Pages:
Author

Topic: A consensus network, or how to stop a big lose (fork it!) - page 2. (Read 4566 times)

hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 500
So what you lot going to call this new fork? Obviously you can't call it Bitcoin, as Bitcoin's transactions are irreversible, which is why we trust it, hence giving it value.
You are wrong. Transactions are reversible but it's "computationally impractical" to do so, though in some extreme situations the network agrees that it's better for the majority to reverse/fork the blockchain. As we already discussed in this thread last year a technical problem within old clients "splitted" the network in two, the longest chain was abandoned by the consensus of the miners in order to join the network and give time to people to update their clients. IIRC the Bitcoin Foundation retributed bitcoins for those who lost money.

So we are using a hard-fork of the blockchain, did we changed the name of Bitcoin? nop.

If we already hard-forked the blockchain for technical (and in many ways economical) reasons, why we shouldn't consider to fork when some potential catastrophic situation could destroy our economy?

btw I am amazed that some people here thinks that a currency could work with one bad actor owning 40% of the market cap.

I tend to agree with you. It's impractical of course, and it won't happen. The principle is sound enough, though. But as far as I understand it, Gox swiped the coins over a couple of years. Maybe it siphoned coins every few weeks or so. It wouldn't surprise me if there were also others behind it (Karpeles as one of a group, perhaps coerced even).

It amazes me that people still place such moral value in BTC actually. It's hardly how I view a free market, more a "war of all against all". Ever since it hit $30 it has been insane, with the few controlling the masses, who in turn are terrified that the masses are cleverer than them and are able to turn the tables.

I wonder how many of the so-called Whales got burnt in the last pump. I am guessing the hierarchy changed somewhat even before the Gox fiasco.

But anyway, let's move on, it's probably the government's fault at the end of the day. That Obama guy, plus bankers and financiers, masterminded the whole thing. You see they're scared of bitcoin ..... lol


legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000
how is 850k of 12+million of existing coins is a 40% "market cap"? it looks to me less than 10% and less than 5% of all 21 million coins

as i said earlier back on first page of this thread if we do this rollback by forking, lets also roll back all other stolen, missing and lost coins although even from simple, pure logic perspective that task is impossible, technically doable but realistically no way in hell.   
please provide one single reason why mtgox missing funds are worth of blockchain forking over any other hack, theft, loss, etc? there are some large instances of btc's disappearing in bad faith in the past, not as big as 850k but nonetheless pretty substantial, so why 850k deserves a fork in your view and others do not?

IF by some weird strange accident we end up with a fork over this issue here's the outcome that will happen: fork #1: genuine authentic Bitcoin blockchain; fork #2: all those missing 850k mtgox coins.

btw we don't know anything about missing 850k, i'm not sure how you came to conclusion it is a single bad actor as being an already known fact.   besides, by your logic, if this bad actor comes to exchanges - it will be pretty easy for law enforcement to track him/her up and lock up while freezing these funds at entered exchanges.
sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 261
­バカ
So what you lot going to call this new fork? Obviously you can't call it Bitcoin, as Bitcoin's transactions are irreversible, which is why we trust it, hence giving it value.
You are wrong. Transactions are reversible but it's "computationally impractical" to do so, though in some extreme situations the network agrees that it's better for the majority to reverse/fork the blockchain. As we already discussed in this thread last year a technical problem within old clients "splitted" the network in two, the longest chain was abandoned by the consensus of the miners in order to join the network and give time to people to update their clients. IIRC the Bitcoin Foundation retributed bitcoins for those who lost money.

So we are using a hard-fork of the blockchain, did we changed the name of Bitcoin? nop.

If we already hard-forked the blockchain for technical (and in many ways economical) reasons, why we shouldn't consider to fork when some potential catastrophic situation could destroy our economy?

btw I am amazed that some people here thinks that a currency could work with one bad actor owning 40% of the market cap.
legendary
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1111
So what you lot going to call this new fork? Obviously you can't call it Bitcoin, as Bitcoin's transactions are irreversible, which is why we trust it, hence giving it value.

Call it goxcoin or bailout coin, and will be traded on bitcoinbuilder.com
legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 1137
All paid signature campaigns should be banned.
So what you lot going to call this new fork? Obviously you can't call it Bitcoin, as Bitcoin's transactions are irreversible, which is why we trust it, hence giving it value.
RollbackCoin, GoxCoin, BailoutCoin, ForkingCoin (because once you do this once you will do it again and again) all come to mind.
legendary
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1111
I don't understand your point. Obviously when I said "demand" I was referring to the bids in the order books.
If the bad actor sells only 10% of its loot in BitStamp the price would go to $1.

The point is that you are wrong and the price would not go to $1.  Not even close.  

First, there are a lot of orders, a lot of large orders, that are not listed in the public order books that you are using.

Second, many people have large sums of USD and other currencies at the exchanges that are not currently committed to orders, it is just sitting there not in the order book.  I personally, and many others, have a large stash of cash at the exchanges just waiting for a meltdown.  In the case of a meltdown we jump in and buy from all the panic sellers.

You cannot use the order book to make any realistic assumptions about where the price would go in a large sell off so please stop trying.

And even the price is going to $1, this is not a reason to fork.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
So what you lot going to call this new fork? Obviously you can't call it Bitcoin, as Bitcoin's transactions are irreversible, which is why we trust it, hence giving it value.
legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 1137
All paid signature campaigns should be banned.
I don't understand your point. Obviously when I said "demand" I was referring to the bids in the order books.
If the bad actor sells only 10% of its loot in BitStamp the price would go to $1.

The point is that you are wrong and the price would not go to $1.  Not even close.  

First, there are a lot of orders, a lot of large orders, that are not listed in the public order books that you are using.

Second, many people have large sums of USD and other currencies at the exchanges that are not currently committed to orders, it is just sitting there not in the order book.  I personally, and many others, have a large stash of cash at the exchanges just waiting for a meltdown.  In the case of a meltdown we jump in and buy from all the panic sellers.

You cannot use the order book to make any realistic assumptions about where the price would go in a large sell off so please stop trying.
legendary
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1111
I just wish these folks who start all these "let's fork the blockchain because ______" threads would stop talking about forking for their favorite reason du jour and just get off their ass and do it.

I for one can't wait to cash in all the alt coins created for me and buy real Bitcoins with the proceeds.

I have a suspicion that the reason that it is always just a bunch of hot air and no on every actually does it is because all these "fork the chain" folks know that their alt forks are doomed out of the gate and it would be a total waste of their time to even try it.


Yes, those who want to fork please do it yourself, and convince miners, investors, and merchants to accept your bailout coin.
legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 1137
All paid signature campaigns should be banned.
I just wish these folks who start all these "let's fork the blockchain because ______" threads would stop talking about forking for their favorite reason du jour and just get off their ass and do it.

I for one can't wait to cash in all the alt coins created for me and buy real Bitcoins with the proceeds.

I have a suspicion that the reason that it is always just a bunch of hot air and no on every actually does it is because all these "fork the chain" folks know that their alt forks are doomed out of the gate and it would be a total waste of their time to even try it.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 500
One Token to Move Anything Anywhere
All things considered I don't know whether or not this situation should warrant a fork - I'm inclined to hope that the idea would at least be discussed seriously by the community and devs although having been Goxxed I must be somewhat biased - but surely the possibility should not be excluded on principle.

On the contrary, given consensus it should in principle always be an option - to nullify huge fraud, criminal manipulation or catastrophic loss on behalf of the majority of actors in the ecosystem.

I can't see why this is seen as a dangerous precedent. Most of the people saying this are also probably happy to say that Bitcoin sets a dangerous precedent to the current financial hierarchy. It's all about setting groundbreaking precedents.
sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 261
­バカ

The problem is that 850k is more than the whole demand of bitcoins in all the exchanges combined. Actually I think it's almost three times the current demand. We don't know the intentions of this bad actor, the only thing we know (in our universe of discourse...) is the amount stolen. The bad actor could manipulate the market for years, for example one could mix those coins and sell otc just small fractions (best case scenario), or send everything to one single address, write some scary message (like "in one hour I will drop 100k in BitStamp") and sign it, get profit from shorts, or talk with some external entity who hates Bitcoin and make some real deals with them. If I were a big bad bank I would try to find the hacker right now, create an alt-coin, destroy bitcoin's economy with occasional drops, let people speculate about future drops.


it looks like either you're full of fear yourself or trying to spread fear in 'masses'.

you have no idea what the real true demand is at any price point below current, you only see demand that is on display on order books. at the very worst or best, depending how one looks at it, 850k btc priced at $0.01 for instance costing $8500 would be snapped in an instant.

that's your worst case scenario which btw has close to 0 chances to play out in reality

I don't understand your point. Obviously when I said "demand" I was referring to the bids in the order books.
If the bad actor sells only 10% of its loot in BitStamp the price would go to $1. Could people start buying coins like crazy? of course yes, but would they do such thing when someone with obvious bad intentions is dropping massive amount of coins? I don't know.

The reality (in our universe of discourse) is that now there is a single entity with a lot of power over the economy. I am not trying to spread FUD, I am just trying to analyze this hypothetical situation.

What I now understand is that Bitcoin can be perfect, but our ecosystem is far away from being perfect. We took an amazing distributed technology and we are basing its economy on centralized services (exchanges, virtual wallets, mining pools). While some of you may think "fuck Mt.Gox, I have never used them, this doesn't affect me" the reality is that we are all tied together.
legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 1137
All paid signature campaigns should be banned.
In the light of possible collapse of value of Bitcoin, what do you people think it will happen to strongest alt-coins out there: LTC, PPC... Would they suffer the same fate, or they will shoot up so hard?
It is simple.  If you believe this buy them.  If you are right you profit.  If you are wrong then not so much.  What does the opinion of random people have to do with it?  Make your own decision and go with it.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
In the light of possible collapse of value of Bitcoin,

Why would that happen? Has network security been broken or something? Are transactions not being processed?
legendary
Activity: 888
Merit: 1000
Monero - secure, private and untraceable currency.
In the light of possible collapse of value of Bitcoin, what do you people think it will happen to strongest alt-coins out there: LTC, PPC... Would they suffer the same fate, or they will shoot up so hard?
legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000

The problem is that 850k is more than the whole demand of bitcoins in all the exchanges combined. Actually I think it's almost three times the current demand. We don't know the intentions of this bad actor, the only thing we know (in our universe of discourse...) is the amount stolen. The bad actor could manipulate the market for years, for example one could mix those coins and sell otc just small fractions (best case scenario), or send everything to one single address, write some scary message (like "in one hour I will drop 100k in BitStamp") and sign it, get profit from shorts, or talk with some external entity who hates Bitcoin and make some real deals with them. If I were a big bad bank I would try to find the hacker right now, create an alt-coin, destroy bitcoin's economy with occasional drops, let people speculate about future drops.


it looks like either you're full of fear yourself or trying to spread fear in 'masses'.

you have no idea what the real true demand is at any price point below current, you only see demand that is on display on order books. at the very worst or best, depending how one looks at it, 850k btc priced at $0.01 for instance costing $8500 would be snapped in an instant.

that's your worst case scenario which btw has close to 0 chances to play out in reality
sr. member
Activity: 332
Merit: 253
if they lost their BTC 3 weeks ago they sold me BTC they didnt have 1.5 weeks ago

This may end up being the issue in bankruptcy court. These transactions after the point where they didn't have the coins they claimed they were selling may all be declared invalid, before any payouts are made.
hero member
Activity: 761
Merit: 500
Mine Silent, Mine Deep
Bitcoin has value specifically because things like bailouts are not possible.

OTOH it is important that the majority of coins do not end up in the hands of a small group of malicious actors. For most people securing their Bitcoins is hard and opportunists/scammers/hackers have exploited this fact. The sooner we can make Bitcoin safe and secure for mainstream users the better.
sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 261
­バカ
But forget about "my fix", just tell me please why anyone would use a currency when the current price is totally controlled by a thief?

Well that is an unproven assumption.  MtGox has provided no clarity.  We have no idea how many coins were stolen.  MtGox has never explicitly articulated how many coins were stolen, by how many people and over how long of a time period.

As for "controlling" the exchange rate.  So they dump it, ok now they don't have the coins anymore and the exchange rate will recover.   Bitcoin rewards the "smart" thing to do.  If an attacker had 800K BTC they could sell it off slowly and be rich for the rest of their lives, or they could dump it all, very likely never be able to cash it out due to AML/KYC type requirements, and cause a short term drop in the exchange rate.  Are you always afraid of every shadow?  There is no evidence that a single attacker has all the coins, and if they do there is no evidence they would be downright idoitic with them.  

I mean do you really believe that Bitcoin can be completely annihilated by a single entity acquiring 800,000 BTC and selling them?  If so why are you here?  You do know that at current exchange rates buying that many coins would be trivial for a well financed bad actor.  It would be a tiny fraction of the cost of a 51% attack and your claim is that short of a network killing fork there is nothing that can stop them from destroying Bitcoin by just clicking the sell button.

Some of us believe Bitcoin will do just fine, and the biggest risk is implementing some dubious "fixes" based on little more than "we have to do something".
In my first post I gave the source in which I based my thesis (Mt.Gox lawyer explicitly said that someone stole 850k from them).
I thought this was not necessary but I just want to make it clear that I don't know if what Mt.Gox is saying is true, in fact Mt.Gox PR have a long history of bs so I don't trust them. I only created an hypothesis based on what they claim.

The problem is that 850k is more than the whole demand of bitcoins in all the exchanges combined. Actually I think it's almost three times the current demand. We don't know the intentions of this bad actor, the only thing we know (in our universe of discourse...) is the amount stolen. The bad actor could manipulate the market for years, for example one could mix those coins and sell otc just small fractions (best case scenario), or send everything to one single address, write some scary message (like "in one hour I will drop 100k in BitStamp") and sign it, get profit from shorts, or talk with some external entity who hates Bitcoin and make some real deals with them. If I were a big bad bank I would try to find the hacker right now, create an alt-coin, destroy bitcoin's economy with occasional drops, let people speculate about future drops.

I already said that I am not 100% serious with this thread because three weeks is too much.

Then why make the thread to begin with?  Don't bother I won't be able to see it.  Life it too short.
you should try to relax asap, otherwise your life is gonna be shorter....
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
I already said that I am not 100% serious with this thread because three weeks is too much.

Then why make the thread to begin with?  Don't bother I won't be able to see it.  Life it too short.
Pages:
Jump to: