Topic: Bitcoin Unlimited - page 2. (Read 4352 times)

It is probably time to sell some BTC and move to an altcoin for the time being:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18284974

I would seriously consider making that hedging move asap.

Afaik, the problem is that without replay protection (which apparently BTU refuses to add), you would end up transferring your BTU when ever your transfer your BTC (and vice versa if BTC doesn't have replay protection). This was apparently a problem during the ETH/ETC split wherein some people tried to sell one or the other, but ended selling both as the transaction got relayed to both forks.

You can't even be sure an malevolent actor won't send your transaction from one peer network to the other.

I actually haven't studied this technical detail, so I might have an incorrect understanding.

Here is my opinion. To get your BTU you must move or keep your bitcoin on the direct wallet which means you're using the software wallet. BTU will be running on the different chain or in this time I will be believing about the forked chain from the original bitcoin itself. So, you must wait until the forked chain will be fully activated. And the bitcoin unlimited dev will make an announcement or a method for you to get your Bitcoin unlimited.

About the distribution of the bitcoin unlimited by the exchange site is depending on the exchange site itself. I think they will try to distribute the bitcoin unlimited coin with same equal to the original bitcoin.
If you're having 2 bitcoin on the bitfinex wallet and you will get 2 bitcoin unlimited and you can manage it on the token manager. I think you must read the bitfinex announcement and it's a reliable source for you.

Spoetnik this is why your "developers should work for free" communist power vacuum doesn't work:

yeah, but there are still people who think its soo awesome
Im not getting this hype

@Ayers agreed there is new greater fool BTC incoming. The key distinction is that allegedly there is only one coordinated whale/cartel in control (instead of multiple uncoordinated, competing whales) who will run away and let it crash to ~1% of its price in order to conserve their BTC stash in a stampede spiral event (which hasn't happened yet because there is sufficient supply of new fools incoming and the base of the pyramid of hodlers who could stampede is always being diluted relative to the cartel's percent of the money supply by the compounding asymmetrical masternode ROI scheme). Unlike in an aggregate market wherein bagholders could at least get out with say only -80% loss or something reasonable.

It is quite an elaborate scheme. You have to wrap your mind around it holistically. The masternodes are the cartel (technically a masternode isn't a hashrate miner, but because the masternodes are subsidized asymmetrically they can also be the miners then selfish mine and gain more asymmetric rewards).

Please read my post immediately before yours where I replied to @dinofelis's latest post.

Note ETH may be similarly structured but without the masternodes (unless someone has an unreleased more efficient implementation of the ETH PoW algorithm, which I saw someone allege) and with better ecosystem marketing and hype than Dash:

how this can work without them losing money, if the price increase like it's happening? you can't manipulate and create value out of thin air, you need more money to raise the value, and other people like miners dump on their manipulation, so they are giving away money for free? this sound stupid to me and it's not what it's happening, i think dash is being pumped with bitcoin dumping, newbie move from one place to another with their silly trading

It helps when the whale/cartel manipulator's (aka Evan Inc's) stash of both DASH and BTC is very large compared to base of the pyramid of non-cartel (aka the float of) DASH hodlers. And your stash never shrinks if the supply of new buyers is growing faster than the base of hodlers (who could compete with the manipulator by selling).

Also the masternode scheme further reinforces this in at least two ways:

1. The hodlers are not selling because they are earning ROI paid in newly minted DASH.
2. The non-cartelized hodlers are paid less minted coins ROI than the cartel, so the cartel is continually diluting their free market competition. (This is diminishing over time as their block reward shrinks although not if transaction volume x fees is offsetting increasing)

The only way the scheme is defeated is if the supply of new buyers becomes MUCH lower than those who want to cash out. Then the cartel has to expend their stash of BTC to prop up the price. So they would instead allow the price to crash, because their goal is to obtain BTC (which can be traded for real fiat money) for this worthless token DASH which they printed out-of-thin-air for themselves.

So from the crashed price, they could buy out all the bagholders and renew the pump process again (while not losing much of their BTC stash).

So that is why I say, that at nosebleed levels, Dash is likely to have crash event at some point, especially people stop believing Dash's InstantX offers anything worthwhile (e.g. when Ethereum and Bitcoin both get instant transactions). I had already linked to the math security errors and design flaws of InstantX, but the n00bs prefer their delusion and only a competing ecosystem with the same features and more adoption will defeat their technological ignorance and delusion.

We are not quite there yet, but at another 4 - 10X the current Dash price, it is possible depending on what happens with other developments interim.

The long-term death of Dash is when some project has moved on to attain millions of users adoption and Dash offers no features that aren't already provided by that mainstream project. Then no one will buy Dash's hype any more. It will be like Steem with a crashed price and loss of speculator confidence in their ability to FOMO pump it to fools again.

The art of pumping, of course.  Actually, limiting the pump is a great time: you dump slowly on fresh blood streaming in  The best part of the game !  When you have a big reserve of cash and a big reserve of coins, you can steer this perfectly.  When you see people start to cash out, you buy with cash and pump the price, so that their FOMO stops them from cashing out.  When you see that there's a buying frenzy by FOMO that would pump too hard and make people take benefit, crumbling the pyramid, you dump on them.
People need to have the feeling that now and then, the market stabilizes, but that "the moon" is near.

If you do it right, you end up converting your stash of coins, by dumping on FOMO newcomers, into a huge pile of cash, which you need to use partially some times, to counter the feeling of crashing.  Small "corrections" you can allow for, that gives confidence to analysts that the price is "consolidating" ; you need enough cash to be able to counter any attempt at "taking benefits".

I think they are doing it like true masters.

When do you stop ?  When your stash of coins is exhausted

Yes, I agree, but I'm convinced that they do have greater fools flooding in now.  Much, much less than the numbers would let you believe (that is the centralized market manipulation), but they are flooding in nevertheless.  Otherwise, their game would be useless.  These games are never useless.  The first players always make a lot of money, and the mass of fools, well, gets fooled.

Except if they grow the pyramid too fast and can't sustain those who want to cash out:


The Dash pyramid scheme will continue to have an advantage in FOMO over any aggregate freer market, until the base of the pyramid can't grow fast enough to allow the earlier buyers to cash out:

For this very reason, Evan Inc. can in theory push the "market" as high as they want. I think they will be cautious about surpassing 1 Billion USD though, for fear of drawing the ire of the SEC.

Dash doesn't have a market. It is allegedly a couple of guys working for Evan Inc. running accounts at the major exchanges buying and selling from themselves. It is a greater fool pyramid scheme.

You even stated that no one with large size dared tried to enter that market without a deal with Evan Inc.. So that tells you Roger Ver is in bed with the alleged "fraud" (aka dis-aggregate non-market) or he didn't buy much Dash.

 

My point is: in this world, only very few understand the kind of subtleties you are addressing.  And those that understand it, knew already that BU was not going to happen - maybe not for the same reasons than your analysis, but there are many reasons why BU is not going to happen as long as bitcoin has its brand name of first mover.  There are hundreds of reasons.  So your sophisticated extra reason, only comprehensible for a very small fraction of people, and a still smaller fraction of influencial people voting in the market, could not have any significant market influence.

BU is not going to happen, but not because it is erroneous.  Your debunking of DASH didn't stop the market from appreciating it.  Markets don't follow rational arguments full of maths, but cheap propaganda.  Your propaganda is of bad quality, sorry 

Is it just luck to often be in the right place at the opportune time?

I don't think that BTU will ever happen. This is just FUD. I don't think miners will abandon the biggest and strongest network and risk losing all the value BTC already has

BCU is definitely cheaper but i don't think it will suddenly burst, it could be dragged below 200 later when a troll suddenly find their way to create a fud of their own. i'm not a supporter of any, i'd rather be moving to a not divided coin. look where ETC now, there not even a single thing is going on in there except the Chinese exchange creating an app which until now it had never been released.

Size of blocks is the not the only way to play those sort of games. Withholding blocks with a delay is equivalent (i.e. a form of selfish mining). I am not going to cover all the details and scenarios now and relate it all to your discombobulated post. Sorry I've got higher priority work to do, than arguing with people who think they are making a point but don't realize they are not. I suggest you study all the research first, before attempting to get into a detailed discussion with me. I did (or at least much of it).