Author

Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 366. (Read 2032266 times)

legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
May 11, 2015, 12:31:46 AM
Usually, miners are good citizens and include many of the pending transactions. However, a block could be mined where all this consensus is ignored and the new block is full of transactions which the miner has "pulled out of his ass" (real-world business or not) with fees payable to himself. Apart from providing PoW security to older blocks, the new block is unhelpful, and many of them together is an attack.

So the "unauthorized" transactions are simply those that are already missing from the majority of the network's node mempools. The reason they are missing is that they have been discarded by most nodes, or never seen by them because the miner kept them quiet until finding a block.

There is no whitelisting or blacklisting unless 51% of the nodes are using the same whitelist or blacklist. If they are then there then that is a majority decision, and the risk of this is the same as today.
Also, standard new blocks with full tx would certainly remain supported even if IBLT was fully functional and in widespread use.

you just described AM's "targeted withholding attack".  also it's solution.

I hadn't read that.

That isn't a solution because it is the wrong characterization of the coming reality of NWO fascism.

I don't know if you've noticed the trend towards consolidation in the online retailing sector. For example here in the Philippines Ayosdito.com and olx.ph merged and now I can't buy imported vitamin D3 any more because the new cartel eliminated vitamin ads!  Angry

Consolidation will accelerate as the global economic implosion hits us 2016 (mostly in Europe) and accelerating in 2017 or 2018 in the USA.

The masses love their WalMart, Target, Amazon, and other big names. The Big 5s will be folded into the Amazons.

When we reach the point that 80% of online shopping is done through Amazon Payments, Paypal, Coinbase, Bitpay, Circle and a few others, then the case of the "transactions which the miner has 'pulled out of his ass'" (i.e. the txs that are for those big names) will be most of the transactions.

As I said, the masses are working against your theory of political containment. Sorry you can't win with politics. You need a truly technically decentralized solution.

As I said from my first comment in this thread that got you all so offended, you need to make the fundamental tenet of Satoshi's whitepaper the actual reality. Bitcoin isn't. Sorry.

when i use Mycelium to scan your Amazon "attacker" payment address, it sends my BTC  thru the Mycelium server who then forwards it out to the network  "indiscriminately".  thus, the payment tx cannot be hidden or held up Amazon's ass to be released en masse with billions of other Amazon tx's for the purpose of attacking and screwing other miners.

If 80% of txs are being coursed through the cartel because the complacent masses use the GUIs the cartel websites present them, then Mycelium won't be hearing about them.

And if the miners that didn't hear about them, don't approve those blocks, then they won't be participating in 80% of the economy and thus economically it is obvious who will win that battle of attrition.

Size matters in Bitcoin. I want to change that.

the GUI's != owner's wallets.   owner's wallet are connected to the p2p network, not the Amazon's attacker ass.

Masses will use the Circle, Paypal, Coinbase, Amazon, Facebook, etc wallet.

This is why the banksters are funding all the large scale wallet startups.

Sorry you can't win this argument. I thought about it in depth.

sorry, none of the geeks should fall for it and alot of ppl have learned from mtgox and the other exchanges.  and all the current unbanked billions won't be eligible for those company accts and will work off their smartphones.  so no, an absurd cartel the likes of what you've described above will not be forming and even if it did, i just described how their share will be limited.  no one likes cartels anyways.

Well now you are really scraping the bottom of the barrel and being either disingenuous or absurdly obtuse.

Denial of reality won't help you.

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-exchange-coinbase-just-passed-2-million-users/

Quote
The newly U.S. licensed Bitcoin Exchange Coinbase has just passed 2 million users. This is a large mark for Coinbase and we at CCN sends our congratulations.

I'm one of those 2M. And I pull my coin out immediately.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 11, 2015, 12:30:26 AM
Sorry you can't win this argument. I thought about it in depth.

"Because I've thought about this in depth, it is inconceivable that I am wrong." - This is not the way to bring people around to your side, seriously!

I am not trying to win a Communist kiss my ass contest. I am trying to elucidate the facts.

If I say I have thought through all the details of the Transactions Withholding Attack ad nauseum over 2 years and entertained 100s of posts of debate, then it means I am speaking factually.

A good card-carrying Communist can't handle facts, and thus doesn't want success.

It doesn't mean I am not open to being wrong, but for how many posts do I have to debate before it becomes redundant and diminishing returns to 0?
E
full member
Activity: 234
Merit: 100
May 11, 2015, 12:24:12 AM
Sorry you can't win this argument. I thought about it in depth.

"Because I've thought about this in depth, it is inconceivable that I am wrong." - This is not the way to bring people around to your side, seriously!
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 11, 2015, 12:24:06 AM
Usually, miners are good citizens and include many of the pending transactions. However, a block could be mined where all this consensus is ignored and the new block is full of transactions which the miner has "pulled out of his ass" (real-world business or not) with fees payable to himself. Apart from providing PoW security to older blocks, the new block is unhelpful, and many of them together is an attack.

So the "unauthorized" transactions are simply those that are already missing from the majority of the network's node mempools. The reason they are missing is that they have been discarded by most nodes, or never seen by them because the miner kept them quiet until finding a block.

There is no whitelisting or blacklisting unless 51% of the nodes are using the same whitelist or blacklist. If they are then there then that is a majority decision, and the risk of this is the same as today.
Also, standard new blocks with full tx would certainly remain supported even if IBLT was fully functional and in widespread use.

you just described AM's "targeted withholding attack".  also it's solution.

I hadn't read that.

That isn't a solution because it is the wrong characterization of the coming reality of NWO fascism.

I don't know if you've noticed the trend towards consolidation in the online retailing sector. For example here in the Philippines Ayosdito.com and olx.ph merged and now I can't buy imported vitamin D3 any more because the new cartel eliminated vitamin ads!  Angry

Consolidation will accelerate as the global economic implosion hits us 2016 (mostly in Europe) and accelerating in 2017 or 2018 in the USA.

The masses love their WalMart, Target, Amazon, and other big names. The Big 5s will be folded into the Amazons.

When we reach the point that 80% of online shopping is done through Amazon Payments, Paypal, Coinbase, Bitpay, Circle and a few others, then the case of the "transactions which the miner has 'pulled out of his ass'" (i.e. the txs that are for those big names) will be most of the transactions.

As I said, the masses are working against your theory of political containment. Sorry you can't win with politics. You need a truly technically decentralized solution.

As I said from my first comment in this thread that got you all so offended, you need to make the fundamental tenet of Satoshi's whitepaper the actual reality. Bitcoin isn't. Sorry.

when i use Mycelium to scan your Amazon "attacker" payment address, it sends my BTC  thru the Mycelium server who then forwards it out to the network  "indiscriminately".  thus, the payment tx cannot be hidden or held up Amazon's ass to be released en masse with billions of other Amazon tx's for the purpose of attacking and screwing other miners.

If 80% of txs are being coursed through the cartel because the complacent masses use the GUIs the cartel websites present them, then Mycelium won't be hearing about them.

And if the miners that didn't hear about them, don't approve those blocks, then they won't be participating in 80% of the economy and thus economically it is obvious who will win that battle of attrition.

Size matters in Bitcoin. I want to change that.

the GUI's != owner's wallets.   owner's wallet are connected to the p2p network, not the Amazon's attacker ass.

Masses will use the Circle, Paypal, Coinbase, Amazon, Facebook, etc wallet.

This is why the banksters are funding all the large scale wallet startups.

Sorry you can't win this argument. I thought about it in depth.

sorry, none of the geeks should fall for it and alot of ppl have learned from mtgox and the other exchanges.  and all the current unbanked billions won't be eligible for those company accts and will work off their smartphones.  so no, an absurd cartel the likes of what you've described above will not be forming and even if it did, i just described how their share will be limited.  no one likes cartels anyways.

Well now you are really scraping the bottom of the barrel and being either disingenuous or absurdly obtuse.

Denial of reality won't help you.

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-exchange-coinbase-just-passed-2-million-users/

Quote
The newly U.S. licensed Bitcoin Exchange Coinbase has just passed 2 million users. This is a large mark for Coinbase and we at CCN sends our congratulations.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
May 11, 2015, 12:18:03 AM
Usually, miners are good citizens and include many of the pending transactions. However, a block could be mined where all this consensus is ignored and the new block is full of transactions which the miner has "pulled out of his ass" (real-world business or not) with fees payable to himself. Apart from providing PoW security to older blocks, the new block is unhelpful, and many of them together is an attack.

So the "unauthorized" transactions are simply those that are already missing from the majority of the network's node mempools. The reason they are missing is that they have been discarded by most nodes, or never seen by them because the miner kept them quiet until finding a block.

There is no whitelisting or blacklisting unless 51% of the nodes are using the same whitelist or blacklist. If they are then there then that is a majority decision, and the risk of this is the same as today.
Also, standard new blocks with full tx would certainly remain supported even if IBLT was fully functional and in widespread use.

you just described AM's "targeted withholding attack".  also it's solution.

I hadn't read that.

That isn't a solution because it is the wrong characterization of the coming reality of NWO fascism.

I don't know if you've noticed the trend towards consolidation in the online retailing sector. For example here in the Philippines Ayosdito.com and olx.ph merged and now I can't buy imported vitamin D3 any more because the new cartel eliminated vitamin ads!  Angry

Consolidation will accelerate as the global economic implosion hits us 2016 (mostly in Europe) and accelerating in 2017 or 2018 in the USA.

The masses love their WalMart, Target, Amazon, and other big names. The Big 5s will be folded into the Amazons.

When we reach the point that 80% of online shopping is done through Amazon Payments, Paypal, Coinbase, Bitpay, Circle and a few others, then the case of the "transactions which the miner has 'pulled out of his ass'" (i.e. the txs that are for those big names) will be most of the transactions.

As I said, the masses are working against your theory of political containment. Sorry you can't win with politics. You need a truly technically decentralized solution.

As I said from my first comment in this thread that got you all so offended, you need to make the fundamental tenet of Satoshi's whitepaper the actual reality. Bitcoin isn't. Sorry.

when i use Mycelium to scan your Amazon "attacker" payment address, it sends my BTC  thru the Mycelium server who then forwards it out to the network  "indiscriminately".  thus, the payment tx cannot be hidden or held up Amazon's ass to be released en masse with billions of other Amazon tx's for the purpose of attacking and screwing other miners.

If 80% of txs are being coursed through the cartel because the complacent masses use the GUIs the cartel websites present them, then Mycelium won't be hearing about them.

And if the miners that didn't hear about them, don't approve those blocks, then they won't be participating in 80% of the economy and thus economically it is obvious who will win that battle of attrition.

Size matters in Bitcoin. I want to change that.

the GUI's != owner's wallets.   owner's wallet are connected to the p2p network, not the Amazon's attacker ass.

Masses will use the Circle, Paypal, Coinbase, Amazon, Facebook, etc wallet.

This is why the banksters are funding all the large scale wallet startups.

Sorry you can't win this argument. I thought about it in depth.

sorry, none of the geeks should fall for it and alot of ppl have learned from mtgox and the other exchanges.  and all the current unbanked billions won't be eligible for those company accts and will work off their smartphones.  so no, an absurd cartel the likes of what you've described above will not be forming and even if it did, i just described how their share will be limited.  no one likes cartels anyways.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 11, 2015, 12:12:59 AM

Quote
[–]gavinandresenGavin Andresen - Bitcoin Expert

I think 1-minute blocks is a good idea. The best time to roll that out would be the next subsidy halving (makes the code much simpler).

We still need a bigger max block size, though.

   reddit

Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons, how about changing the block interval?

I'm in favor of changing it.  About 16 block per day would be about right as far as I'm concerned.  Bitcoin never was a real-time system and real-time behavior when needed is best done for real in a proxy (e.g., a bitcoin-backed sidechain designed for such use-cases.)

That addresses only a small symptom of the overall problem, i.e. the orphan rate.I need to recheck the math for orphan rate. The size of block scales with block period, not sure if orphan rate is non-linear such that it would decline. I think so.

It does nothing for the fact that UXTO won't scale with RAM.

It does nothing for the Transactions Withholding attack, pool Sybil attack, and inefficacy of getblocktemplate-at-scale issues I've raised.

