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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.



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.

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'll revisit the extensive and increasingly global characteristics of Bitcoin from this thread to update the tally soon.

Just reiterating to watch the bitcoin 101 blackboard series:
youtube: link1 (https://youtu.be/Bhe61JaNFLU)


has anyone here watched it?

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?

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?

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)

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.

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).

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.

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.

Satoshi ... is it you?

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.

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.

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.

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.

I just know menghasil something of bitcoin