Pages:
Author

Topic: Hacks & puppets & forks - how to destroy bitcoin - page 3. (Read 3386 times)

sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair
Since Bitcoin has reached escape velocity back in 2013 (no government and no banks can ever shut it down), there have been many scare tactics to subvert Bitcoin OR to shake weak-handed newbies from their BTC.

Today's headline (and there'll be plenty more from banks/ceos/governments as the future years come -yet bitcoin will grow and grow);

"JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon says bitcoin is a fraud that ... - CNBC.com"
Courtesy of Comcast/General Electric companies.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair
There's been much hysteria during 2017 re: coming-deadlines....the first earlier this year around March, and the other being the looming Aug. 1, 2017,

What is the probability that nothing happens...normal Bitcoin stays Bitcoin and most hashing power remains with normal Bitcoin?

You are looking at the immediate consequences. But bitcoin has earned its credibility in the last 8 years. Of course there is inertia. All of the events listed does not add credibility of bitcoin and can really kill the credibility.

That is a great point, Bitcoin has been so entrenched and well-established that its King status will never go away. Bitcoin's 10 year anniversary is not that far away and that will be a nice milestone.
full member
Activity: 364
Merit: 106
There's been much hysteria during 2017 re: coming-deadlines....the first earlier this year around March, and the other being the looming Aug. 1, 2017,

What is the probability that nothing happens...normal Bitcoin stays Bitcoin and most hashing power remains with normal Bitcoin?

You are looking at the immediate consequences. But bitcoin has earned its credibility in the last 8 years. Of course there is inertia. All of the events listed does not add credibility of bitcoin and can really kill the credibility.
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2520
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
Oh wei - did 'real' bitcoin had Segwit or not ?

So a base protocol does not need such specs as SW  or max block size

We are in the middle of finding this out - it's hard work and sadly too much fights.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair
Hacks.

Barry Silbert companies again tainting a good thing of segwit into hardfork-backdoored-altcoin:

PSA
: Beware of S2xGarzik-Coin hardfork (and similar Silbert DCG-backed failures ie Garzikcoin aka BIP 100, Bitcoin Unlimited)
These attacks of using "community" urgency have been relentless since 2015:


People, please stay educated and be mindful of software you are supporting to run a full node.

Although altcoins of XT, Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin Cash, etc have failed to take-over real Bitcoin, please don't be complacent with ramifications of future hard-forks.

From Chainalysis now Skry now Bloq now Segwit2x (Jeff Garzik):

    Founded in 2014, Chainalysis is the leading provider of Anti-Money Laundering software for Bitcoin. With offices in New York and Copenhagen, we work with global financial institutions, like Barclays and Bitcoin exchanges to enable every stakeholder to assess risk in this new economy.
credit: baronofbitcoin

s2x-garzikcoin: Opens door for AML, easy identification, etc. Things so traditional authorities identify you, classify you, and shut you down, FREEZE YOUR ASSETS, lock you up.  Just because they don't like you for not supporting the traditional Bank Swift network or a Bankchain.

Bitcoin's consensus system and natural economic incentives PROTECT the real bitcoin.

Nothing bad happened after the BCC split, in fact the price increased and we even got free coins.

So I guess there will be nothing bad in a SegWit2x fork, and we will have more free coins to hold.

There certainly will be if the present percentage of miners pushes it through. Corecoin would have to change PoW to stand a chance of being usable. It would slow to a crawl if it lost that much mining power.

Bitfury is already having second thoughts about the New York Agreement. You will see the first mining camps start defecting from the agreement after segwit locks in.

In any case, it's irrelevant. Whales will dump on GarzikCoin, killing the price and thus forcing them to go back to mining the legacy chain. GarzikCoin doesn't stand a chance and will become another dumb altcoin, and everyone involved will be forever hated because they will be responsible of crashing the price in the middle of an all time high for no reason other than rushing a hardfork for an unnecessary blocksize increase while putting Jeff Garzik, someone that works in a blockchain spying tool, in charge.


Repeated History: Reading references (emphasis mine);
http://www.contravex.com/2015/08/29/the-economics-of-sinking-garzikcoin-aka-bip-100/
Adam T. says:   
August 30, 2015 at 8:49 AM   

“pre-emptive strike” — best characterization I’ve seen yet to describe the odd feeling of urgency from certain parties.
Reply   

    Pete Dushenski says:   
    August 30, 2015 at 10:11 AM   

    Odd indeed. Almost like these overgrown children seriously imagine that Bitcoin didn’t reach escape velocity 2.5 years ago and that they can rewrite history if only they obtain enough “consensus” on social media. Must suck to think that’s how the world works.



sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair
Just reiterating to watch the bitcoin 101 blackboard series:
youtube: link1 (https://youtu.be/Bhe61JaNFLU)

IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.
It's at $38B, and there aren't a lot of companies that would be able to take on something with that value and destroy it without also destroying the value of the company. Most organizations couldn't even pull something like that off.

I am far more concerned about the power plays and lack of community interest that could result of the recent events dealing with the blocksize, but it's looking like it will be getting resolved so there is a fair amount of hope for that to go to the back burner and solve the issues we've been experiencing.