It can't help you scale to micropayments volume.
legendary
Activity: 4760
Merit: 1283
May 11, 2015, 12:08:10 AM

Quote
[–]gavinandresenGavin Andresen - Bitcoin Expert

I think 1-minute blocks is a good idea. The best time to roll that out would be the next subsidy halving (makes the code much simpler).

We still need a bigger max block size, though.

   reddit

Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons, how about changing the block interval?

I'm in favor of changing it.  About 16 block per day would be about right as far as I'm concerned.  Bitcoin never was a real-time system and real-time behavior when needed is best done for real in a proxy (e.g., a bitcoin-backed sidechain designed for such use-cases.)

sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 11, 2015, 12:04:58 AM
Usually, miners are good citizens and include many of the pending transactions. However, a block could be mined where all this consensus is ignored and the new block is full of transactions which the miner has "pulled out of his ass" (real-world business or not) with fees payable to himself. Apart from providing PoW security to older blocks, the new block is unhelpful, and many of them together is an attack.

So the "unauthorized" transactions are simply those that are already missing from the majority of the network's node mempools. The reason they are missing is that they have been discarded by most nodes, or never seen by them because the miner kept them quiet until finding a block.

There is no whitelisting or blacklisting unless 51% of the nodes are using the same whitelist or blacklist. If they are then there then that is a majority decision, and the risk of this is the same as today.
Also, standard new blocks with full tx would certainly remain supported even if IBLT was fully functional and in widespread use.

you just described AM's "targeted withholding attack".  also it's solution.

I hadn't read that.

That isn't a solution because it is the wrong characterization of the coming reality of NWO fascism.

I don't know if you've noticed the trend towards consolidation in the online retailing sector. For example here in the Philippines Ayosdito.com and olx.ph merged and now I can't buy imported vitamin D3 any more because the new cartel eliminated vitamin ads!  Angry

Consolidation will accelerate as the global economic implosion hits us 2016 (mostly in Europe) and accelerating in 2017 or 2018 in the USA.

The masses love their WalMart, Target, Amazon, and other big names. The Big 5s will be folded into the Amazons.

When we reach the point that 80% of online shopping is done through Amazon Payments, Paypal, Coinbase, Bitpay, Circle and a few others, then the case of the "transactions which the miner has 'pulled out of his ass'" (i.e. the txs that are for those big names) will be most of the transactions.

As I said, the masses are working against your theory of political containment. Sorry you can't win with politics. You need a truly technically decentralized solution.

As I said from my first comment in this thread that got you all so offended, you need to make the fundamental tenet of Satoshi's whitepaper the actual reality. Bitcoin isn't. Sorry.

when i use Mycelium to scan your Amazon "attacker" payment address, it sends my BTC  thru the Mycelium server who then forwards it out to the network  "indiscriminately".  thus, the payment tx cannot be hidden or held up Amazon's ass to be released en masse with billions of other Amazon tx's for the purpose of attacking and screwing other miners.

If 80% of txs are being coursed through the cartel because the complacent masses use the GUIs the cartel websites present them, then Mycelium won't be hearing about them.

And if the miners that didn't hear about them, don't approve those blocks, then they won't be participating in 80% of the economy and thus economically it is obvious who will win that battle of attrition.

Size matters in Bitcoin. I want to change that.

the GUI's != owner's wallets.   owner's wallet are connected to the p2p network, not the Amazon's attacker ass.

Masses will use the Circle, Paypal, Coinbase, Amazon, Facebook, etc wallet.

This is why the banksters are funding all the large scale wallet startups.

Sorry you can't win this argument. I thought about it in depth.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
May 11, 2015, 12:00:44 AM
Usually, miners are good citizens and include many of the pending transactions. However, a block could be mined where all this consensus is ignored and the new block is full of transactions which the miner has "pulled out of his ass" (real-world business or not) with fees payable to himself. Apart from providing PoW security to older blocks, the new block is unhelpful, and many of them together is an attack.

So the "unauthorized" transactions are simply those that are already missing from the majority of the network's node mempools. The reason they are missing is that they have been discarded by most nodes, or never seen by them because the miner kept them quiet until finding a block.

