Topic: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud) - page 161. (Read 378996 times)

This desperation level is something never seen before 

Again you have no idea of what you're talking about and you are rambling on your spherical cows, which as a mathematician CS annoys me, you are adding to the stereotype.

PoW is legit, nobody is denying that, but version bits are being spoofed. This adds to the already known possibility that a version-bit based trigger scheme might get activated without the actual hashing power backing running what they say they are running.

Also, as others mentioned, cloud mining and hash markets are chock-full with scams and exit-scam schemes. The standard is not offering any guarantees or leverage, which in an unregulated market means what we already should know. Still in 2015 people don't seem to grasp the difference of operating in de-facto unregulated Bitcoin.

As a miner this nonsense makes me laugh, but I do worry about the uncertainty it may cause and at the money it can lose to unsuspecting people in various ways.

And with all that, 0.6%.

 


I mean look at the fucking website, if that doesn't scream scam to you.............https://www.nicehash.com

They even have the token 5 $ fiverr motion graphic...

This actually isn't cloud mining (at least not in the traditional sense); it's a hash power market not unlike similar markets for electricity.  I haven't used the service yet, and I've been hesitant for the reasons you say.  However jtoomin from Toomin Bros. Mining (the group that has mined several of the recent BIP101 blocks) can see that NiceHash is indeed pointing the rented hash power at its pool.  So it appears NiceHash does what it claims to do.

https://www.nicehash.com

Cloud mining is a scam. You are promoting a scam that will lose people money in support of a project that is already on its deathbed.

You misunderstand.

What is being spoofed is the version stamp (not the work, obviously).

Do you have any experience using mining pools?  Have you even mined a single Bitcoin?

Proof-of-work is proof of work done.  Unlike node count, it cannot be spoofed.

Miners (a) attempt to earn a profit with their hash power, and (b) express their acceptance of protocol rules by way they construct blocks and by the blocks upon which they mine.  When a miner points his hash power at a pool, he forfeits (b).  When a miner points his hash power at NiceHash (the hash renting service), he sells (b) to the highest bidder (who right now are people who want BIP101 blocks mined).  

This is an example of a market becoming more efficient.  If NiceHash didn't exists, some of those same people would eventually purchase physical hash power, resulting (eventually) in a similar outcome (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem).

Three creative ways XTards are falsifying hash power in rent-a-hash and pay-per-hash schemes:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3natjy/stepbystep_instructions_for_how_to_rent_hashing/

https://www.bigblockbounty.com/

https://cryptoplay.net/vote/

Making sure these spoofed votes are overwhelmingly non-indicative of hash power.

Thanks for doing me the service of repeatedly bumping the thread during my absence.

It is concerning that such a strong false narrative has been allowed to be build up. Even if you disagree with BIP101 it is not constructive that there is so much misinformation and ad hominem.

Yes I disagree with all of these points.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/why-i-support-bip101-1164464

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/permanently-keeping-the-1mb-anti-spam-restriction-is-a-great-idea-946236

Disagreement over what part? XT is dead? Mike and Gavin are self serving? Mike is insane?

Because there is disagreement about this issue, and not everyone sees this from your perspective, myself included.

This thread is still chugging along, eh? I've been on vacation for a few weeks and fully expected to see this thread dead and buried. Is this going to be one of those threads like the BFL scammer thread where everything is said in the first 20 pages but it continues on for 1200 pages?

Why doesn't someone create a summary then end this?

Something like:

XT is dead.

It proved that Mike and Gavin are nothing more than profiteering scumbags.

Mike has delusions of grandeur, thinks he's Satoshi and invented the idea of SPV clients.

/thread

Still spinning false narratives in here it seems, beware of anyone who frames the conversation in terms of “good guys vs bad guys” or “good vs evil”. Such a narrative is always incorrect and oversimplifies the reality of the situation.

The "101" thing; I don't think that irony would ever be lost on the latest intake of students to Professor Andresen's class. Maybe it wouldn't work out so good lol  

gavin hasnt made a core commit in years. (probably too busy with XT)

so he is totally irrelevant, and his failed coup with his fraud of an acolyte hearn should be carved in everyone's head for posterity as well as prosperity.

altho we could thx him for making bitcoin stronger against the low social means, intellectual fallacies, approximations and shortcuts he shamelessly used, i'd say let's irc-rucify the statist sucker for the example too!


then he could always spend the rest of his life giving "blockchain technology 101" courses over at MIT. yeayy. ^^

Hope that Gavin don't get banned from bitcoin-dev aswell, he is a XT dev, but he made good things to core, he have a few commits and is one of the few devs that look this forum.

+1

It depends on which Satoshi you're talking about of course, but if it's a case of identifying the particular Satoshi that coined the SPV expression, sure, no reason why Hearn could not have been behind that originally.


-1

I think it's the most likely explanation, but I also reject the implication that an organisation like DARPA would create/deploy/promote decentralised cryptocurrency with insidious/pernicious intent. I think they're taking a higher level view; that proliferation of decentralised technologies is inevitable anyway, and the best they can do is lead the charge, collecting whatever benefits and assuming whatever roles that need filling, and muddying the waters throughout the process as much as possible so as to maximise their position once the dust settles. A successful centralising change to the protocol is just a single example of that tactic; if I were the ostensible DARPA director, I would have people like Hearn agitating in that direction, but simultaneously have a Greg Maxwell type character formulating his "vengeful fightback cryptocurrency design". You must be in a position to influence or capitalise on either side of a conflict, it's basic Machiavellianism.

tl;dr - everyone seems to assume "adversary vs adversary" when Hegellian dialectic is the preference. These people don't want to lose, and so playing the role of a match-fixing referee is the only guaranteed way to always win.


I'm more optimistic than that; the programmers you refer to (and other people altogether) will inspire so many more to work on this stuff both in the future and even right now. Knowledge is it's own reward, and this subject is one of the richest that human history has offered so far. We simply won't be able to stop the right people turning up and consolidating and innovating this concept further.

hearn banned from#b-dev

http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2015/09/29