Topic: Aug 1 summary - page 3. (Read 96452 times)

Why? Plenty of people have done it.

Not really, no. Just move your BTC to a new address. Import the old private key into a BCH wallet, and done. Nothing can really go wrong unless your system is compromised already (whilst moving BTC).

Still kind of nervous about redeeming my BCH but I really want to as it's kind of a lot of money that I could do with. Obviously I've read theymos' instructions on page 1. Without reading through all the other pages, has anything changed or is there a better method to claim my BCH. I'm strongly thinking about claiming my BCH this week.

You can upload images, GIFs & Flash files... when you're here long enough.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=help;page=post

You can't

How about how to upload a video in this forum???

Dead Cat Bounce 2.0

I'm going to state that it's mostly Bitcoiners (or general crypto holders) who have a generally low education/knowledge regarding the technology and Bitcoin itself that are happy that this happened. Not everything is about money, and Bcash has definitely had a negative impact on the image of Bitcoin. They have demonstrated another type of attack on Bitcoin which we have not really seen in the past.

Large number of educated holders*; otherwise the number is rather small. Most of the traders have limited knowledge, as said above, and mostly care about profit. Replay attacks, wipeout protection are equivalent to the Night King from GoT for them.

Even if, as a bitcoin holder, you are able to profit anywhere between 6% and 20% by cashing out your Bcash, that does not mean that you are glad bcash happened.

Bcash is what it is, and sure, we take some profits, and cannot put the genie back in the bottle, but that does not mean that bcash was a good thing for bitcoin or that bitcoin holders are glad that it happened.

On the contrary, it seems that a large number of bitcoin holders are glad to profit from the bcash, but they are not really that excited about bcash because it seems to be an ongoing attack on bitcoin rather than truly something that was a genuine play or needed.  However, now that bcash is there, you would think that it would be a decent vehicle for bigblockers to develop their ideas and their coin philosophies, which they are not satisfied but instead want to just keep attempting to attack bitcoin with further unnecessary forks.  So, yeah it is a bunch of bullshit - but there seem to have been ways to attempt to profit off of the bullshit, if you are a bitcoin holder... and likely will be additional ways in the future.. because likely bitcoin is going to be the winner in these various scattered ass attack plays that are likely to attempt to get stronger in the future.

 The major holder of bitcoin im sure they are glad now bitcoin cash came along if they werent before. Great gain of profit for a airdrop

I intentionally avoided continuing our mini discussion due to this.

This is why new people are always welcome and they help in educating them on the development process and Bitcoin in general. The more of them there are, the better.

Bitmain, Ver and Bitpay are essentially the cancer of Bitcoin. They stand for things that are completely the opposite of what Bitcoin was built for.

If we can't resist Bitmain, then we've essentially failed.

Initially I've read that as 15 000 GPUs.

Bitmain has shown that $$$ is all that matters to them.  They  will push at BTC  over and over again  to them any coin will do as long as they are making $$$.

IN a way I see part of their philosophy but it is a very dangerous  game to play. Hopefully BTC will hang in there.

But to see BTC difficulty last jump go down 28% in the first few days they raise back to + 3%  was very disturbing.   

To see hash rate drop from 6600p  to 4100p for BTC  and for BCC to jump from 500p to 3700p  was very disturbing .

To see how bitmain has lifted LTC back to a good coin  vs a shit coin is very disturbing.

They simply have a lot of power and are the biggest danger to asic coins on the planet.

I now have 15,000 worth of gpus in non asic coins simply because bitmain has so much asic muscle.

Seems like we are getting far off topic, but these are still interesting points related to the august 1 forkening.

Like I indicated, when I listen to Greg, I experience a certain level of confidence of integrity and principles and his ability to identify nonsense, and that he is not bought out.. and it seems that there are several leaders in core of similar ilk - however, what happens if several of those leaders have health issues or something, then are there folks to take over that are not going to be compromised..... I am saying this because Greg says, "we" this and "we" that and he knows about a lot of the significant and important decisions that are being made.. so is there some vulnerabilities in his level of knowledge in the event that he and some other bitcoin core leaders can no longer participate or contribute that some how bitcoin could become more vulnerable to some of the possible nutjob randsom attempts?

The video was *relatively* simple with a few parts being excluded from this statement. Now go ahead and compare the BCH code (which was c/p Bitcoin Core - Segwit and some small changes). How many improvements have they made, Bitcoin Unlimited or Bitcoin Classic between the release of Bitcoin Core 0.14.0 and 0.15.0?

Correct, or put differently/simply "time till you synchronize".

If Bitcoin can not resist the attacks of these little paws, mostly fueled by a small amount of their own wealth and their ego, then Bitcoin and the idea behind it has failed. Attacks from larger entities are yet to come (excluding these covert users who have infiltrated both sides of the community).

Correct. You do not build digital gold by rushing for any change that *might* be beneficial to the price. Code/improvement wise Bitcoin resembles a technocracy and that's how it should be (although the whole consensus/governance model is much more complex / I am not referring to it as a whole). You don't let random people decide security measures when building a boat or ship, do you? There are a lot of things in the work, but they take time to build especially when you have an unprecedented code-review/quality in this industry as in Bitcoin Core.

Thanks for the video link, Lauda.  I did watch it, and G.Maxwell certainly inspires a certain level of confidence and very informative, even though some of his technical nerdiness - hahahaha- goes over my head a bit.

Regarding the term IBD.. You are referring to initial block download, or something else?

I agree with you that there are various attack vectors in bitcoin, including Ver, Bitmain, craig wright and some of the various followings of these folks - but I suppose to some extent they are causing some work upon bitcoin and bitcoin core contributors that might well make bitcoin stronger and much more difficult to attack by some entity that may have better funding.. I am not sure.

As Greg pointed out towards the end of his presentation, he said that he is very happy about bitcoin's price and we do not necessarily want to rush price performance over strength of security and bitcoin fundamentals, so that is frequently what causes me further confidence with bitcoin core and that they do not seem inclined to give into terrorists, they work on some contingency plans, they seem not to get too excited about price, even though they recognize the value of price appreciation.  Surely, the BTC price is going to follow such a measured and secure approach, even if price does not seem to be principle focus points of core... and surely they may even be o.k with a certain level of price suppression that allows for additional developments of bitcoin before BIGGER attacks can take place.

If we see a similar situation like we've seen in mid July, the fork will be used to manipulate the market and make it tank again (remember the low of $18xx) before spiking up again. If this plays out almost the same way, it is very clear that these people are playing the market and should be prosecuted.

If you have already forgotten, earlier this year exchanges have signed a document stating that they can't support a hard fork like this that does not have replay protection which SegWit2x does not. Meanwhile, look at what the Core developers have been doing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSRoEeqYtJA. Please watch the whole video. They are constantly fighting in order to keep reducing the IBD time, among other improvements (e.g. coming Signature aggregation, encrypted BTC network traffic, et. al.). Now when you factor that in, just think just how much Roger Ver is malevolent. He is the cancer of Bitcoin (along with BITMAIN).

Sure, a lot of holders of bitcoin ended up advantaging financially from BCH - yet I doubt that it was really good or necessary, and there are some folks who are not technically sophisticated enough to figure out how to cash out their BCH or will they be advantaged when Coinbase finally releases coins to them in January 2018?

The BCH split is what it is and end up with some people profiting, but I still would not characterize it as a good thing for bitcoin as a whole... even though it may prepare core for some of these kinds of attacks and it may prepare some of the bitcoin community, too, in order to identify these attacks for what they are.. perhaps?

Thanks Lauda.  This second response from you makes me feel a little more confident that we are not entering into a doom and gloom scenario (as I felt from your first response).

Seems like the nutjob BIG blockers will employ their attempt at a segwit2x take-over fork (unless they snap into their senses, which does not seem too likely at the moment) and then the large majority of the bitcoin community will likely just ignore them and then the more technically advanced of the folks will figure out way to cash out their $100 segwit2x coins - even if it takes 50 confirmations, rather than 12... and then we (the real bitcoin) prepare for the next hardfork or whatever other desperate attempts at nonsense bitcoin network attacks the nutjobs decide to propagate.

Yeah, I honestly expected a lot more to happen.

Anyway, the BCH split ended up being advantageous.

What they should be doing is something which greatly differs from what they are doing. However, you can't know what the motivations of the entities who sponsor them are. Garzik, Bitmain and Ver are mere pawns at best.

You can safely transact on the Bitcoin Network, it is just likely that your Segwitx2 coins could be replayed (thus you'd lose access to them). Maybe their opt-in replay protection works well enough to prevent this from happening, at least for the experienced user base.

One or multiple of the following is the sign of an attack disguised as a hard fork ("upgrade"): 1) No community consensus / community ignored. 2) No replay protection. 3) No wipeout protection. 4) Same address prefixes as Bitcoin.

I do understand the concept that the attackers keep doubling down because they want to keep attempting to get their way (like you said to become bitcoin), but of course they should not want to kill the golden goose - even though that may be the goal of some of the persons (entities) financing them and lending them rhetorical points.

Hopefully these matters are going to become more clear in the coming months, but I would not put it past these nutjobs to attempt to employ their plan earlier than previously anticipated in order to attempt to catch others in a less prepared state, and maybe I dont understand well enough because I am not sure about the prevention plan - except maybe the whole bitcoin network and transactions don't go through until their is some clarity that they are not going to be replayed?

I still don't feel like I understand, but maybe some of these matters will become more clear, because the no replay protection of segwit2x ... does seem to be a more frequent talking point in recent weeks... and maybe somewhere down the line dynamic (threat) is going to better sink in for my thinking.