There is no whitelisting or blacklisting unless 51% of the nodes are using the same whitelist or blacklist. If they are then there then that is a majority decision, and the risk of this is the same as today.
Also, standard new blocks with full tx would certainly remain supported even if IBLT was fully functional and in widespread use.

you just described AM's "targeted withholding attack".  also it's solution.

I hadn't read that.

That isn't a solution because it is the wrong characterization of the coming reality of NWO fascism.

I don't know if you've noticed the trend towards consolidation in the online retailing sector. For example here in the Philippines Ayosdito.com and olx.ph merged and now I can't buy imported vitamin D3 any more because the new cartel eliminated vitamin ads!  Angry

Consolidation will accelerate as the global economic implosion hits us 2016 (mostly in Europe) and accelerating in 2017 or 2018 in the USA.

The masses love their WalMart, Target, Amazon, and other big names. The Big 5s will be folded into the Amazons.

When we reach the point that 80% of online shopping is done through Amazon Payments, Paypal, Coinbase, Bitpay, Circle and a few others, then the case of the "transactions which the miner has 'pulled out of his ass'" (i.e. the txs that are for those big names) will be most of the transactions.

As I said, the masses are working against your theory of political containment. Sorry you can't win with politics. You need a truly technically decentralized solution.

As I said from my first comment in this thread that got you all so offended, you need to make the fundamental tenet of Satoshi's whitepaper the actual reality. Bitcoin isn't. Sorry.

when i use Mycelium to scan your Amazon "attacker" payment address, it sends my BTC  thru the Mycelium server who then forwards it out to the network  "indiscriminately".  thus, the payment tx cannot be hidden or held up Amazon's ass to be released en masse with billions of other Amazon tx's for the purpose of attacking and screwing other miners.

If 80% of txs are being coursed through the cartel because the complacent masses use the GUIs the cartel websites present them, then Mycelium won't be hearing about them.

And if the miners that didn't hear about them, don't approve those blocks, then they won't be participating in 80% of the economy and thus economically it is obvious who will win that battle of attrition.

Size matters in Bitcoin. I want to change that.

the GUI's != owner's wallets.   owner's wallet are connected to the p2p network, not the Amazon's attacker ass.
hero member
Activity: 544
Merit: 500
May 11, 2015, 12:00:12 AM

Quote
[–]gavinandresenGavin Andresen - Bitcoin Expert

I think 1-minute blocks is a good idea. The best time to roll that out would be the next subsidy halving (makes the code much simpler).

We still need a bigger max block size, though.

   reddit

Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons, how about changing the block interval?
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 10, 2015, 11:59:33 PM
I am headed to the gym. I wish you guys would work with me and get serious. We are headed into Orwellian hell if we don't stop bickering and go solve the damn problem.

Right now while Bitcoin is headed for bottom below $150 is our opportunity. We won't get another one.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 10, 2015, 11:48:26 PM
Usually, miners are good citizens and include many of the pending transactions. However, a block could be mined where all this consensus is ignored and the new block is full of transactions which the miner has "pulled out of his ass" (real-world business or not) with fees payable to himself. Apart from providing PoW security to older blocks, the new block is unhelpful, and many of them together is an attack.

So the "unauthorized" transactions are simply those that are already missing from the majority of the network's node mempools. The reason they are missing is that they have been discarded by most nodes, or never seen by them because the miner kept them quiet until finding a block.

There is no whitelisting or blacklisting unless 51% of the nodes are using the same whitelist or blacklist. If they are then there then that is a majority decision, and the risk of this is the same as today.
Also, standard new blocks with full tx would certainly remain supported even if IBLT was fully functional and in widespread use.

you just described AM's "targeted withholding attack".  also it's solution.

I hadn't read that.

That isn't a solution because it is the wrong characterization of the coming reality of NWO fascism.

I don't know if you've noticed the trend towards consolidation in the online retailing sector. For example here in the Philippines Ayosdito.com and olx.ph merged and now I can't buy imported vitamin D3 any more because the new cartel eliminated vitamin ads!  Angry

Consolidation will accelerate as the global economic implosion hits us 2016 (mostly in Europe) and accelerating in 2017 or 2018 in the USA.

The masses love their WalMart, Target, Amazon, and other big names. The Big 5s will be folded into the Amazons.

When we reach the point that 80% of online shopping is done through Amazon Payments, Paypal, Coinbase, Bitpay, Circle and a few others, then the case of the "transactions which the miner has 'pulled out of his ass'" (i.e. the txs that are for those big names) will be most of the transactions.

As I said, the masses are working against your theory of political containment. Sorry you can't win with politics. You need a truly technically decentralized solution.

As I said from my first comment in this thread that got you all so offended, you need to make the fundamental tenet of Satoshi's whitepaper the actual reality. Bitcoin isn't. Sorry.

when i use Mycelium to scan your Amazon "attacker" payment address, it sends my BTC  thru the Mycelium server who then forwards it out to the network  "indiscriminately".  thus, the payment tx cannot be hidden or held up Amazon's ass to be released en masse with billions of other Amazon tx's for the purpose of attacking and screwing other miners.

If 80% of txs are being coursed through the cartel because the complacent masses use the GUIs the cartel websites present them, then Mycelium won't be hearing about them.

And if the miners that didn't hear about them, don't approve those blocks, then they won't be participating in 80% of the economy and thus economically it is obvious who will win that battle of attrition.

Size matters in Bitcoin. I want to change that.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
May 10, 2015, 11:42:58 PM
Usually, miners are good citizens and include many of the pending transactions. However, a block could be mined where all this consensus is ignored and the new block is full of transactions which the miner has "pulled out of his ass" (real-world business or not) with fees payable to himself. Apart from providing PoW security to older blocks, the new block is unhelpful, and many of them together is an attack.

So the "unauthorized" transactions are simply those that are already missing from the majority of the network's node mempools. The reason they are missing is that they have been discarded by most nodes, or never seen by them because the miner kept them quiet until finding a block.

There is no whitelisting or blacklisting unless 51% of the nodes are using the same whitelist or blacklist. If they are then there then that is a majority decision, and the risk of this is the same as today.
Also, standard new blocks with full tx would certainly remain supported even if IBLT was fully functional and in widespread use.

you just described AM's "targeted withholding attack".  also it's solution.

I hadn't read that.

That isn't a solution because it is the wrong characterization of the coming reality of NWO fascism.

I don't know if you've noticed the trend towards consolidation in the online retailing sector. For example here in the Philippines Ayosdito.com and olx.ph merged and now I can't buy imported vitamin D3 any more because the new cartel eliminated vitamin ads!  Angry

Consolidation will accelerate as the global economic implosion hits us 2016 (mostly in Europe) and accelerating in 2017 or 2018 in the USA.

The masses love their WalMart, Target, Amazon, and other big names. The Big 5s will be folded into the Amazons.

When we reach the point that 80% of online shopping is done through Amazon Payments, Paypal, Coinbase, Bitpay, Circle and a few others, then the case of the "transactions which the miner has 'pulled out of his ass'" (i.e. the txs that are for those big names) will be most of the transactions.

As I said, the masses are working against your theory of political containment. Sorry you can't win with politics. You need a truly technically decentralized solution.

As I said from my first comment in this thread that got you all so offended, you need to make the fundamental tenet of Satoshi's whitepaper the actual reality. Bitcoin isn't. Sorry.

when i use Mycelium to scan your Amazon "attacker" payment address, it sends my BTC  thru the Mycelium server who then forwards it out to the network  "indiscriminately".  thus, the payment tx cannot be hidden or held up Amazon's ass to be released en masse with billions of other Amazon tx's for the purpose of attacking and screwing other miners.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 10, 2015, 11:33:03 PM
Usually, miners are good citizens and include many of the pending transactions. However, a block could be mined where all this consensus is ignored and the new block is full of transactions which the miner has "pulled out of his ass" (real-world business or not) with fees payable to himself. Apart from providing PoW security to older blocks, the new block is unhelpful, and many of them together is an attack.

So the "unauthorized" transactions are simply those that are already missing from the majority of the network's node mempools. The reason they are missing is that they have been discarded by most nodes, or never seen by them because the miner kept them quiet until finding a block.

There is no whitelisting or blacklisting unless 51% of the nodes are using the same whitelist or blacklist. If they are then there then that is a majority decision, and the risk of this is the same as today.
Also, standard new blocks with full tx would certainly remain supported even if IBLT was fully functional and in widespread use.

you just described AM's "targeted withholding attack".  also it's solution.

I hadn't read that.

That isn't a solution because it is the wrong characterization of the coming reality of NWO fascism.

I don't know if you've noticed the trend towards consolidation in the online retailing sector. For example here in the Philippines Ayosdito.com and olx.ph merged and now I can't buy imported vitamin D3 any more because the new cartel eliminated vitamin ads!  Angry

Consolidation will accelerate as the global economic implosion hits us 2016 (mostly in Europe) and accelerating in 2017 or 2018 in the USA.

The masses love their WalMart, Target, Amazon, and other big names. The Big 5s will be folded into the Amazons.

When we reach the point that 80% of online shopping is done through Amazon Payments, Paypal, Coinbase, Bitpay, Circle and a few others, then the case of the "transactions which the miner has 'pulled out of his ass'" (i.e. the txs that are for those big names) will be most of the transactions.

As I said, the masses are working against your theory of political containment. Sorry you can't win with politics. You need a truly technically decentralized solution.

As I said from my first comment in this thread that got you all so offended, you need to make the fundamental tenet of Satoshi's whitepaper the actual reality. Bitcoin isn't. Sorry.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
May 10, 2015, 11:17:15 PM
Usually, miners are good citizens and include many of the pending transactions. However, a block could be mined where all this consensus is ignored and the new block is full of transactions which the miner has "pulled out of his ass" (real-world business or not) with fees payable to himself. Apart from providing PoW security to older blocks, the new block is unhelpful, and many of them together is an attack.

So the "unauthorized" transactions are simply those that are already missing from the majority of the network's node mempools. The reason they are missing is that they have been discarded by most nodes, or never seen by them because the miner kept them quiet until finding a block.

There is no whitelisting or blacklisting unless 51% of the nodes are using the same whitelist or blacklist. If they are then there then that is a majority decision, and the risk of this is the same as today.
Also, standard new blocks with full tx would certainly remain supported even if IBLT was fully functional and in widespread use.

you just described AM's "targeted withholding attack".  also it's solution.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 10, 2015, 11:07:34 PM
This is a strategy to actually maximize your returns.  Look at current altcoins; if you or your investors poison your coin you'll get nothing.  If you do not poision it, you and a small number of people will be the first to mine the next new thing and you may actually get help implementing it -- help which seems to be needed because haven't you been talking about this for over a year now?

I am not going to do something stupid about investors. I refused $100,000 in investment in 2014 for 25% of a 10% premine.

I was sick with M.S. all of 2013 and 2014. I could barely code. I tried my best every single day and I had investors in waiting (I've been self-funded) who were following me daily. But I couldn't perform despite my valiant attempts, because M.S. is particularly debilitating in the head (you may not realize how intense concentration is when you are coding, you keep 100 variables in your mind, you only realize when lose the ability to concentrate that you used to take for granted).

My former ideas revolved around attempting to make the PoW CPU only and I did devise an algorithm which leverages the ASIC built into every CPU. So that will still be reused. But that in hindsight isn't really a complete solution to anything.

This latest idea is only recent. The genesis was a couple of months ago and the realization that it doesn't have pitfalls finally gelled about 3 days ago. I've been coding 18 hours a day on a new social network, so I just hadn't been thinking about crypto, then someone pinged me and asked why I couldn't get rolling on crypto so I thought about it for few minutes and realized it (healthy mind now I guess the M.S. is fading).

I should add that another orthogonal aspect of my ideas is about 6 months aged. And that is how to drive tx volume to the coin. And it is intimately related to how to solve the anonymity properly (Monero is incomplete). I have written about it in detail publicly but no one seems to pay attention (except for one very respected member here who commented in this thread within the past 24 hours I will not name who discussed this with me in Bitmessage months ago).
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 10, 2015, 10:47:47 PM
I reiterate my upthread point that higher orphan rate favors larger pools because they will be better connected (don't forget the NSA has direct taps on major trunk lines and the high-speed traders on Wall Street have this superior connectivity too) and thus mine on orphaned chains less, thus have high profits for their miners, thus driving more miners to them and making the smaller pools go bankrupt. This is a variant of the selfish mining effect.

Thus I will repeat again that larger blocks = centralization

you do realize this view directly contradicts current behavior?  large miners do not build 1MB blocks repeatedly and instead construct the smallest blocks possible to limit latency transmission across the network.  if all "large" miners were hooked up as directly as you imply, they should today be constructing 1MB to maximize fees and try and torment small miners.

We can conclude that large pools today are possibly not yet co-opted (compromised, controlled) by the DEEP STATE and we have no evidence of them doing an active attack.

That tells us nothing about the future.

i don't believe large miners = NSA, CIA, DEEP STATE, banksters

Where there is a vacuum, entropy will flow. That is an undeniable fact of the Second Law of Thermo.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
May 10, 2015, 10:43:47 PM
as i was talking about IBLT above, if we get that implemented according to Gavin's proposal, that would eliminate your theoretic large pool "improved connectivity" advantage.  

Indeed. But technically it won't work. I don't have time to go into that today, but I will soon. Even Gavin has admitted there are yet unresolved problems. I haven't been following it lately, so I will need to go and dig back into it. But again, not today. I am already behind schedule today.

And even if IBLT works, it can't address the Transaction Withholding Attack nor the point I made about getblocktemplate being impotent against the complacency of the masses.

And the other problem is IBLT may never be able to be deployed. Hard forks are political hurdles. This will be a huge one.

P.S. afaik Gavin has never designed something significant for Bitcoin. All the major stuff was decided before Satoshi left. Correct me if I am mistaken.

we have no proof that large pools are directly connected more so or to the disadvantage of small pools.  you haven't even given a definition of both.  but even assuming that they are, which i'm not, i've still given plenty of reasons why they shouldn't want to create attacking bloated blocks to try and torment smaller miners.  

The government (NSA, CIA, DEEP STATE, banksters) has the incentive and the capability.

Did we forget who the enemy is?

i don't believe large miners = NSA, CIA, DEEP STATE, banksters
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
May 10, 2015, 10:42:11 PM
I reiterate my upthread point that higher orphan rate favors larger pools because they will be better connected (don't forget the NSA has direct taps on major trunk lines and the high-speed traders on Wall Street have this superior connectivity too) and thus mine on orphaned chains less, thus have high profits for their miners, thus driving more miners to them and making the smaller pools go bankrupt. This is a variant of the selfish mining effect.

Thus I will repeat again that larger blocks = centralization

you do realize this view directly contradicts current behavior?  large miners do not build 1MB blocks repeatedly and instead construct the smallest blocks possible to limit latency transmission across the network.  if all "large" miners were hooked up as directly as you imply, they should today be constructing 1MB to maximize fees and try and torment small miners.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
May 10, 2015, 10:39:00 PM
as i was talking about IBLT above, if we get that implemented according to Gavin's proposal, that would eliminate your theoretic large pool "improved connectivity" advantage.  

Indeed. But technically it won't work. I don't have time to go into that today, but I will soon. Even Gavin has admitted there are yet unresolved problems. I haven't been following it lately, so I will need to go and dig back into it. But again, not today. I am already behind schedule today.

And even if IBLT works, it can't address the Transaction Withholding Attack nor the point I made about getblocktemplate being impotent against the complacency of the masses.

And the other problem is IBLT may never be able to be deployed. Hard forks are political hurdles. This will be a huge one.

P.S. afaik Gavin has never designed something significant for Bitcoin. All the major stuff was decided before Satoshi left. Correct me if I am mistaken.

we have no proof that large pools are directly connected more so or to the disadvantage of small pools.  you haven't even given a definition of both.  but even assuming that they are, which i'm not, i've still given plenty of reasons why they shouldn't want to create attacking bloated blocks to try and torment smaller miners.  

The government (NSA, CIA, DEEP STATE, banksters) has the incentive and the capability.

Did we forget who the enemy is?

We need a more anti-fragile (simplified!), resilient and robust protocol that is immune to all this fragile complexity (IBLT, latency, etc).
Jump to: