound by the paltry and facile limits to what kinds of logic you don't fail to see:

"Cloward and Piven called for overloading the system in order to precipitate a crisis"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward%E2%80%93Piven_strategy

"Worse is better." -Vladimir Ilitch Ulyanov

[tvbcof]

Why would the opponents of the 20MB fork help them create them in the first place? I fail to see any kind of logic here.

Because (as we already extensively explained and discussed) MP & Co stand to make a fortune by facilitating and exploiting GavinCoin's failure.

The world is not bound by the paltry and facile limits to what kinds of logic you don't fail to see:

"Cloward and Piven that called for overloading the system in order to precipitate a crisis"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward%E2%80%93Piven_strategy

"Worse is better." -Vladimir Ilitch Ulyanov

I hate to get off-topic and we should probably take it to 'politics&society', but it seems like a related 'outright redistribution of income' strategy would be to have a large segment of the population on SNAP then just jack up food prices for everyone.  The SNAP folks will come out a wash on the back of extra money paid by the rest.  That seems to be already occurring here in the U.S.  Whether we went through a Cloward & Piven phase or a modified one to get here is subject to question.  What's not in question is that JPM/Chase is making bank running it.

As a feeble stab at being a little bit on topic, it is worth note that said large banking institutions have a much bigger footprint in society with their control of money flows than the MPII has with their potential minor losses on their 'intellectual property' exploitation, and we've seen the kind of pressure they can bring to bear on the free exchange of data between individuals in cyber-space.  It's pretty pie-in-the-sky to believe that JPM, GS, etc would not have Bitcoin in sight out of the corner of their eye and the ability to bring a world of pain if/when they feel inclined to do so.

Back off-topic and back on the Cloward & Piven thing, how to 'jack up food prices' in a 'free market'?  Even if one has leverage over the majors as the corporations they are (e.g., Archer Daniels, Midland) it's not all that easy.  Hobby farms would become actually viable as prices increase and take a chunk out of the best layed plans.  I hypothesis that this is one of the driving forces behind the significant push to re-define and control 'waters of the U.S.', 'wetlands', etc.  Sure, some small number of people will be able to run hobby farms, but they'll pay the state dearly for the privilege and their prices will be adjusted accordingly.

Of course the same game played with food could work equally well with energy, utilities, etc.  My water bill for my house in town has taken a giant upswing in recent years and I see various 'assistance' programs for the less well off to offset this misfortune.

Back on-topic a bit, never underestimate the devious mind of a Socialist (spoken as a former quasi-socialist myself.)  Even one who just wants to provide everyone their 'entitlement' to use Bitcoin just like rich folks do.

[cbeast]

I am 100% for users to obfuscate. I am 100% against miners using it. Having said that TOR mining wouldn't be desirable for commercial mining anyway. Centralized open competitive mining is optimum for consumer protection and global participation.

It provokes the honest question of: How exposed would you want mining to be? 

Should they all register with their local military authority? 
Or put another way: Is it necessarily a "business" and subject to MTL?

I don't care if miners obfuscate, I just think they won't. When mining becomes institutionalized and owned by VISA/Master Card they will want to brand their mining service with low fees and zero confirmation guarantee. It also behooves miners to be open to prove they are not double-spending.

[danielpbarron]

What I am reading from this offer is that you pay 3 MPcoin for every Gavincoin bought from MP. Not impressive.

I asked, and you are correct. My bad.

Good. Hopefully he will make a new public offer in the range of 750 current BTC in exchange for something like 3000 future gavincoins (1 mpcoin == 3 gavincoins).

With a fixed refund date where he gives back the 750 BTC + a small interest if the fork does not happen.

I don't know if I understood the entire subtext to this one, but if I did it's pretty funny.  So, that is to say, I think this is a joke and not serious right?

Why ? If there is a market between MPcoins and Gavincoins then somebody has to propose a price, that the others are free to accept or not.
The first offer from MP was an obvious mistake, because he valued his own coins below Gavin's one. If he is serious in his commitment, then he will offer more than 1 gavincoin for 1 mpcoin. This starts at 1501 future gavincoins for 750 current bitcoins.

No, the mistake was on my part. His offer is 750 bitcoin today for 1`000 USGavincoin in the future, which is essentially the same as trading 750 post-fork bitcoin for 250 USGavincoin. I might be willing to offer you a better deal, but I will not agree to "refund" in the case that the fork doesn't happen. That's the whole point of making this kind of agreement. I'd be betting that the fork is not successful, whether by being crushed on the market or by not ever happening. If you're really interested in buying some discounted coins, you had better get in the WoT.

[NewLiberty]

Even if money (BTC, etc.) is stolen at gunpoint?  Blacklisting stolen money is a marvelous idea.

Oh GTFO you UnSavoryGarnish.

"I know it looks like I sent money into that exchange, but I was actually held at gun point so please reverse it!"

Let's start using social security numbers as our addresses while we're at it. So stupid.

If a thief is caught and still has the money then should they be forced to give it back?  If the thief gave it to their brother who still has it then should the brother be forced to give it back?  If the thief "bought" lunch from their brother-in-law who happens to own a restaurant then should the brother-in-law be forced to give it back?  When is the stolen money no longer rightfully the original owner's?

Bitcoin supports voluntary clawback agreements through atomic swaps and multi-sig.  Those that seek to have this sort of "consumer protection" can also do so with their favorite escrow agent as a different option.  

It is not the default transaction type to have every transaction facilitate clawback through each and every jurisdictional authority that might claim it, it is voluntary by the transacting parties, and supported within the protocol.

To make clawback provisions mandatory for all transactions, and include arbitrary jurisdictional counterparties in all transactions would be not be a better money.  However if you are using bitcoin in complex legal arrangements, it may be useful to do so.

This is not related to the topic other than that these multiple atomic transactions take up more block space.

[cbeast]

No, the mistake was on my part. His offer is 750 bitcoin today for 1`000 USGavincoin in the future, which is essentially the same as trading 750 post-fork bitcoin for 250 USGavincoin. I might be willing to offer you a better deal, but I will not agree to "refund" in the case that the fork doesn't happen. That's the whole point of making this kind of agreement. I'd be betting that the fork is not successful, whether by being crushed on the market or by not ever happening. If you're really interested in buying some discounted coins, you had better get in the WoT.

Pitchman!

[danielpbarron]

No, the mistake was on my part. His offer is 750 bitcoin today for 1`000 USGavincoin in the future, which is essentially the same as trading 750 post-fork bitcoin for 250 USGavincoin. I might be willing to offer you a better deal, but I will not agree to "refund" in the case that the fork doesn't happen. That's the whole point of making this kind of agreement. I'd be betting that the fork is not successful, whether by being crushed on the market or by not ever happening. If you're really interested in buying some discounted coins, you had better get in the WoT.

Pitchman!

Are you trying to be funny? I'm "pitching" the very thing you claim to support.

I have not seen an argument against a larger block limit that uses facts. Your market forces will just have to deal with larger blocks.