Pages:
Author

Topic: Hearn's "Faith in Humanity Shaken" after People Awaken to His EVIL Plan! (Read 6012 times)

legendary
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1030
Twitter @realmicroguy
Your claim that he thought coinbase and bitpay constituted enough hash power to trigger the XT fork is laughable on its face.

You should reread my post more carefully. I never said that.

What's this then?

Quote
Mike thought all he needed was banker-owned Coinbase (and perhaps Bitpay) to support his "bitcoin frankenstein" and the fork would proceed.



~~

What you don't seem to grasp is how he was going to bypass hashpower with checkpoints. You really need to get up-to-speed with what he's saying in this clip. I think you might be the only user here that doesn't understand what Mike had planned?

Here, try this one more time: >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB9goUDBAR0

~~
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1070
who is coinbase or bitpay? Smiley

the chinesses will dictate the market.

they do not have big merchants that can do business abroad, so in that regard they are bonded with their users base only

and no the miners alone can not dictate anything, you need merchants also, to move bitcoin
legendary
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1030
Twitter @realmicroguy
Bait & switch much? Try what one more time? He's laying out a scenario where two different communities has different ideas at what constitutes the valid chain. In no way does this achieve your stated scenario whereby Coinbase and perhaps Bitpay are enough to totally overturn consensus.

But there aren't two communities? What he's laying out is a scheme whereby one group plans to subvert the wishes/desires of another group.

He even went further by stating that, "if the Chinese don't like it, they should make their own Altcoin." What a guy!
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1004
who is coinbase or bitpay? Smiley

the chinesses will dictate the market.
legendary
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1660
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
Your claim that he thought coinbase and bitpay constituted enough hash power to trigger the XT fork is laughable on its face.

You should reread my post more carefully. I never said that.

What's this then?

Quote
Mike thought all he needed was banker-owned Coinbase (and perhaps Bitpay) to support his "bitcoin frankenstein" and the fork would proceed.



~~

What you don't seem to grasp is how he was going to bypass hashpower with checkpoints. You really need to get up-to-speed with what he's saying in this clip. I think you might be the only user here that doesn't understand what Mike had planned?

Here, try this one more time: >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB9goUDBAR0

~~

Bait & switch much? Try what one more time? He's laying out a scenario where two different communities has different ideas at what constitutes the valid chain. In no way does this achieve your stated scenario whereby Coinbase and perhaps Bitpay are enough to totally overturn consensus.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
Your claim that he thought coinbase and bitpay constituted enough hash power to trigger the XT fork is laughable on its face.

You should reread my post more carefully. I never said that.

What's this then?

Quote
Mike thought all he needed was banker-owned Coinbase (and perhaps Bitpay) to support his "bitcoin frankenstein" and the fork would proceed.



~~

What you don't seem to grasp is how he was going to bypass hashpower with checkpoints. You really need to get up-to-speed with what he's saying in this clip. I think you might be the only user here that doesn't understand what Mike had planned?

Here, try this one more time: >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB9goUDBAR0

~~

Yeah, thats Mike's "rule by authority" philosophy rearing its ugly head. 
That's why "everyone" hates Mike and XT...but that doesn't mean
he was wrong to try to increase blocksize and push for mainchain scaling.
Sadly, he's less harmful than those that are trying to do the opposite.

legendary
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1660
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
Your claim that he thought coinbase and bitpay constituted enough hash power to trigger the XT fork is laughable on its face.

You should reread my post more carefully. I never said that.

What's this then?

Quote
Mike thought all he needed was banker-owned Coinbase (and perhaps Bitpay) to support his "bitcoin frankenstein" and the fork would proceed.

sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
Have fun and get paid for it!
Time will tell. Hearn is a big guy in the clique but it's still a lot of people involved.
full member
Activity: 136
Merit: 100
Get your filthy fiat off me you damn dirty state.
Your claim that he thought coinbase and bitpay constituted enough hash power to trigger the XT fork is laughable on its face.

You should reread my post more carefully. I never said that. Which makes me doubt the sincerity of your confusion.

Hearn clearly said that he intended to subvert all of China by using checkpoints. He also said he would subvert all SPV wallets using the same methods. This would of course affect anyone not using his version of the software. You must not grasp what he outlines here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB9goUDBAR0

I never claimed he could be successful, I was attempting to explain his intention per a user's request.

Hey, I'm the guy who made that youtube video using interview excerpts of Hearn on Epicenter Bitcoin in mid-2015. Thanks to everyone who linked to it and helped expose Hearn's willingness to "ignore the longest chain" using "checkpoint blocks." I'm glad Hearn's the problem of bankers and not bitcoiners now.

Great work! You might actually be THE person that saved Bitcoin from the banks! Kiss

To everyone: you're welcome.   Cool
hero member
Activity: 1106
Merit: 521
At this point I have no idea what to believe.

Someone please hold me.

Me too, "can i have a hug"..................lol  Grin
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 500
✪ NEXCHANGE | BTC, LTC, ETH & DOGE ✪
All that Hearn says may be true (I am not very updated on all that). However, Which is the interest in proclaiming dead a project in which you have been working for 5 years when other people still are going on working in it? I don't know. But I doubt that the interest is to just warn users.
legendary
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1030
Twitter @realmicroguy
Your claim that he thought coinbase and bitpay constituted enough hash power to trigger the XT fork is laughable on its face.

You should reread my post more carefully. I never said that. Which makes me doubt the sincerity of your confusion.

Hearn clearly said that he intended to subvert all of China by using checkpoints. He also said he would subvert all SPV wallets using the same methods. This would of course affect anyone not using his version of the software. You must not grasp what he outlines here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB9goUDBAR0

I never claimed he could be successful, I was attempting to explain his intention per a user's request.

Hey, I'm the guy who made that youtube video using interview excerpts of Hearn on Epicenter Bitcoin in mid-2015. Thanks to everyone who linked to it and helped expose Hearn's willingness to "ignore the longest chain" using "checkpoint blocks." I'm glad Hearn's the problem of bankers and not bitcoiners now.

Great work! You might actually be THE person that saved Bitcoin from the banks!  Kiss
full member
Activity: 136
Merit: 100
Get your filthy fiat off me you damn dirty state.
Your claim that he thought coinbase and bitpay constituted enough hash power to trigger the XT fork is laughable on its face.

You should reread my post more carefully. I never said that. Which makes me doubt the sincerity of your confusion.

Hearn clearly said that he intended to subvert all of China by using checkpoints. He also said he would subvert all SPV wallets using the same methods. This would of course affect anyone not using his version of the software. You must not grasp what he outlines here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB9goUDBAR0

I never claimed he could be successful, I was attempting to explain his intention per a user's request.

Hey, I'm the guy who made that youtube video using interview excerpts of Hearn on Epicenter Bitcoin in mid-2015. Thanks to everyone who linked to it and helped expose Hearn's willingness to "ignore the longest chain" using "checkpoint blocks." I'm glad Hearn's the problem of bankers and not bitcoiners now.
newbie
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
If bitcoin is working then its working.

Even if transactions can take 1 hour to complete the fact is they complete and they are secure. That is still an improvement on anything before bitcoin.

If the time to complete becomes an issue people can use another chain for less than 1 hour. Bitcoin will always be number one since its got the first mover advantage. The miners dont switch to another sidechain so BTC is always stronger with more hashing power.

Mike Hearn is talking bull**** as usual.

I think the key difference in the transaction completion time and the number of transactions that can be handled is the fact that all of these transactions are PUBLIC and out of the hands of VISA and MasterCard. I'll take a 1 day completion time if it means that less of my information and spending habits are in the vast databases of VISA/MasterCard/NSA/USGOVT thankyaverymuch.
sr. member
Activity: 401
Merit: 280
This is the beauty of open source software.

If and when the "evil" muhahahah... blockstream guys carry out their dastardly plan of "forcing" their products onto the bitcoin community I can reject them and their code. In the meantime I like their contributions and would appreciate if you judge their current work based upon its merit and something more substantive than ... its too complicated.

Exactly. My opinion doesn't matter all that much. It's a sort of catharsis to get it out there though. The market will decide on proposals, and they are. The incentive structure upon which Bitcoin operates might prove that it actually works... Bullish (at least when when the drama's died down).

I think your opinion does matter. We ARE the market, and if you "recruit" just a few people into bitcoin, as i and most here do - friends, family, coworkers-, and since we are still small in numbers, it does matter. Just a cheer up thought :-)
legendary
Activity: 994
Merit: 1035
Exactly. My opinion doesn't matter all that much. It's a sort of catharsis to get it out there though. The market will decide on proposals, and they are. The incentive structure upon which Bitcoin operates might prove that it actually works... Bullish (at least when when the drama's died down).

I genuinely would be happy with core + segwit or classic. Both are good and have smart people behind them.

Hearn just made his opinion public in a wrong way and that has caused the recent crash in prices,

Wrong way? He is a liar and fraud. There is no way he is that ignorant on how bitcoin works ...therefore he is shilling for R3...

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/lies-fud-and-hyperbole-1329647
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
This is the beauty of open source software.

If and when the "evil" muhahahah... blockstream guys carry out their dastardly plan of "forcing" their products onto the bitcoin community I can reject them and their code. In the meantime I like their contributions and would appreciate if you judge their current work based upon its merit and something more substantive than ... its too complicated.

Exactly. My opinion doesn't matter all that much. It's a sort of catharsis to get it out there though. The market will decide on proposals, and they are. The incentive structure upon which Bitcoin operates might prove that it actually works... Bullish (at least when when the drama's died down).
hero member
Activity: 546
Merit: 500
Oh, people are comparing Hearn with Hitler now?
Hearn just made his opinion public in a wrong way and that has caused the recent crash in prices,
But it will be soon back up, just wait
legendary
Activity: 994
Merit: 1035
I'll preface by saying that the Blockstream guys are highly competent coders and cryptographers, they were before they formed Blockstream, and they are today. Your placement of trust in them thus far is not alien to me. However, a conflict of interest is an insidious thing, it may start out benign, but under the pressure of investors, deadlines, and runway... may begin to allow a form of self delusion... a self reinforcing mentality that what is best for the company is best for the protocol.

The investors that deposited $21 mil didn't do so out of charity, they were sold an eventual ROI. I'm not satisfied with the thesis that it was "we're going to altruistically contribute open source code to better Bitcoin, which will probably make us massive amounts of money somehow, and we'll dissolve the company while stiffing the investors if we have second thoughts about it." I want to know how they plan to make money, and if artificially crippling the main chain could incubate that plan.

It seems that more distribution of available software is the only way to allow miners, who issue the votes that count, to fully exercise their built in right of voting with hashes. If the miners continue to choose core's direction, so be it, I'll convert my node to a segwit node so it actually continues to fully verify. I got interested in Bitcoin because it felt like there wasn't a central point of control, that it natively resisted control by centralized influence. I have confidence that the market will settle the blocksize just as efficiently as it sets the price and the difficulty, a market with production quotas is not a market. Mining valid blocks is not a trivial thing, and those doing it have an interest in seeing the system they manage be as successful as possible.

I don't need to trust Classic or Core , and can review and judge the open source code based upon its own merits. I can even appreciate and am happy to use some of Mike Hearn's code- bitcoinJ who I despise, because I understand what it does.

This is the beauty of open source software.

If and when the "evil" muhahahah... blockstream guys carry out their dastardly plan of "forcing" their products onto the bitcoin community I can reject them and their code. In the meantime I like their contributions and would appreciate if you judge their current work based upon its merit and something more substantive than ... its too complicated.

Believe you me, I'm not going to touch Lightning network, if its centralized, closed source, has DRM, introduces too much risk. Until there is evidence that supports it has those traits I look forward to it.
Pages:
Jump to: