Topic: "Bitcoin is Dead" - Mike Hearn - page 18. (Read 17638 times)

So is Bitcoin dead? It is not dead. Objectively, the Bitcoin markets are still alive and well, and the Blockchain, the digital platform on which the currency relies, is still operational. As Elizabeth Stark points out on Twitter, people love to declare that Bitcoin is dead. According to this running tally, Bitcoin has been declared dead 88 times. (Hern's post would be the 89th instance of someone falsely claiming the currency was dead.) People have been declaring Bitcoin dead since 2010, and it's been declared dead twice already in 2016.

Rightly so, I think the insiders know much much more about it rather than us.
We can just guess things and say no bitcoin still has huge potential, but the insiders always know the actual condition and technical views.

At the very least the 'core devs' have to step up and put on a timeline WHEN they plan to do a hard fork now to at least 2mb imho....

they may think they have a more 'elegant solution' with soft forks and such ..but the masses are restless....so they have to do that

and also show some more 'movement' on where they want to go coding wise in the future......

the catch is a frigging 'timeline' to hard fork to 2mb say 3 months ago on top of the talk of their other innovations ..if core devs would have done

that ..then hell ..imho the 'confidence' of that planing would way offset any problems with a 'hard fork' to 2mb blocks

I suppose if the FUD continues and price dumps to 150 usd btc (shudder I need 230 or above to break even) ..then all the above will get done

I mean they got to be a bit more frigging 'pro active' and 'consensus building' less our way or the highway

I suppose the example of the 'bitcoin foundation' should temper my expectations


I do sometimes wonder if these folk that are core devs or other bitcoin devs ..being 'early adopters' in their unconscious minds really think that 450 is as high as
the price can go..I mean mining at 12c a coin back in the day..they may have frigging lost touch with the new reality of 2015?
.would explain a lot about there 'it will get done when it gets done' and such actions it seems to me..


anyway right or wrong from a coder point of view (i don't code) the masses have spoken....eventually core devs need to fess up to doing a hard fork to 2 MB
and a timeline or triggers for more in the future......with 20% say of FUD with the other alternative chains for BTC ....it is just enough to rock the boat
...that is if they want their 'core vision' to prevail......just suck it up already....go with the flow

anyway how it seems to me (and others) from digging thru the FUD

We need Classic. The Core developers are fucking around.

bitcoin classic is about as useful as a bag of dirt 

Bitcoin is revolutionary I doubt I would die after a little dump or some ignorant person leaves the bitcoin community.The fact is there is still thousands of people still using bitcoins.

One thing has nothing to do with the other.

I assume you mean if Bitcoin Classic is accepted widely and miners don't splinter.  In which case, (barring a catastrophic bug, which is very unlikely) Bitcoin would be just as robust as it is now.

R3 sounds like it has impressive resources but as far as I can gather its purpose is to bring distributed ledgers to the financial world, not to create a true peer to peer currency like Bitcoin.  In other words, its just a fancy way to move fiat around.
 

I agree.  May I ask you another question: If Bitcoin Classic is accepted, will it be robust enough to be able to compete with what the R3 blockchain group will put out?  I mean, the R3 group scabbed Hearn (among others), invested 9 billion USD in research alone (Bitcoins present marketcap is only 5.8 billion USD), and serves a huge US banking system with a platform and customer base already in place.  Surely, whatever the R3 group comes up with, it will be a totally different critter than Bitcoin, but what impact will it have on the adoption of Bitcoin Classic and the Bitcoin community in general?

I'm thinking Bitcoin Classic. 

Just look at who's backing it:  Gavin, Garzik, Coinbase, Bitstamp, and a ton of others.
Their purpose is clear: an immediate increase to 2MB.  We need to fork away
from Core.  Core has failed.  That's why we're in this mess and should be
as obvious as the fact that the emperor is wearing no clothes.  Those that
can't tell have bought into some dogma that "core must be right" while ignoring
the obvious facts that Core has done nothing but stall and fail to increase
transaction capacity, despite a lot of good sounding "ideas" like "lightning",
"scalability conferences", "segwit",...and that the same guys in core (everyone
except Gavin and Garzik) who are against meaningful blocksize increases work
for a private company called Blockstream who is in the business of blockchain
technology.

I'm sure I sound like a broken record by now to some, but you asked me directly
and I'm telling you the reality as I see it.

Yes i know all this. but.... what and where is the overall community going to go? XT? Core? Classic?

The waters are so muddied to the average bitcoiner, it's sad, hence the sell-off again....

What do you think Jonald?

Feeling good about price action after Mike's letter.  Looks like the January 16 price bottomed in the 360's and has turned corner and heading up again very solidly.  390+ as I write this.

http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/coinbaseUSD#rg2ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv

I actually thought there would be more downside.  I think the clear evidence of almost 75% immediate support for Classic from the mining community is what has turned hte price corner.  People are beginning to have faith that Classic can make it.  Future is starting to look promising for the first time in months.

BUT - Blockstream/Core shills are pulling out all stops to FUD, Lie, Manipulate, confuse things.  It ain't over - but barring an unexpected disaster - it looks like Classic will prevail, and governance be restablished that isn't stupid, and full of conflict of interest (aka Blockstream/Core)

www.BitcoinClassic.com
* get ready to upgrade your node!  Countdown to Fork, commencing in.... 4, 3, 2....

"who the heck is mike" and "isnt he just a programmer"
type replies are missing the point.. its not about replacing
a programmer or whether he is even wise or not...

...look at what he is writing about with Greg Maxwell,
the community, the blocks.  Its all verifiable.

And if you don't know who Mike Hearn is,
then you're basically clueless...he's the
guy who wrote XT along with Gavin to
try to help raise the blocksize when
core refused to.

Congrats, you can cut and paste from wikipedia. LOL.

What a craftily assembled narrative. I enjoyed the read. Now, back to reality.

Cryptography is heavily based on mathematical theory and computer science practice; cryptographic algorithms are designed around computational hardness assumptions, making such algorithms hard to break in practice by any adversary. It is theoretically possible to break such a system, but it is infeasible to do so by any known practical means. These schemes are therefore termed computationally secure; theoretical advances, e.g., improvements in integer factorization algorithms, and faster computing technology require these solutions to be continually adapted. There exist information-theoretically secure schemes that provably cannot be broken even with unlimited computing power.

Cryptography is branch of modern physics, mathematics and IT. An one of the best example is Cryptocurrency like Bitcoin, Dogecoin, n many other.

Its already told that it is open source. So folks why r u worrying.

Firstly when it get introduced no one know about this concept. so people were quite stumbled. But since its origin people understand importance, uses and benefits, even implement it to day to day life. 

Mike dont know that he was just and programmer doing whatever ordered if he know about cryptography then he might hv to create own cryptocurrency. So everything is just buzz no to worry.

I heard Name of Mike first time by today. I never know him before. But what a strange today he said bitcoin is dead and suddenly it goes down this is just resemblance. Bcz he is just programmer. And there are so many talented programmer in world. If he think that quitting his job bitcoin will die then its his misunderstanding. Bcz There are so many big names have start to invest in bitcoin Even few are bank and industrial sector also.

Even there was prediction of 21 million bitcoin generation. Still it not completed.

I read article published in Fusion.

That's correct, he is just a programmer. One of probably millions who are capable of doing the same job equally well. I sense an inflated sense of self-worth.

Yea, makes you think for a while... But one question to see if I fully understand:
Everything is almost the same as a year ago, apart from the congestion of the blockchain, and the only problem is that the block sizes will not be augmented?
What if everyone would stop using bitcoin core and transferred to XT, then you'll get like 2 sides:

1 side that is either ignorant or related to the so mentioned 10 people,
and the other side will be the one who favors decentralisation.

If only enough people would see that, could that make this problem reversible? Or is it really too late for that?

I'm not expert whatsoever so I might miss some basic knowledge, but still... If it were possible this way, and we could get enough people to vouch for XT?
Perhaps I am too hanging to closely to this idea that it will be fine in the end, but a little hope is allowed no? :p

As for Mike, I would really like to know how much people are selling their btc without ever having heard of him before this f***** mass-media-massacre for btc...

Being an insider doesn't mean your right, it can very well mean he just wants to feel the same type of power he used to have when he was an insider. This happens with every aspect of business.

He was (and is) someone who wrote code, and so he doesn't have an economics degree just by existing within the development team. He claims Bitcoin's immediate downfall will be because of block size, which is irrelevant right now. He wanted to publish a more centralized future fix for the block sizes.

Bitcoin might go down in the short term, but I would attribute that due to shaken confidence from someone who had a fancy job title. I personally do not think he is right as it currently stands.