Bitcoin has crossed $50B cap and is not so trivial anymore. Also, the market has been clear this week re:August 1st  release of BCC (larger blocksize fork) and BCC has been DUMPED, people getting rid of BCC as fast as they can  and instead buying some real Bitcoin (BTC).

I held off responding hoping others would reply to the thread.

You make a lot of excellent points. I wish I had something to contribute but not so much.

If I was to apply an economic model to this discussion, I would aim for a type of thermoeconomic context. I believe that's the future and the best model to use.

But to be honest, I'm an amateur when it comes to economics/markets/trading & I've been severely slacking off for a long time now.

To the point of economics/markets/trading, look at the practical use-case of Bitcoin; a global store of value asset that may be transmitted via a communications channel.

To illustrate how global, I asked which country people were from in this small forum, of those who spoke out, in two days the following tally;
9 responded from Phillippines
5 responded from Indonesia
3 responded from India
2 responded from USA
1 from Ukraine
1 from Bangladesh
1 from East Timor

the above was a count of posters from here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/which-country-are-you-from-here-list-thirty-popular-bitcoin-countries-for-trade-1853019

I'll revisit the extensive and increasingly global characteristics of Bitcoin from this thread to update the tally soon.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair
Just reiterating to watch the bitcoin 101 blackboard series:
youtube: link1 (https://youtu.be/Bhe61JaNFLU)


has anyone here watched it?
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair
There's been much hysteria during 2017 re: coming-deadlines....the first earlier this year around March, and the other being the looming Aug. 1, 2017,

What is the probability that nothing happens...normal Bitcoin stays Bitcoin and most hashing power remains with normal Bitcoin?
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair
...
Even if no change is made to code....another attack potential: central banks can sponsor (lend to "startups"/"entrepreneurs") organizations that'll cause a huge bouts of volatile events to keep away broad-mass-user-base: they would bid up prices like crazy to hold a signification portion of coins, and then unload the coins on the market either all at one time (huge drop in 1 week) or slowly to control volume over-time (ie 3 years of lower prices).

In light of recent cyber-attacks enabled by official government-entity backdoors, does anyone question the attempts to attach these evil acts to cryptocurrency since these 'hackers' then ask for payments in such? Wouldn't it be convenient for government-backed entities to set a plan to make things like Bitcoin look bad by using their contractors (hackers for hire) to use these exploits so that subsequently bad publicity would be spread on Bitcoin to general public around the world?

Isn't this made easy by all these global companies using USA-developed (China-made) computing infrastructure which has the backdoors the NSA/CIA requires for having such control?
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair
…then even a $50 billion market cap would still be seen as trivial in the financial assets arena where one bitcoin can easily go above $3,000 USD. But really, as the years pack on and integrity remains intact, the price would be infinity-bound.

...

How can a $50 billion market cap be trivial or seen as under-the-radar?
see here: link1 (http://i1.wp.com/money.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/all-the-worlds-money-and-markets.png?w=1346) or link2 (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/75/9b/63/759b63f98e8569498bee62738fda954b.jpg)


IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.
It's at $38B, and there aren't a lot of companies that would be able to take on something with that value and destroy it without also destroying the value of the company. Most organizations couldn't even pull something like that off.

I am far more concerned about the power plays and lack of community interest that could result of the recent events dealing with the blocksize, but it's looking like it will be getting resolved so there is a fair amount of hope for that to go to the back burner and solve the issues we've been experiencing.

Amazing how in 3-months bitcoin (mkt cap) approaching $50B so quickly....the level where I say BTC is not so trivial anymore.

True, villainous reputation would be labeled for any entity (or entities) working to attack or take down Bitcoin...but couldn't this same exact thing be achieved without any such labeling by simply changing the rules of the protocol (take-over without traditional mining - ie segwit)? Or even further centralizing need/cost of hardware for mining the protocol (blocksize)?

What is the current total size of the bitcoin blockchain?

Then why would there be a push for blocksizes to go larger? (more susceptible to spam attacks, blockchain bloat, requirement for more expensive capital hardware mining pools)

Why wouldn't there be a push for smaller blocksizes? Shouldn't the protocol decrease blocksize from 1mb to 750kb? (limit spam in a block, reduce bloat, increase decentralization)
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1007
IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.
It's at $38B, and there aren't a lot of companies that would be able to take on something with that value and destroy it without also destroying the value of the company. Most organizations couldn't even pull something like that off.

I am far more concerned about the power plays and lack of community interest that could result of the recent events dealing with the blocksize, but it's looking like it will be getting resolved so there is a fair amount of hope for that to go to the back burner and solve the issues we've been experiencing.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair
IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.

They can destroy bitcoin.

If they want to make it obvious they oppose innovation and progress which benefit civilization & make themselves look guilty.

They usually prefer to be described as philanthropists who donate money to charity and have a net positive effect on society, rather than the opposite.

I'm not certain they want to paint themselves as being villains with mass discontent on the horizon.

There exists a great separation of powers by the users, developers, mining network in this decentralized framework of Bitcoin.

Destruction of Bitcoin need not be public nor make an organization villainous, they just need to introduce a proposal to be adopted to tilt this power structure involving change to Bitcoin's protocol (code).

A slight change of this control, and this is all about CONTROL, will open the doorway to begin the destruction of bitcoin.

Even if no change is made to code....another attack potential: central banks can sponsor (lend to "startups"/"entrepreneurs") organizations that'll cause a huge bouts of volatile events to keep away broad-mass-user-base: they would bid up prices like crazy to hold a signification portion of coins, and then unload the coins on the market either all at one time (huge drop in 1 week) or slowly to control volume over-time (ie 3 years of lower prices).
legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1441
IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.

They can destroy bitcoin.

If they want to make it obvious they oppose innovation and progress which benefit civilization & make themselves look guilty.

They usually prefer to be described as philanthropists who donate money to charity and have a net positive effect on society, rather than the opposite.

I'm not certain they want to paint themselves as being villains with mass discontent on the horizon.
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
IMHO it's also important - the capitalization of Bitcoin - is only 30.000.000.000 $. There are a lot of powerful funds or some companies, how have much more money. So if they want - they can push / pump/ hold / sell. They have enough power to destroy Bitcoin.
AGD
legendary
Activity: 2069
Merit: 1164
Keeper of the Private Key
Satoshi ... is it you?
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 544

Scalability problems is the main problem that bitcoin will face if the community will decide to accept segwit. I am not against segwit but there are just some things that segwit needs to settle before they can start with bitcoin and that I say is the problem on scalability. Bitcoin unlimited on the other hand is nice but there are many errors and bugs and so it is much safer to stick with segwit as long as they can find a way to settle the problem on scalability.

Xester, thank you but it sounds to me that you are saying everything you mentioned has a problem?
The proven option with least problems and the solution to the world's money/store of value problem is and has always been bitcoin.

Though bitcoins has been facing many problems and almost all solutions being provided have also many loopholes but it will not stop bitcoin from striving and developing itself. Bitcoin will remain stronger than ever and the secret behind that is the support of the community and users. Without the support of people who patronize bitcoin over other cryptocurrencies it would already be dead by now.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair

Scalability problems is the main problem that bitcoin will face if the community will decide to accept segwit. I am not against segwit but there are just some things that segwit needs to settle before they can start with bitcoin and that I say is the problem on scalability. Bitcoin unlimited on the other hand is nice but there are many errors and bugs and so it is much safer to stick with segwit as long as they can find a way to settle the problem on scalability.

Xester, thank you but it sounds to me that you are saying everything you mentioned has a problem?
The proven option with least problems and the solution to the world's money/store of value problem is and has always been bitcoin.
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 544
They are not going to increase the number of bitcoin in the circulation but without doing that we can still buy a cup of coffee using bitcoins. But that will only happen if the confirmation rate will be much faster than before and the miners fee will be lesser and reasonable. Anyway bitcoin is already a global currency since it can cross borders all around the world but it will never replace the fiat currency.

I like what OP said on that, here:

Quote
What about “scalability” doing many many fast-transactions/lightning network?
there are many options and none of them have to involve changing bitcoin. with fiat you have outside counterparties assigning responsibility for fast coffee transactions, i.e. Visa network or MasterCard network. Come up with a counterparty solution or let another coin become a credit-card or have a startup either become a trusted solution or develop a sidechain or some trustless solution.
Last i checked, its been clear that many of us around the world have been able to send/receive bitcoin with no issue - as so many of our friends have been doing in Japan, India, Russia, Greece, America, China, Nigeria, various South American countries, the UK. all around the world bitcoin transactions have been happening for already for years and are happening even as i type this.
“scalability” forced upon bitcoin would destroy bitcoin’s primary use of store of value.
hack.

They make very good points about bitcoin primarily being a holder of value with stability being a key element of that and lightning transactions being better suited to alt coins or 3rd party solutions.

Scalability problems is the main problem that bitcoin will face if the community will decide to accept segwit. I am not against segwit but there are just some things that segwit needs to settle before they can start with bitcoin and that I say is the problem on scalability. Bitcoin unlimited on the other hand is nice but there are many errors and bugs and so it is much safer to stick with segwit as long as they can find a way to settle the problem on scalability.
legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1441
To the point of economics/markets/trading, look at the practical use-case of Bitcoin; a global store of value asset that may be transmitted via a communications channel.

To illustrate how global, I asked which country people were from in this small forum, of those who spoke out, in two days the following tally;
9 responded from Phillippines
5 responded from Indonesia
3 responded from India
2 responded from USA
1 from Ukraine
1 from Bangladesh
1 from East Timor

the above was a count of posters from here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/which-country-are-you-from-here-list-thirty-popular-bitcoin-countries-for-trade-1853019

Its awesome to see how bitcoin has gained a worldwide presence & is increasingly becoming a currency of the people.

Some say the golden days of crypto are far gone, but those results make me excited for cryptos future.

I don't think crypto is truly mainstream yet & don't know if it ever will be, but these results are exciting.
full member
Activity: 252
Merit: 100
I just know menghasil something of bitcoin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin
Pages:
Jump to: