Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 228. (Read 2032248 times)

fortunately TPTB are not 1 person, they are a decentralized group of infallible humans incapable of loving each other with eternal affection and equal intensity they may not even know they are TPTB, and then there is the second tears in the hierarchy.  If Bitcoin is a tool for TPTB, the worst case is some of us are implicitly involved and indirectly subverting power from within the existing PTB hierarchy or from a tear above, it is most likely we aren't agents but lucky individuals who have front row seats to battle between the extremely powerful and the very powerful.

Occam's razor, suggests that's probably not the case.  

your willingness to accept such deep conspiracy theory is bordering on psychotic.  i've skimmed that data and just don't believe it credible esp after having followed/lived it step by step with all the follow on consequences arising from it.  also the events leading up to it make perfect sense as well.

my pt is that the community aka economic majority can fork away from any dev or group of devs that abuses its power.

Didn't you just write we could easily fork away from Gavinmike 

Your posts don't have logical continuity.

And that is why they don't understand when I post comments on both sides of an issue. I am weighing the probabilities.

And yes I am also not sure who invented Bitcoin.

But just step back for a moment and ask yourself who in the hell had the power to do 9/11?

And then you see the world differently than if you didn't think that power existed.

Then look at what is actually happening with Bitcoin.

Don't expect an identifiable Jesus. It is a phenomenon that has been going on for a long time. Just open your eyes. Have you actually done any research for example on 9/11. It is absolutely impossible the government's official story. You should know that as an engineer even you are not a civil engineer just a little bit of research will convince you. But it goes on over and over in history much further back than that.


I have a lot to say. If everyone else posted more too, then it would balance out. I guess I just think too fast?

I agree the stereotypical engineer's creed and culture is whitepapers, equations, and results over talk. You in fact do limit your posts usually to analysis backed by data and/or equations. Kudos. But discussion is IMO another form of engineering. It is way I brainstorm ideas and bounce them off others.

I gave up a long time ago worrying about some civil level of discourse in public forums. If I tried to achieve that I would fail as has everyone else here.

Also I know repetition is important because ideas are lost in the thicket of people's preoccupations and attention spans.

All in all though, much better for my antagonists if I am here talking and not coding. So I should be taking your advice soon (but when I decide to and not when Cypherdoc thinks he has kicked me out)


When I say someone else is making technological mistakes, that is not boasting about my intellect. That is pointing out they are making mistakes and over estimating their understanding of the issues.

I am sure I am not the smartest person in this thread. I had already stated Gmaxell is smarter than me in crypto-math. You can add Mixles to that list too, tvbcof is very smart, etc..


That was pretty lame. But I do come from an era and the Deep South where gentlemen settled their differences this way when it had devolved into ad hominem BS and then it was done (go drink a beer together bloodied).

It is weird for you perhaps because maybe you didn't grow up in my culture. You just don't go talking this way to each other (the way Cypherdoc does) where I come from without getting your ass kicked.

In southern gentleman's manner, you act like a gentleman and you are treated as one. Act like a savage and you are dealt with as one.


There is so much noise here in this thread that I had to take some kind of medicine just to deal with enduring it. It is boring (redundant noise) as hell and just trying to liven it up so I don't fall asleep. And waiting for those morsels that make it all worth while.

Such as for example the posts from tvbcof and Mixles. Those paid for my ticket of admission here several times over.

Huh?  I entertained the hypothesis since before I bought my first BTC and have never discarded it.  It has been and continues to be a relatively weak hypothesis, but absolutely strong enough to keep around.

Bitcoin invented by TPTB does not preclude two of my significant hopes for the solution:

 1)  I can make some money off it.  [checked]

 2)  It can act as a spring-board for like but more robust ideas.

My mind does not work be believing something true or false.  It works by assigning probabilities to possibilities and adjusting them.  I didn't recognize how unusual this is until later in life.

If Bitcoin's nonanonymous structure really turns out to be a tool the nefarious powers that be could employ to trace all economic transactions in say, a Revelations type of fashion, then it is certainly possible that those PTB employ said tool to advantage, and that anyone supporting such a tool is also a tool of said PTB, ignorantly or not.

I don't expect a competing Bitcoin fork, i think they will just eat some humble pie and include the 20MB patch and hop back on the MC and continue to develop SC much like Mike did with LightHouse.

@ Justus, thanks I will be sure to run alternate nodes.

So someone who has spent the past 4-5 years promoting Bitcoin as a new form of sound money and trying to educate as many people about that as possible, is really a tool of the TPTB who would lose most of their power/influence under a true sound money system. Got it. I'll file that one right next to Satoshi is really the CIA.

after all we've been through i can't possibly believe that Yahoo TPTB_need_war has hoodwinked you into believing that Bitcoin is a tool for the real TPTB?  seriously?  b/c that is what you'd have to believe to think i am a shill for TPTB. 

of course i have an interest.  my coin (what little i have  )

Sorry to poke fun at you, but I couldn't resist.

I do believe that some of your comments contain interesting insight.  The most recent was your post here about how people who value their accomplishments more than their appraisal of their knowledge are often more pragmatic and balanced.  I had never thought about that, but think you might be right.  

However, here are some of my issues with your comments:

(a) you constantly make references to "TPTB" and attribute many events to conspiracy theories, without sufficient evidence.

(b) by posting voluminously on this thread in a way that distracts from the natural flow of conversation, I think you're being disrespectful.

(c) by constantly boasting about your intelligence and by making sexist and otherwise derogatory comments, you come across to me as both insecure and rude.

(d) by challenging people to fist fights, you're just being downright weird.

In summary, I think you are intelligent and have things to offer to the conversation, but I do wish you'd try to improve the delivery of your message.

I keep weighing this as the most solid explanation for certain of cypherdoc's behaviors, but then I think back to the early days and various aspects of his person and back off.

The other day I ran across a very amusing situation where a shill was stone-cold busted due to a defect in Windows clipboard.  I allow for the possibility that the whole thing is a fabrication but I've seen no efforts put toward debunking it.  We have, however, known with high probability that multi-personna shill software has been around for some time and has been purchased by the U.S. govt among others.

Anyway, the presenter of a vid was musing about shills and wondered if some of them were not fairly ordinary people who got caught up in some legal trouble and offered the opportunity to have their problems go away by doing some shill work.  It dawned on me that the Bitcoin ecosystem is probably bursting at the seams with people who are 'flawed' in some way.  Especially as the tax seasons drift by.

Here's the vid which is an interesting watch:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy4zlMkNnn4

personally, if XT becomes a reality, i don't expect there to be a surviving Core for devs to dev on.  value will quickly be sucked out of Core and those devs left behind will become totally irrelevant with their careers shattered.  and that's b/c there has been enough of a discussion over this obvious 1MB obstruction that i'd think that there will be no for profits who will be willing to hitch their future to decision making by Blockstream.  esp true for Nasdaq and NYSE who want and need thousands of cheap, reliable tx's throughput on the MC, the most secure and apolitical one.

once this happens, Gavin and Mike will be happy to recruit a whole new core dev team to minimize the chances of such a huge disagreement happening once again.  everyone is for diversity but this hostage situation is way over the top and can't be tolerated.  

This is actually a very astute point in bold and I am surprised given the other dumb technical errors you made upthread.

However what you fail to grasp is that Bitcoin's protocol can be forked by 51% of the hashrate.

Those who don't follow, lose their BTC value in that chain. They could spend in another fork, but the Coinbase, Circle, and Paypal masses will stay on the coin managed by the elite. And they can 50% attack your minority fork too claiming it is rogue.

Now with pegged side chains, you could move your BTC value out of the main and into your minority fork. But it still doesn't protect your minority fork against 50% attack.

And you don't have a concentration of smaller miners. The mining is becoming more and more concentrated in larger ASIC farms (who won't want to risk destroying their hardware investment on some fight against TPTB to support a minority chain). And even the P2P network is becoming concentrated around larger hubs that thus have influence over the propagation delays.

The way to support development decentralization is to run nodes that are not Bitcoin Core or its derivatives (including XT)

Once Gavin (or someone) produces a firm proposal, then run libbitcoin or btcd nodes that have been patched to support it.

That's the worst case, the first time you do it is the hardest, once we fork from Core, it'll be easier to do it again, next time there will be more options I hope, I don't expect the Core developers to stop developing.  

Fully agree, I was saying something along these lines in the earlier UTXO commit discussion where we might end up with only a small number of "archival" nodes that maintain a full history, while most nodes function as some form of pruned node. The reason this or your situation above works is you only need one honest node on the network to highlight and flag issues.

If some majority of full nodes (which is possible with a small node count) decide to collude and cheat, because of the way the blockchain is structured any single honest node has the ability to present irrefutable proof of such collusion to the public.

Again, this goes back to the fact that Bitcoin's decentralization is driven by the mining security process, not the node count (which can be influenced by Sybil attacks, mining cannot be influenced by Sybil attacks because it requires work). Even with 1 billion tps the mining situation looks similar to today. A large number of independent miners operating over stratum (<1kbps) connected to a small number of pools. If any pools collude, it only takes one honest node to highlight that and those pools would see their miners switch to honest pools. As long as the independent miner remains decentralized, Bitcoin is OK.

This is also why your O(nm) equation works. It is OK for the number of nodes m to decrease as needed bringing us back to O(n). The devs' arguments that you can't scale O(n^2) networks is correct, but this is showing they don't understand the network and Bitcoin's economics as well as they think.

You know damn well it isn't that simple.

The disingenuous way you present arguments is so obvious for someone with a brain stem.

imagine the worst case; he is lead core dev dictator and makes a pig headed wrong move with the code. 

just refuse to update or just fork him off.