Author

Topic: PSA: Get your Bitcoin off any exchange supporting "BSV" (due to insolvency risk) (Read 1514 times)

legendary
Activity: 4410
Merit: 4788
Looking at https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-sv/markets/ and sorting by volume % and then by name to check how many trading pairs they have it looks like 4 exchanges, MEXC, Upbit, Changelly PRO and
IndoEx hold 50%+ of the volume. Some others, like CoinEx do not even hit 1/10 of 1% of the market.

Still wonder how and why these smaller ones bother unless they are as discussed earlier just using API calls to someplace and do not even bother having their own synced wallet or anything else.

-Dave

other interesting facts.
of the markets of presumed $$... majority is tether not actual $$
its USDT not USD

so they are not trading in and trading out actual fiat much.
they are just using arbitrage tools to cycle funds in circles to boost volume
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
How many serious CEXs are there that still have Faketoshi altcoin listed?
As noted in BitMEX's tweet I linked to above, the biggest ones are Robinhood, Bittrex, Bitfinex, and KuCoin, although you can still see a full list on Greg's opening post on this thread or here: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-sv/markets/

We know that for some of the famous CEX CEO logic is not the strongest virtue, but why do they still support such a project?
The same reason they list and support any such shitcoin - as long as there are people willing to trade it, then centralized exchanges are willing to host that activity in order to cash in on the trading fees.

Looking at https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-sv/markets/ and sorting by volume % and then by name to check how many trading pairs they have it looks like 4 exchanges, MEXC, Upbit, Changelly PRO and
IndoEx hold 50%+ of the volume. Some others, like CoinEx do not even hit 1/10 of 1% of the market.

Still wonder how and why these smaller ones bother unless they are as discussed earlier just using API calls to someplace and do not even bother having their own synced wallet or anything else.

-Dave
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
How many serious CEXs are there that still have Faketoshi altcoin listed?
As noted in BitMEX's tweet I linked to above, the biggest ones are Robinhood, Bittrex, Bitfinex, and KuCoin, although you can still see a full list on Greg's opening post on this thread or here: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-sv/markets/

We know that for some of the famous CEX CEO logic is not the strongest virtue, but why do they still support such a project?
The same reason they list and support any such shitcoin - as long as there are people willing to trade it, then centralized exchanges are willing to host that activity in order to cash in on the trading fees.
legendary
Activity: 3234
Merit: 5637
Blackjack.fun-Free Raffle-Join&Win $50🎲
I wonder how other exchanges are going to handle the fact that not only can coins start being seized, but apparently they can't even monitor for chain splits if this happens. Surely delisting has to happen soon?

How many serious CEXs are there that still have Faketoshi altcoin listed? We know that for some of the famous CEX CEO logic is not the strongest virtue, but why do they still support such a project? Maybe they think that Faketoshi will not sue them like he is doing to others these days...
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
So, looks like BitMEX have given up trying to keep tabs on what the hell is going on with BSV.

After noting on November 14 that BSV was releasing a hardfork client to allow CSW to unilaterally start seizing coins which belong to other people, they attempted to monitor for such activities by running two version of the BSV software. They then on November 23 announced they were giving up trying to sync the ridiculously bloated blockchain and therefore cannot monitor for coins being seized or chain splits.

And looks like Bitfinex is starting to notice the effects of BSV being a complete mess: https://www.bitfinex.com/posts/868

I wonder how other exchanges are going to handle the fact that not only can coins start being seized, but apparently they can't even monitor for chain splits if this happens. Surely delisting has to happen soon?
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
yep it only needs 0.25% of bitcoiners to pool jump to BSV pool to 51% BSV network

A bit more then that since it would only be 50% :-)

Eliminating the people trading it, there is an ass for every seat so to speak so if you try to sell something people will buy it.

What I still don't get is the fact that after this last fork they are putting out that exchanges are not dropping it.

With this for they can now confiscate coins that belong to anyone, including exchanges clients. Even if the exchange did nothing wrong but they decide *these* coins are now ours poof go those coins. How can you operate like that?

Up until they released the code this entire thread, although accepted as true was for the most part an academic discussion. Well, it's no longer academic it's here.

If you have coins on an exchange that has not dropped BSV, or announced their dropping it some advice:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Uvcra0Gnus

-Dave

legendary
Activity: 4410
Merit: 4788
BSV is a stack of cards ready to tumble

BSV is not a coin with actual real world services or a large hashrate to secure that network.
the businesses wrapped around BSV are not real collateral backed to evaluate them in real money terms to any high degree

BSV is a stack of cards ready to tumble

firstly, the trade volume
there is the ability to fake volume
(for simple demo)
its only trading at ~$40. ($55m VOLUME(as read by someone else recent days average))
 meaning 2 idiots probably could swap the same $20 back and forth between each other (using a bot) 2.75m times a day  = 31 times a second
only swapping the same 0.5bsv:$20 between each other to create this fake trade volume


secondly faking BSV businesses valuations
EG (im using dummy numbers for easy demo explainer)
let say BSV had access to all 19m of its bsv coins.

BSV is saying its entire business partnerships are worth more then 760m(circ cap) whilst only $20  (only $20 in entire BSV reserves in my demo) is traded of real fiat between BSV'ers.

then those businesses are also not holding portions of BSV as real reserved collateral. meaning their business valuations are not actually backed let alone by the coin, but then no fiat reserves to back the coin
which those business are not actually holding

lets explain this simply

imagine company A only has 1m bsv coins. that business then claims its worth $40m(coin*price). even though there would be (demo above) only $20 real fiat in the BSV ecosystem.

that business offers out say 100m of shares/tokens where only one share/token is bought for say $10
creating that business valuation of $1bilion..($10 fiat * 100m shares)
 even though the actual fiat in the BSV (demo number) ecosystem is only $30 now (disclaimer dummy numbers for demo explainer of hypothetical scenario)

yep you see it in sharktank/dragons den TV shows.
business enters the tank/den.. asks for only $100k hard money for 5%
the dragons/sharks laugh and say "do you really think your company is worth $2m(even though company has no cash and is only seeking $100k)


because the BSV ecosystem of CSW companies only service each other in a incest game of sharing their own genepool of 'collateral'
those BSV services/companies.. are a stack of cards ready to fall

where the real hard fiat does not match the BSV cap and bsv business valuations

..
oh and i have not even got to the hashrate yet
650petahash (0.65exa)
is 0.25% of bitcoin hashrate

yep it only needs 0.25% of bitcoiners to pool jump to BSV pool to 51% BSV network

edit to respond to below (in jest/humour)
yep it only needs 0.25% of bitcoiners to pool jump to BSV pool to 51% BSV network

A bit more then that since it would only be 50% :-)
bitcoin is 270exa, which 0.25% is 675peta
51% attack of 650peta BSV is 663peta required

0.25% of bitcoin is a 52% attack essentially.. so my math is good Cheesy
full member
Activity: 1134
Merit: 140
Next up: BSV doesn't need a blockchain. Roll Eyes
Eventually this shitcoin will either join its thousands of friends in the altcoin graveyard or turn into something similar to PayPal where users have to sign up on their centralized website, hand over their money to receive a shitcoin which they also keep. By then due to BSV not being listed on any exchange, they would have full control over the price and they can manipulate it to make money like if there are more cashouts they decrease the price and increase it when there are more deposits...
Well, if they go into that territory then the SEC will be all over their ass, because they are keen on regulating these kind of price manipulations as evidence of a security. Talk about a legal battle you can't win.  Smiley

Best that happens if they go down that route is BSV gets banned in the USA.
I mean it’s obvious that they are not smart, which means they could do all kinds of unexpected stuff and that’s fine, we shouldn't really expect them to do anything that requires even a slight bit of thinking. They may or may not do this, I am not saying they will do it, all I am saying is that something that will put them in SEC's crosshair doesn't seem too unlikely to me, it would be totally possible and it will definitely happen.

What I do not understand is that how could people believe these people. Craig Wright showed what kind of person he has long time ago, and even knowing full on well and have information on it, why would anyone trust and invest into this?
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
I may stand corrected Dave - I'm reading unconfirmed chatterings that both Bittrex and Robinhood depend on Blockchair, and so may be delisting BSV when Blockchair does. I checked the Bittrex site here (https://global.bittrex.com/status) and they currently list their BSV wallets as "inactive". Perhaps the dominoes are starting to fall...

So if they had a reorg that caused them to loose coins they could always 'fix' it.
No no no. They might have enough hashrate, but they don't have the password to the right Twitter accounts to use the Proof of Tweet algorithm. Tongue
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
If they know which, if any, exchanges are not using their own node(s) but puling from Blockchair then they could know that as of November 7th they are going to have to stop supporting BSV.
Blockchair's BSV explorer has already had times where it has shown no new blocks for several days, while other block explorers have been dozens or even hundreds of blocks ahead (albeit with every block explorer you check either at different heights, or at the same height but showing different forks). Although it seems to have caught up now, any exchange which was solely relying on Blockchair would have had to suspend their BSV deposits and withdrawals for over a week now.

I pointed out above that Coinex was still active BUT since they are closely linked with ViaBTC I assumed that they were using their block explorer. And they had a low confirmation rate.
Thinking about it, Via dies have enough SHA hashrate to do whatever they want to the BSV blockchain if they wanted to. So if they had a reorg that caused them to loose coins they could always 'fix' it.

But, I also asked and nobody replied as to what number of confirmations other exchanges were using. If they were at some very high number, then even with the re-orgs and stalls it might have not mattered.

Kind of like back in 2017 when some exchanges were waiting on 500 confirms for BCH before they changed the DAA.

-Dave
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5834
not your keys, not your coins!
Here is what the lead developer of Blockchair had to say a few months ago:
[...]
With this amount of junk data I just don't see a business model for a BSV explorer which would work in the long term (maybe an explorer run by a miner?) [emphasis mine]. The same goes for exchanges for example I think. If you have to buy 10 racks of servers to validate the blockchain, but you only have 10 clients paying trading fees, you'll go bankrupt.
Junk data that nobody cares about and nobody is interested in using. Sounds about right.
Even if a miner sets up a block explorer (idea: they're running a node anyway), it's still a bad business model, because the mining simply subsidizes the explorer; there's nothing of value that it provides in return.
That's why there literally cannot be a meaningful, long-term business model for a BSV explorer. The discrepancy between the cost to run it (expensive hardware) and the ad money it can generate (low interest, few BSV users who use block explorers) completely disincentivizes it. As we already determined, this is not by accident.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
If they know which, if any, exchanges are not using their own node(s) but puling from Blockchair then they could know that as of November 7th they are going to have to stop supporting BSV.
Blockchair's BSV explorer has already had times where it has shown no new blocks for several days, while other block explorers have been dozens or even hundreds of blocks ahead (albeit with every block explorer you check either at different heights, or at the same height but showing different forks). Although it seems to have caught up now, any exchange which was solely relying on Blockchair would have had to suspend their BSV deposits and withdrawals for over a week now.

Here is what the lead developer of Blockchair had to say a few months ago:
But the reality is that 99.99% or so of Bitcoin SV transactions are junk, so despite being the biggest Bitcoin-like blockchain with most transactions, Bitcoin SV constitutes only 0.3% of our visitor numbers and there are very few API clients using Bitcoin SV (0.2% of all API requests most of which are free API calls for the stats). Unfortunately, this doesn't cover all these costs. So that's why we can't run more than 2 nodes, and even these two nodes will get stuck at some point because we'll go bankrupt buying all these disks to store the junk data. But we're trying our best Smiley

With this amount of junk data I just don't see a business model for a BSV explorer which would work in the long term (maybe an explorer run by a miner?). The same goes for exchanges for example I think. If you have to buy 10 racks of servers to validate the blockchain, but you only have 10 clients paying trading fees, you'll go bankrupt.
Junk data that nobody cares about and nobody is interested in using. Sounds about right.
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
Next up: BSV doesn't need a blockchain. Roll Eyes
Eventually this shitcoin will either join its thousands of friends in the altcoin graveyard or turn into something similar to PayPal where users have to sign up on their centralized website, hand over their money to receive a shitcoin which they also keep. By then due to BSV not being listed on any exchange, they would have full control over the price and they can manipulate it to make money like if there are more cashouts they decrease the price and increase it when there are more deposits...

Well, if they go into that territory then the SEC will be all over their ass, because they are keen on regulating these kind of price manipulations as evidence of a security. Talk about a legal battle you can't win.  Smiley

Best that happens if they go down that route is BSV gets banned in the USA.
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 10611
Next up: BSV doesn't need a blockchain. Roll Eyes
Eventually this shitcoin will either join its thousands of friends in the altcoin graveyard or turn into something similar to PayPal where users have to sign up on their centralized website, hand over their money to receive a shitcoin which they also keep. By then due to BSV not being listed on any exchange, they would have full control over the price and they can manipulate it to make money like if there are more cashouts they decrease the price and increase it when there are more deposits...
member
Activity: 162
Merit: 84
Not an exchange, but it looks like Blockchair will stop supporting BSV (and EOS) in about 2 weeks. You are shown a banner at the top of the page whenever you try to use the BSV explorer with the following text:
Quote
Please note that on November 7th, 2022 we'll be limiting full public support for the following blockchains: EOS, Bitcoin SV. We recommend switching to alternative explorers.

Can't say I blame them when on any given day there are about 5 different chain tips to try to pick from until Proof of Tweet kicks back in and the BSV gods dictate which chain is the One True ChainTM.

Also, looks like CoinGeek might know something we don't and are running preemptive damage control. https://coingeek.com/bsv-doesnt-need-exchanges/
Next up: BSV doesn't need a blockchain. Roll Eyes

BSV and EOS that will be limited will cause the assets of these coins to be vacuumed, even though they have been around for a long time, old coins are starting to have a few lyrics that make it difficult to develop, especially as you said in the future BSV does not need blockchain this will eliminate them clearly and they will take  advantage of that reason.
legendary
Activity: 3948
Merit: 3191
Leave no FUD unchallenged
Next up: BSV doesn't need a blockchain. Roll Eyes

I mean... If they wanted to go down the route of easily enforced court-ordered forfeiture, it's was a pretty poor design choice to include one to begin with.   Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
Not an exchange, but it looks like Blockchair will stop supporting BSV (and EOS) in about 2 weeks. You are shown a banner at the top of the page whenever you try to use the BSV explorer with the following text:
Quote
Please note that on November 7th, 2022 we'll be limiting full public support for the following blockchains: EOS, Bitcoin SV. We recommend switching to alternative explorers.

Can't say I blame them when on any given day there are about 5 different chain tips to try to pick from until Proof of Tweet kicks back in and the BSV gods dictate which chain is the One True ChainTM.

I'm guessing that since they make their money from selling API access and other services that the cost of keeping the BSV chain up and running and on the correct fork is now costing them more then it's generating.
As I said a few posts up, as soon as a business is no longer making money with a coin it's gone if there is a cost to keeping it up and running.


Also, looks like CoinGeek might know something we don't and are running preemptive damage control. https://coingeek.com/bsv-doesnt-need-exchanges/
Next up: BSV doesn't need a blockchain. Roll Eyes

If they know which, if any, exchanges are not using their own node(s) but puling from Blockchair then they could know that as of November 7th they are going to have to stop supporting BSV.

-Dave
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
Not an exchange, but it looks like Blockchair will stop supporting BSV (and EOS) in about 2 weeks. You are shown a banner at the top of the page whenever you try to use the BSV explorer with the following text:
Quote
Please note that on November 7th, 2022 we'll be limiting full public support for the following blockchains: EOS, Bitcoin SV. We recommend switching to alternative explorers.

Can't say I blame them when on any given day there are about 5 different chain tips to try to pick from until Proof of Tweet kicks back in and the BSV gods dictate which chain is the One True ChainTM.

Also, looks like CoinGeek might know something we don't and are running preemptive damage control. https://coingeek.com/bsv-doesnt-need-exchanges/
Next up: BSV doesn't need a blockchain. Roll Eyes
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
BSV attacks don't stop
The high-fee miner seems to mine when BSV is more profitable, so we should see them oscillating on and off now unless the BSV price crashes a fair bit-- $40 might be enough to make them stop but it's a pain to calculate how much gain they're getting from gaming the difficulty update algorithm so they might keep going with prices even lower than that.

Quote
Ayre goes to jail for suspicious materials on his PC; i.e. no more cash flow for CSW
I assume you've seen his commentary on the advantages of living in Antigua, so that's not likely!

He seems to have learned to stop posting so many images of his questionably young looking entertainment in public.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5834
not your keys, not your coins!
Probably not going to matter much but as @gmaxwell mentioned in another thread hodlonaut won his case https://twitter.com/hodlonaut/status/1583086284792205312
So it might not make a difference OR faketoshi might start a scorched earth campaign and attack everyone he can. In the end it probably does not matter anyway. There will always be people who believe him and it's probably not worth anyone's time to change their opinion on that. We can just make sure that the number of people who do believe him is as small as possible.

-Dave
The American-style happy ending now would be:
  • BSV attacks don't stop, all exchanges delist it (too risky)
  • People panic sell, price goes to 0
  • CSW loses next court case(s) based on hodlonaut precedent
  • Ayre goes to jail for suspicious materials on his PC; i.e. no more cash flow for CSW

We would never hear from him again.. Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
Probably not going to matter much but as @gmaxwell mentioned in another thread hodlonaut won his case https://twitter.com/hodlonaut/status/1583086284792205312
So it might not make a difference OR faketoshi might start a scorched earth campaign and attack everyone he can. In the end it probably does not matter anyway. There will always be people who believe him and it's probably not worth anyone's time to change their opinion on that. We can just make sure that the number of people who do believe him is as small as possible.

-Dave
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5834
not your keys, not your coins!
I'm running a search for the word 'Chancellor' now, just out of curiosity. Cheesy
Code:
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> grep -aPo '\x43\x68\x61\x6e\x63\x65\x6c\x6c\x6f\x72' *.dat
blk00000.dat:Chancellor
Off-topic, but for anyone interested: It finished after a while, with the following results. 'Chancellor' appears 8 more times on the blockchain.

Code:
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> grep -aPo '\x43\x68\x61\x6e\x63\x65\x6c\x6c\x6f\x72' *.dat
blk00000.dat:Chancellor
blk00280.dat:Chancellor
blk00281.dat:Chancellor
blk00315.dat:Chancellor
blk01005.dat:Chancellor
blk01241.dat:Chancellor
blk01679.dat:Chancellor
blk02741.dat:Chancellor
blk03078.dat:Chancellor

For example, in blk00280.dat, we have a copy of part of the actual message from the genesis block:
Code:
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> hexdump -C blk00280.dat | grep -C 10 Chancellor
067af060  70 49 ea 5a 2f 12 8e 3e  b8 0f 1c 40 1b 25 30 00  |pI.Z/..>...@.%0.|
067af070  00 00 00 6a 47 30 44 02  20 61 9f 56 b8 3c f4 47  |...jG0D. a.V.<.G|
067af080  6d a7 51 ff 1b 02 1c 46  75 59 64 ee 60 72 de 50  |m.Q....FuYd.`r.P|
067af090  0e cd b5 6c 7d 81 62 58  05 02 20 70 69 1e 15 29  |...l}.bX.. pi..)|
067af0a0  e8 9c 1a 32 d5 91 f9 80  d9 ce df 96 ca 6d d0 54  |...2.........m.T|
067af0b0  30 53 25 d6 b8 e8 6e 7a  88 de 26 01 21 03 07 94  |0S%...nz..&.!...|
067af0c0  ea 0d e0 18 68 85 21 57  89 70 87 6f 3a 14 b7 db  |....h.!W.p.o:...|
067af0d0  e1 c5 5e 5a fd 01 71 9e  d8 e2 13 2e e4 ce ff ff  |..^Z..q.........|
067af0e0  ff ff 02 01 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 28 6a 26 54 68  |...........(j&Th|
067af0f0  65 20 54 69 6d 65 73 20  30 33 2f 4a 61 6e 2f 32  |e Times 03/Jan/2|
067af100  30 30 39 20 43 68 61 6e  63 65 6c 6c 6f 72 20 6f  |009 Chancellor o|
067af110  6e 2e 2e 2e 24 82 1e 00  00 00 00 00 19 76 a9 14  |n...$........v..|
067af120  89 44 a5 66 b5 b6 fe 71  ae fb 22 89 e5 af cf 7b  |.D.f...q.."....{|
067af130  40 17 c4 55 88 ac 00 00  00 00 01 00 00 00 02 3d  |@..U...........=|
067af140  52 a6 8b 79 89 e8 0a 98  f7 32 d2 42 3a 55 12 98  |R..y.....2.B:U..|
067af150  0c 0f 90 97 3f bb db c0  9e 3e 9a ac bd a2 9e 01  |....?....>......|
067af160  00 00 00 da 00 48 30 45  02 21 00 b7 32 8c 22 4b  |.....H0E.!..2."K|
067af170  50 4d 26 b8 15 a4 cb d6  38 33 7d 7c 4b a0 c9 5b  |PM&.....83}|K..[|
067af180  b4 e6 c3 60 92 8b b4 63  c7 6c d8 02 20 76 c1 0c  |...`...c.l.. v..|
067af190  55 8f fe 63 a1 01 63 76  16 05 b4 79 c9 36 b1 8d  |U..c..cv...y.6..|
067af1a0  52 0f 5b 2d 0e 3e 18 aa  53 b5 fa 09 dd 01 47 30  |R.[-.>..S.....G0|

Similar in blk00281.dat:
Code:
04438c70  13 e7 d8 5d 06 ff ff ff  ff 02 58 02 00 00 00 00  |...]......X.....|
04438c80  00 00 29 6a 54 68 65 20  54 69 6d 65 73 20 30 33  |..)jThe Times 03|
04438c90  2f 4a 61 6e 2f 32 30 30  39 20 43 68 61 6e 63 65  |/Jan/2009 Chance|
04438ca0  6c 6c 6f 72 20 6f 6e 20  62 2e 2e 2e 31 02 70 00  |llor on b...1.p.|
04438cb0  00 00 00 00 19 76 a9 14  77 bf 6e 7f f6 2b da d5  |.....v..w.n..+..|
04438cc0  23 7e c8 a1 da 91 f5 2b  16 28 18 63 88 ac 00 00  |#~.....+.(.c....|

Does anyone know or have a suspicion why people used / still do copy these bytes into blocks every now and then?
Maybe some miners that don't know what to put in scriptSig?
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
Since it's still trading at close to $50 a coin I took a look at CoinEx which is the only exchange I have an account in that trades it they have a 10 block confirm for trading and 30 blocks to withdraw. Either they know something we don't or have a lot more confidence that there will not be a massive reorg. Does anyone else with an account at an exchange that still trades see anything different?

I don't see the point in taking the risk at the moment, but I guess you can say that about any coin that has low to mid hashrate with an abundance of ASICs out there.

-Dave
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
Five explorers, five different block heights. Lol.

Looking again at the two I quoted before (which are the two which seem closest to the chain tip), they are again showing different blocks. Taking block 761,998, viawallet has an almost empty block from the unknown miner with a hash of 00000000000000000988466f0965faa0ad16c5208a6053ba4868c8ef17b3cde4, while whatsonchain has a qdlnk 4GB block with a hash of 000000000000000007765478946ed0cfeda56343ab956699bb39d1b9b44696d3.

This seems to be the case every time I check. Just endless conflicting blocks and stale chains. Reorgs within reorgs.

Sounds like the beginning of the end for BSV. Now all that's left to happen is a black swan event to cause the mass delisting & exodus to other chains and possibly even a hardfork (by someone other than nChain bros).
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
Five explorers, five different block heights. Lol.

Looking again at the two I quoted before (which are the two which seem closest to the chain tip), they are again showing different blocks. Taking block 761,998, viawallet has an almost empty block from the unknown miner with a hash of 00000000000000000988466f0965faa0ad16c5208a6053ba4868c8ef17b3cde4, while whatsonchain has a qdlnk 4GB block with a hash of 000000000000000007765478946ed0cfeda56343ab956699bb39d1b9b44696d3.

This seems to be the case every time I check. Just endless conflicting blocks and stale chains. Reorgs within reorgs.
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 7490
Crypto Swap Exchange
The entire BSV network has collapsed. Blockchair shows no blocks for a day. https://explorer.viawallet.com/bsv and https://whatsonchain.com/blocks both show recent blocks, but different recent blocks. If you look through the past 24 hours worth of blocks, this unknown miner is mining between 70-80% of them, completely empty. At any point, this miner could decide to just ignore all blocks other than their own, completely halting all transactions and activity on BSV.

Difference on each block explorer made me curious, so i did quick research about top block height on each BSV block explorer. Here's the result,

LinkTop block height
https://bchsvexplorer.com/761976
https://explorer.viawallet.com/bsv761988
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-sv761833
https://whatsonchain.com/blocks761991
https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/assets/bsv761834

I skipped block explorer/website which no longer update their data (indicated by last block was mined on few weeks/years ago), but none of them show same number.

And it's still on going (according to Blockchair). Honestly i don't know benefit of doing this other than proving they have full control over the network or reducing cost of running node.
Definitely some weird stuff going on. Blockchair and some other explorers are showing no blocks for ~5 hours, while other explorers are showing 50 blocks beyond that, but with dozens more empty blocks. Seems to me that CSW and co are trying to re-org out all these empty blocks?

I spend a minute on r/bsv and found post showing OP_RETURN on transaction (included on empty block) which say "Pay enough fee. Not 0.05 sat/B spam. Money has value.".

https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/y71d5l/empty_block_miner_showing_his_cards_pay_enough_fee/
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5834
not your keys, not your coins!

First nail in the coffin, waiting for Blockchain association to hammer the rest of the nails into BSV. Good work driving their user base away.

Actually I wouldn't be surprised if some crank forks BSV in a situation similar to Bitcoin Cash ABC vs SV.
Honestly if I was running an exchange, I'd immediately delist BSV now if I hadn't done so much earlier. It's a way too large risk, getting deposits in BSV which are then reorged out of your wallet using 'Proof of Tweet'. No amount of trade volume can counteract this huge risk, in my opinion. Basically, CSW and his friends (potentially even regular users) could leverage it to completely dry out exchanges.
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
I'm of the opinion that the general incompetence of Bitcoin Association to run a public blockchain, and CSW running around calling himself Satoshi, are not connected events or at least not cause-and-effect. CSW's too busy fighting legal lawsuits to get his hands dirty with most of the decisions they make Smiley
Devil's advocate:  The scammyness of Craig and Calvin scares off everyone competent.

They do directly operate as his command, e.g. they said nothing about these empty blocks until Wright started railing about them. They take down any post he complains about (e.g. when they referred to BSV as a cryptocurrency), etc.

legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
I'm really sad that BSV is such a top-to-bottom scam.  I think they're demonstrating the *inevitable* consequences of their lack of resource constraints:  Essentially zero fee income, users insecure against seizure due to the possibility of arbitrary rule changes, massive centralization in *all* parts of the ecosystem, amplifications of hashpower centralization (anyone making big blocks causes the largest miners to get more than their fair share). But someone could argue that these are really just the effects of a blockchain created and run by con-men, and not their technical and economic decisions.

I'm of the opinion that the general incompetence of Bitcoin Association to run a public blockchain, and CSW running around calling himself Satoshi, are not connected events or at least not cause-and-effect. CSW's too busy fighting legal lawsuits to get his hands dirty with most of the decisions they make Smiley
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
Wait, what? Did they miss the part where this miner has the majority hashrate on the chain and is finding ~80% of all blocks? The only way the could "freeze" their block rewards is to convince literally every person and every service which still uses BSV to not accept these coins.
See also your earlier post about PoT. ... they have the most hashpower but who has the greater follower count?!

Quote
I'm also laughing at the fact that when Taal does manage to find a block, since it is 4 GB, in the time it takes to propagate across the network to the unknown miner, the unknown miner has often just found their own block in the meantime and orphans the 4 GB block. But tell me again about how big blocks don't cause any problems. Roll Eyes

I'm really sad that BSV is such a top-to-bottom scam.  I think they're demonstrating the *inevitable* consequences of their lack of resource constraints:  Essentially zero fee income, users insecure against seizure due to the possibility of arbitrary rule changes, massive centralization in *all* parts of the ecosystem, amplifications of hashpower centralization (anyone making big blocks causes the largest miners to get more than their fair share). But someone could argue that these are really just the effects of a blockchain created and run by con-men, and not their technical and economic decisions.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
Wait, what? Did they miss the part where this miner has the majority hashrate on the chain and is finding ~80% of all blocks? The only way the could "freeze" their block rewards is to convince literally every person and every service which still uses BSV to not accept these coins. They can't actually prevent the miner from moving their coins since they can just mine their own transactions with their majority hashrate. Or maybe they are planning to fork to a new algorithm which only accepts blocks from Taal? BSV is so centralized already then such a fork would literally make no difference, lol. Just fork to an Excel spreadsheet on CSW's personal laptop at this point.

I'm also laughing at the fact that when Taal does manage to find a block, since it is 4 GB, in the time it takes to propagate across the network to the unknown miner, the unknown miner has often just found their own block in the meantime and orphans the 4 GB block. But tell me again about how big blocks don't cause any problems. Roll Eyes
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

First nail in the coffin, waiting for Blockchain association to hammer the rest of the nails into BSV. Good work driving their user base away.

Actually I wouldn't be surprised if some crank forks BSV in a situation similar to Bitcoin Cash ABC vs SV.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
Or it could be someone trying to force a re-org
They are using the cutting edge Proof of Tweet algorithm: https://nitter.it/Arthur_van_Pelt/status/1581464913591291904#m

The entire BSV network has collapsed. Blockchair shows no blocks for a day. https://explorer.viawallet.com/bsv and https://whatsonchain.com/blocks both show recent blocks, but different recent blocks. If you look through the past 24 hours worth of blocks, this unknown miner is mining between 70-80% of them, completely empty. At any point, this miner could decide to just ignore all blocks other than their own, completely halting all transactions and activity on BSV.

The amount of copium on Twitter is hilarious. Everything from "There is no attack" to "This is good because it means fees will be pushed higher than the subsidy" to "This is just someone trying to load up their bags with block rewards before we moon" (seriously). People are unable to make transactions, and there are frequent reorgs dozens of blocks deep.

Any word on exchanges starting to implement freezes on BSV withdrawals/deposits? Even if someone does manage to get a deposit confirmed on the network, I can't imagine the exchange will be too happy when a reorg makes that deposit disappear 100 blocks later. Given I can only imagine the majority of BSV bagholders will be keen to dump their bags for real bitcoin as soon as possible, any exchange which continues to accept BSV deposits is at a huge risk of loss, even without CSW's new software allowing him to arbitrarily seize any coins he likes. So back to the original point of this thread: Get your bitcoin in to your own wallets as soon as possible.
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
And now they are showing no blocks for 16 hours, last one as of this post was Oct 15, 2022, 8:26 PM UTC.
Since it was mentioned earlier in the thread that only 9 nodes at the tip, it could be that a bunch of places were all puling data from the same place that shit the bed.

Or it could be someone trying to force a re-org and others fighting it and due to the massive chain bloat severs are just spinning themselves into oblivion, or it could be bad coding caused an issue. Fun to speculate but until the people running the public block explorers tell us, it's just conjecture.

Either way, it's interesting to watch.

-Dave
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
And it's still on going (according to Blockchair). Honestly i don't know benefit of doing this other than proving they have full control over the network or reducing cost of running node.
Definitely some weird stuff going on. Blockchair and some other explorers are showing no blocks for ~5 hours, while other explorers are showing 50 blocks beyond that, but with dozens more empty blocks. Seems to me that CSW and co are trying to re-org out all these empty blocks?

Whoever this unknown miner is, they control a majority of the hashrate and are finding somewhere between 70-80% of BSV blocks. We always knew BSV was a centralized scam coin, but currently instead of it being centralized under CSW's control it is centralized under the control of this unknown miner.

Wonder if they'll start using the new protocol to simply assign every BSV in existence to themselves? Tongue
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5834
not your keys, not your coins!
It's just XOR operation with random key and IIRC it's used on chainstate rather blocks directory.
Oh, that's true! The LevelDB UTXO database does have scrambled values.

First of all, every value in the database has been obfuscated, so you will need the get the obfuscate_key (the first entry in the database):
Code:
b12dcefd8f872536
An obfuscated value from the database will look something like this:
Code:
71a9e87d62de25953e189f706bcf59263f15de1bf6c893bda9b045
To deobfuscate it, you just need to extend the obfuscate_key to the same length as the value, and then XOR the value with that extended obfuscate_key:
Code:
71a9e87d62de25953e189f706bcf59263f15de1bf6c893bda9b045  <- value
b12dcefd8f872536b12dcefd8f872536b12dcefd8f872536b12dce  <- extended obfuscate_key
c0842680ed5900a38f35518de4487c108e3810e6794fb68b189d8b  <- deobfuscated value (XOR)

So I guess if people store obscene data or malware pieces in (unspendable or not) UTXOs, the bytes might not be matched by government agencies and antiviruses. If it's in a blk*.dat file, it's different, though.
For example, we can find the byte representation of 'Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks' easily in our bitcoin folder.

Looking for strings like this;
Code:
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> strings *.dat | grep 'Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks'
EThe Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks

But we can also search for 'magic bytes' easily, as follows:
Code:
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> grep -aPo '\x54\x68\x65\x20\x54\x69\x6D\x65\x73\x20\x30\x33\x2F\x4A\x61\x6E\x2F\x32\x30\x30\x39\x20\x43\x68\x61\x6E\x63\x65\x6C\x6C\x6F\x72\x20\x6F\x6E\x20\x62\x72\x69\x6E\x6B\x20\x6F\x66\x20\x73\x65\x63\x6F\x6E\x64\x20\x62\x61\x69\x6C\x6F\x75\x74\x20\x66\x6F\x72\x20\x62\x61\x6E\x6B\x73' *.dat
blk00000.dat:The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks

I'm running a search for the word 'Chancellor' now, just out of curiosity. Cheesy
Code:
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> grep -aPo '\x43\x68\x61\x6e\x63\x65\x6c\x6c\x6f\x72' *.dat
blk00000.dat:Chancellor
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 7490
Crypto Swap Exchange
So recently 50% of BSV's hashpower comes from something called "mempool.com".  Most explorers have been claiming this hashpower as "unknown" but the blocks are identified.
Any idea why they are mining empty blocks? Are CSW and Taal going to simply re-org all these blocks away because they don't like them?

And it's still on going (according to Blockchair). Honestly i don't know benefit of doing this other than proving they have full control over the network or reducing cost of running node.

AFAIK they haven't broken the scrambling support in the code they copied from Bitcoin Core so their block files should be scrambled with some weak encryption that will prevent dumb scanning tools from finding things in them (we added that in bitcoin to prevent idiot anti-virus software from corrupting peoples blockchains when someone inserted some twentysome byte virus pattern in the chain).

I didn't know the blocks were scrambled in the (BTC) database. Can you post a link to the PR that added this?

It's just XOR operation with random key and IIRC it's used on chainstate rather blocks directory.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5834
not your keys, not your coins!
AFAIK they haven't broken the scrambling support in the code they copied from Bitcoin Core so their block files should be scrambled with some weak encryption that will prevent dumb scanning tools from finding things in them (we added that in bitcoin to prevent idiot anti-virus software from corrupting peoples blockchains when someone inserted some twentysome byte virus pattern in the chain).
I didn't know the blocks were scrambled in the (BTC) database. Can you post a link to the PR that added this?
Same here; I always assumed the block format that is explained on https://learnmeabitcoin.com/technical/blkdat to be used without exception.
I also tried on a few blocks and nothing seems scrambled; whole block is stored on disk, piece by piece.

You are referring to the structure of a blk*.dat file?

It is explained here: https://learnmeabitcoin.com/technical/blkdat
You can even hover over part of the genesis block to get annotations on what bytes are what, as shown below.


I also queried a few selected blocks for you (first 0x90 bytes each).
Code:
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> hexdump -C blk00000.dat | head
00000000  f9 be b4 d9 1d 01 00 00  01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000010  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000020  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 3b a3 ed fd  |............;...|
00000030  7a 7b 12 b2 7a c7 2c 3e  67 76 8f 61 7f c8 1b c3  |z{..z.,>gv.a....|
00000040  88 8a 51 32 3a 9f b8 aa  4b 1e 5e 4a 29 ab 5f 49  |..Q2:...K.^J)._I|
00000050  ff ff 00 1d 1d ac 2b 7c  01 01 00 00 00 01 00 00  |......+|........|
00000060  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000070  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 ff ff  |................|
00000080  ff ff 4d 04 ff ff 00 1d  01 04 45 54 68 65 20 54  |..M.......EThe T|
00000090  69 6d 65 73 20 30 33 2f  4a 61 6e 2f 32 30 30 39  |imes 03/Jan/2009|
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> hexdump -C blk01337.dat | head
00000000  f9 be b4 d9 e8 e3 11 00  00 00 00 20 ea 58 90 18  |........... .X..|
00000010  60 a5 72 4d 96 f4 86 48  cb 7c c4 1d 35 6f 15 4a  |`.rM...H.|..5o.J|
00000020  fa 9e 26 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 8a 12 56 61  |..&...........Va|
00000030  81 67 04 09 5e b6 b9 ca  e6 6b 55 11 e8 15 b3 03  |.g..^....kU.....|
00000040  44 d9 ec f2 28 09 37 aa  6a e3 b6 86 8d ff 68 5b  |D...(.7.j.....h[|
00000050  7b 4f 2f 17 36 4f 8f 4c  fd 7e 05 01 00 00 00 00  |{O/.6O.L.~......|
00000060  01 01 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000070  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000080  00 00 ff ff ff ff 55 03  0d 2c 08 41 d6 da 3f e1  |......U..,.A..?.|
00000090  c8 72 c2 41 d6 da 3f e1  58 d3 4b 2f 42 54 43 2e  |.r.A..?.X.K/BTC.|
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> hexdump -C blk03203.dat | head
00000000  f9 be b4 d9 88 e5 16 00  00 a0 1a 21 d2 aa ee 3a  |...........!...:|
00000010  0b 36 2d 02 14 34 b7 e2  f8 28 ac 90 04 15 be ce  |.6-..4...(......|
00000020  2d 25 01 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 77 ee 79 dd  |-%..........w.y.|
00000030  57 09 1c d6 b3 48 03 c2  c6 84 46 5a f4 c9 cc 2a  |W....H....FZ...*|
00000040  e6 bf 80 db 97 3d bf bf  fb 80 c7 0c d4 b1 29 63  |.....=........)c|
00000050  94 c8 08 17 30 cf 27 9d  fd 9b 0b 01 00 00 00 00  |....0.'.........|
00000060  01 01 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000070  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000080  00 00 ff ff ff ff 4c 03  fc 84 0b 13 62 69 6e 61  |......L.....bina|
00000090  6e 63 65 2f 37 38 39 48  00 0b 03 7e f9 3b fc fa  |nce/789H...~.;..|
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks>
As we can see, they are just a concatenation of blocks. Blocks start with the mainnet's magic bytes f9beb4d9, followed by 4 bytes of size of the following block and then the header and body.

Bitcoin Wiki actually defines the whole structure quite well.
More details about the header here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_hashing_algorithm

You can quickly find all the block starts in blk00000.dat like this:
Code:
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> hexdump -C blk00000.dat | grep "f9 be b4" | head
00000000  f9 be b4 d9 1d 01 00 00  01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000120  ac 00 00 00 00 f9 be b4  d9 d7 00 00 00 01 00 00  |................|
00000200  00 00 00 00 f9 be b4 d9  d7 00 00 00 01 00 00 00  |................|
000002e0  00 00 00 f9 be b4 d9 d7  00 00 00 01 00 00 00 bd  |................|
000003c0  00 00 f9 be b4 d9 d7 00  00 00 01 00 00 00 49 44  |..............ID|
000004a0  00 f9 be b4 d9 d7 00 00  00 01 00 00 00 85 14 4a  |...............J|
00000580  f9 be b4 d9 d7 00 00 00  01 00 00 00 fc 33 f5 96  |.............3..|
00000810  1f f7 05 29 d6 2e 0b a1  ac 00 00 00 00 f9 be b4  |...)............|
000008f0  86 43 f6 56 b4 12 a3 ac  00 00 00 00 f9 be b4 d9  |.C.V............|
000009d0  b3 86 81 64 25 dd ac 00  00 00 00 f9 be b4 d9 d7  |...d%...........|

You can also see where the next block starts by using the 0x125 'offset' from the above command's output and hexdump the block file until that point (plus 8 bytes of the next block just to confirm it really is the next block):
Code:
bitcoin@localhost:~/.bitcoin/blocks> head -c $(python3 -c 'print(0x125+8)') blk00000.dat | hexdump -C
00000000  f9 be b4 d9 1d 01 00 00  01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000010  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000020  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 3b a3 ed fd  |............;...|
00000030  7a 7b 12 b2 7a c7 2c 3e  67 76 8f 61 7f c8 1b c3  |z{..z.,>gv.a....|
00000040  88 8a 51 32 3a 9f b8 aa  4b 1e 5e 4a 29 ab 5f 49  |..Q2:...K.^J)._I|
00000050  ff ff 00 1d 1d ac 2b 7c  01 01 00 00 00 01 00 00  |......+|........|
00000060  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000070  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 ff ff  |................|
00000080  ff ff 4d 04 ff ff 00 1d  01 04 45 54 68 65 20 54  |..M.......EThe T|
00000090  69 6d 65 73 20 30 33 2f  4a 61 6e 2f 32 30 30 39  |imes 03/Jan/2009|
000000a0  20 43 68 61 6e 63 65 6c  6c 6f 72 20 6f 6e 20 62  | Chancellor on b|
000000b0  72 69 6e 6b 20 6f 66 20  73 65 63 6f 6e 64 20 62  |rink of second b|
000000c0  61 69 6c 6f 75 74 20 66  6f 72 20 62 61 6e 6b 73  |ailout for banks|
000000d0  ff ff ff ff 01 00 f2 05  2a 01 00 00 00 43 41 04  |........*....CA.|
000000e0  67 8a fd b0 fe 55 48 27  19 67 f1 a6 71 30 b7 10  |g....UH'.g..q0..|
000000f0  5c d6 a8 28 e0 39 09 a6  79 62 e0 ea 1f 61 de b6  |\..(.9..yb...a..|
00000100  49 f6 bc 3f 4c ef 38 c4  f3 55 04 e5 1e c1 12 de  |I..?L.8..U......|
00000110  5c 38 4d f7 ba 0b 8d 57  8a 4c 70 2b 6b f1 1d 5f  |\8M....W.Lp+k.._|
00000120  ac 00 00 00 00 f9 be b4  d9 d7 00 00 00           |.............|
0000012d
[...]
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
AFAIK they haven't broken the scrambling support in the code they copied from Bitcoin Core so their block files should be scrambled with some weak encryption that will prevent dumb scanning tools from finding things in them (we added that in bitcoin to prevent idiot anti-virus software from corrupting peoples blockchains when someone inserted some twentysome byte virus pattern in the chain).

I didn't know the blocks were scrambled in the (BTC) database. Can you post a link to the PR that added this?
legendary
Activity: 3822
Merit: 2703
Evil beware: We have waffles!
...
Yeah.  To say that puts a bit of a downer on festivities would be an understatement, heh.  I've heard of security-through-obscurity, but never security-through-abhorrence.  Messing with SV has definitely fallen into the category of "if you lower yourself to that level, there's no coming back".  Where's the puke emoji when you need it?  
Ya mean like these?
I really hope there is a special spot in Hell for CSW and his cronies...
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
The question is how long until we see posts like this about BSV:

...
Dear STEX Trader,

The developers changed the code (fork) of the SUM project. According to the new SUM coin code, all transactions do not exist in the block explorer. The STEX does not support the transition to the new code leading to the loss of blocks. Therefore, in case the SUM coin developers team provide us with the old node that supports all lost blocks then withdrawals on STEX will be enabled. Currently, the communication between us and SUM coin developers team does not bring a positive outcome.

Please note that these actions characterize SUM as an exit scam project. In order to protect our users, we’ve decided to start the delisting procedure and stop any support of SUM coin on STEX.

Project info: www.sumcoin.org

Medium: medium.com/@sumcoinindex

STEX Team

I can see exchanges keeping it on so long as there is trade volume and they are making money. I have said it before and will say it again, that is what exchanges try to do, make money.  As soon as they see a coin as a real threat to that it is tossed.

Even if it was known to be a scam at the beginning they will still list something if they think they can make money on the trading fees.

But, there is a tipping point, if they think they can be really hurt by it, it's tossed like yesterdays trash. After all, once you list a coin the hard work is done, you just have to sit there and take the fees, shutting it off is just about no work at all.

-Dave
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5834
not your keys, not your coins!
Sorry for the double post but:


Wright's conspirators and employees will be holding a live-stream to explain Wright's plans to enable centralized coin theft on BSV, BCH, and Bitcoin by introducing a cryptographic backdoor will start and open for your questions at 2PM Eastern today (as in about 2 hours from now!).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKXOdTgPvfs
Basically, they repeated over and over that:
(1) You don't need keys; you just prove ownership in front of any court and get the coins.
(2) If a court rules that your coins actually belong to someone else, they will be forcibly transferred by BSV nodes and they actively work on that.

Completely invalidating 'Not your keys, not your Bitcoin' and questioning the whole existence of decentralized blockchains in the first place. Also obviously the completely opposite than what we read in the Bitcoin whitepaper.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
So recently 50% of BSV's hashpower comes from something called "mempool.com".  Most explorers have been claiming this hashpower as "unknown" but the blocks are identified.
Any idea why they are mining empty blocks? Are CSW and Taal going to simply re-org all these blocks away because they don't like them?

On another note, lets hope this is the first of many exchanges to start seeing BSV for the scam that it is:
It appears that @WhiteBit Exchange quietly delisted BSV yesterday. For 24 hours there's no trading volume being reported anymore, the link to the public trading page is now re-routed to, oh irony, the BTC page and the Search page returns a "No results".
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
Sorry for the double post but:


Wright's conspirators and employees will be holding a live-stream to explain Wright's plans to enable centralized coin theft on BSV, BCH, and Bitcoin by introducing a cryptographic backdoor will start and open for your questions at 2PM Eastern today (as in about 2 hours from now!).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKXOdTgPvfs
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
So recently 50% of BSV's hashpower comes from something called "mempool.com".  Most explorers have been claiming this hashpower as "unknown" but the blocks are identified.

Take the following with a grain of salt because I don't read Chinese and haven't talked to a Chinese speaker yet.  It is apparently a Chinese mining pool that appears to have recently become BSV only.  According to its webpages it is approved by (or run by??) the Cyberspace Administration of China and claims that it's the only mining pool that can legally operate in china.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
https://bitcoinsv.com/bitcoin-association-releases-mining-software-to-freeze-lost-or-stolen-bitcoin/

Here we go. The next step in the complete centralization of BSV.
Quote
‘Bitcoin Association and the broader BSV ecosystem do not believe that “code is law”. All the laws in the classical sense still apply to blockchain technology and therefore BSV. If someone has a valid right to digital assets but doesn’t have the technical means to access them, there should be a way to recover access to those assets,’ he said.

We know, of course, that this is completely consistent with what Satoshi said in the past: "Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more.  Think of it as a donation to everyone, until the owner goes through the necessary legal system to force a centralized solution on miners to freeze these lost coins and then later return them to a different address, all without needing a private key or any other cryptographic proof.  After all, if there is one thing I've always loved, it is third parties having complete control over the entire blockchain."   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Can't wait for BSV miners (read: CSW and Ayre) to start freezing coins in various exchange wallets, and to see just how quickly an exchange will delist this trash when they find their assets being frozen against their will. Will be funny to see exchanges being on the receiving end of having their coins locked against their will for a change. Tongue
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 10611
No reason to do the experiment. Someone else caught up with you, and accomplished a 51% attack with 100 blocks deep reorg. Absolutely nothing happened, because there's absolutely no decentralization, no immutability and no integrity behind this clown show in the first place. There was no change even in the price. BSV-ers simply don't care; it's all about what Craig tells them.

Craig's perspective is BSV's consensus mechanism.
They should have done it to exchanges in order to force them to delist this scam coin.
Send a large amount of BSV to the exchange.
Sell it and withdraw the money.
51% attack and reverse the transaction.
Send a message to the exchange telling them you'd send the money back after they remove it Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 3948
Merit: 3191
Leave no FUD unchallenged
Okayyy, that's really fucked up. Thanks for the heads-up! This literally changes everything. It even makes me wonder whether it's intentional; seems after all the steps they've taken to disincentivize node operators (mostly financially), it's all pretty calculated.
Even if I don't get into legal trouble and I do have access to powerful enough hardware, I will never provide infrastructure for (and store) such materials.
What started out as a funny little 'blockchain attack' idea, actually turned dark real quick here. Shocked

Yeah.  To say that puts a bit of a downer on festivities would be an understatement, heh.  I've heard of security-through-obscurity, but never security-through-abhorrence.  Messing with SV has definitely fallen into the category of "if you lower yourself to that level, there's no coming back".  Where's the puke emoji when you need it? 

legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
Who the hell is using BSV in 2022? Pump and dump altcoin traders?
CSW, his immediate family, Calvin Ayre, the people they employ at CoinGeek (although I'm sure there will be at least a few who dump any BSV they receive immediately for bitcoin), scammers, and idiots. Remember that there are people willingly using Bitconnect 2.0 and Terra Luna 2.0. There are no shortages of idiots to whom to sell a shitcoin.

Yes, we already know that BSV is complete garbage and Craig Wright isn't Satoshi, but who the hell would use a centralized shitcoin blockchain that would eventually steal your coins? This doesn't make any sense.
Most stablecoins are centralized and can arbitrary steal/freeze your coins, and yet have volumes of tens of billions of dollars.

It's hilarious though, how the 'BSV Association' then tried to replace PoW with 'Proof of Authority' by asking node operators to reject the longest chain.
Oh, and don't forget that Ayre reported the actual longest chain to the police: https://nitter.it/CalvinAyre/status/1422655123147399172
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5834
not your keys, not your coins!
Ah you should be aware that the BSV chain is reported to contain child porn.  Not just some old non-working onion urls or whatever, but actual full on child porn due to its operators facilitating file upload and encouraging its use to bloat the chain.
[...]
Okayyy, that's really fucked up. Thanks for the heads-up! This literally changes everything. It even makes me wonder whether it's intentional; seems after all the steps they've taken to disincentivize node operators (mostly financially), it's all pretty calculated.
Even if I don't get into legal trouble and I do have access to powerful enough hardware, I will never provide infrastructure for (and store) such materials.
What started out as a funny little 'blockchain attack' idea, actually turned dark real quick here. Shocked

I am one of those people willing to do this experiment, yes! Smiley
You have read system requirement to run BSV node[1], right? To run node which can keep up with latest block, you need 8C/16T CPU, 64GB RAM and 100Mbit internet connection. I don't know how to find cheap VPS, but on Linode[2] it costs $320/month (Linode 64 GB shared CPU) + $200/month (10 TB S3 storage, unless you use prune mode). You might as well as burn your money.
[...]
I know; it's CSW's way of financially disincentivizing (obviously altruistic) node operators and making the blockchain more centralized. Personally, access to such hardware would be no problem for me, since I don't need to rent it. But as mentioned above, I now declare this idea as 'discarded'. Maybe we can demonstrate on another, 'centralized' blockchain what the consequences of having few nodes can be. But that's a different topic.

Do you know what's funny about this? Cheesy We could literally find 20 people in this forum who are willing to buy 7TB of HDD space to spin up BSV nodes and vote against Craig's 9 nodes. It would be great, just showing that it is this easy to attack a not properly decentralized blockchain.
No reason to do the experiment. Someone else caught up with you, and accomplished a 51% attack with 100 blocks deep reorg. Absolutely nothing happened, because there's absolutely no decentralization, no immutability and no integrity behind this clown show in the first place. There was no change even in the price. BSV-ers simply don't care; it's all about what Craig tells them.

Craig's perspective is BSV's consensus mechanism.
That's amazing! I think I missed that. It's hilarious though, how the 'BSV Association' then tried to replace PoW with 'Proof of Authority' by asking node operators to reject the longest chain. I hope the attackers succeeded and got away with a good amount of BSV which they immediately market-dumped.

However, what I hoped to be able to achieve is not only show such attacks are easy when you have 9 nodes, but also to stop CSW in his endeavors of introducing massive changes into the BSV blockchain, granting him however many coins and such. Not for protecting BSV holders or anything, just to make him a little bit upset.
That would require setting up a bunch of nodes and just leaving them running without updating them with any such code changes.

But again, idea scrapped. Roll Eyes
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
Do you know what's funny about this? Cheesy We could literally find 20 people in this forum who are willing to buy 7TB of HDD space to spin up BSV nodes and vote against Craig's 9 nodes. It would be great, just showing that it is this easy to attack a not properly decentralized blockchain.
No reason to do the experiment. Someone else caught up with you, and accomplished a 51% attack with 100 blocks deep reorg. Absolutely nothing happened, because there's absolutely no decentralization, no immutability and no integrity behind this clown show in the first place. There was no change even in the price. BSV-ers simply don't care; it's all about what Craig tells them.

Craig's perspective is BSV's consensus mechanism.
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 7490
Crypto Swap Exchange
Do you know what's funny about this? Cheesy We could literally find 20 people in this forum who are willing to buy 7TB of HDD space to spin up BSV nodes and vote against Craig's 9 nodes. It would be great, just showing that it is this easy to attack a not properly decentralized blockchain.
Are you by any chance one of those people?  Wink
It's pure waste of time and resources, but why not create such campaign, when he can spend all that time spreading toxicity and lawsuits worldwide.
I am one of those people willing to do this experiment, yes! Smiley

You have read system requirement to run BSV node[1], right? To run node which can keep up with latest block, you need 8C/16T CPU, 64GB RAM and 100Mbit internet connection. I don't know how to find cheap VPS, but on Linode[2] it costs $320/month (Linode 64 GB shared CPU) + $200/month (10 TB S3 storage, unless you use prune mode). You might as well as burn your money.

Who the hell is using BSV in 2022? Pump and dump altcoin traders?

Some time ago, certain weather app store their data on BSV blockchain[3].

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20221009092610/https://node.bitcoinsv.io/sv-node/system-requirements
[2] https://www.linode.com/pricing/
[3] https://bitcoinist.com/96-of-bitcoin-sv-transactions-come-from-a-weather-app-report/
full member
Activity: 1834
Merit: 166
  • Bitfinex
Are you crazy? This is a top exchange
The other exchanges like Binance are also top one in terms of volume but he's actually concerned about your funds over these exchanges due to scam coin BSV but accepted the same from you as you are already promoting it so you will find others suggestions inappropriate in this matter but you will see once it happens with you and believing in this scam coin and faketoshi.
hero member
Activity: 3164
Merit: 937
Who the hell is using BSV in 2022? Pump and dump altcoin traders?
Yes, we already know that BSV is complete garbage and Craig Wright isn't Satoshi, but who the hell would use a centralized shitcoin blockchain that would eventually steal your coins? This doesn't make any sense. Are there any people, who believe that BSV is the real Bitcoin?
I'm glad that I don't use the crypto exchanges in your list. I used HitBTC a few years ago, but my account there is dormant for years.
Yobit being on this list is no surprise to me. The ultimate shitcoin crypto scam exchange.
Any crypto exchange supporting shitcoins trading should be instant red flag for every cryptocurrency trader.
I'm sure that almost all legit crypto exchanges will delist and remove BSV sooner or later. The exchanges that keep BSV and other shitcoins would simply prove that they are crypto scams.
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 10611
I mean, obviously the license is complete nonsense since the code he is trying to license was not written by him and was instead plagiarized/stolen from Satoshi and other real bitcoin devs, but that wouldn't stop him from trying I'm sure.
The scammers are good at abusing the law. Technically it is not stealing to redistribute software released under MIT license with a new license as long as you include the original license, which they do.
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
Ah you should be aware that the BSV chain is reported to contain child porn.  Not just some old non-working onion urls or whatever, but actual full on child porn due to its operators facilitating file upload and encouraging its use to bloat the chain.

In the US possession of child porn is one of the relatively few strict liability crimes-- you don't have to have intended to do it to be guilty.

Kinda ironic how much they blather on about the LAWL and their ability to edit the chain but they don't use that editing power to cure this violation of the law, nor do they even bother (or have the competence to) fix pruning support which they broke. Perhaps it's even intentional in the interest of keeping people from running their nodes.

Now I don't want to fud too much considering that so far no one has yet gotten in trouble for accidentally possessing child porn incidental to running some cryptocurrency software and BSV isn't the first (my understanding is that namecoin has the same issue, and triggers some FBI hash checking search tool)... but you might want to be aware of it.

AFAIK they haven't broken the scrambling support in the code they copied from Bitcoin Core so their block files should be scrambled with some weak encryption that will prevent dumb scanning tools from finding things in them (we added that in bitcoin to prevent idiot anti-virus software from corrupting peoples blockchains when someone inserted some twentysome byte virus pattern in the chain).

I might otherwise suggest using pruning and/or a ramdisk to reduce your exposure, but those aren't options for BSV... Not carrying it on a laptop across a border is a good idea, but that shouldn't be a problem because of the resource requirements. Smiley
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5834
not your keys, not your coins!
Do you know what's funny about this? Cheesy We could literally find 20 people in this forum who are willing to buy 7TB of HDD space to spin up BSV nodes and vote against Craig's 9 nodes. It would be great, just showing that it is this easy to attack a not properly decentralized blockchain.
Are you by any chance one of those people?  Wink
It's pure waste of time and resources, but why not create such campaign, when he can spend all that time spreading toxicity and lawsuits worldwide.
I am one of those people willing to do this experiment, yes! Smiley
Would be a great way to showcase how much importance this number [number of full nodes on Bitcoin network] has and how it makes Bitcoin so uniquely strong.

I am sure most of people who run BSC nodes are acting like zombies and they will follow anything CSW tells them to do, but not all of them so we could gain few on our side.
Blockchair explorer is showing bsv blockchain has total of 18 nodes, but other more optimistic websites are reporting total of 57 nodes... it's pathetic.
Honestly I don't think any of those 9 nodes is owned by someone else than Craig and his friends. But I may be wrong (also about the number).
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
It's probably worth pointing out that this is completely intentional. As Greg has pointed out above, CSW's team will be releasing code which allows him to arbitrarily seize BSV.
I know CSW and his bsv trolls in this forum are openly supporting censorship, seizure of funds, and I think they even like the idea of creating CBDC that will work similar like BSV in the end.
It's more like vouchers than a real money, and you can spend them only on such items that government (and CSW) allows you to use them.
I can't wait to see the day when bsv shitcoins will also have expiration dates  Cheesy

This is an attack these scammers wanted and tried to perpetrate against Bitcoin but the Bitcoin community fought them back.
Yeah, but sadly some people are still blindly following them and not looking at all the red flags  Tongue
For a long time I was think that best for to deal with CSW is to ignore him, but this is obviously impossible thing to do.

Do you know what's funny about this? Cheesy We could literally find 20 people in this forum who are willing to buy 7TB of HDD space to spin up BSV nodes and vote against Craig's 9 nodes. It would be great, just showing that it is this easy to attack a not properly decentralized blockchain.
Are you by any chance one of those people?  Wink
It's pure waste of time and resources, but why not create such campaign, when he can spend all that time spreading toxicity and lawsuits worldwide.
I am sure most of people who run BSC nodes are acting like zombies and they will follow anything CSW tells them to do, but not all of them so we could gain few on our side.
Blockchair explorer is showing bsv blockchain has total of 18 nodes, but other more optimistic websites are reporting total of 57 nodes... it's pathetic.
legendary
Activity: 3948
Merit: 3191
Leave no FUD unchallenged
It means you can only modify the software in such a way that it is still compatible with BSV, and then it defines BSV as the chain which forked at block 556,767 and is accepted by the software put forward by Bitcoin Association.

I guess they'll have to update that block height when they fork again to allow faketoshi to steal all those coins.   Roll Eyes

It would be hilarious if some SV users (or victims as they should probably be known) managed to grow a conscience and decided to stay on the current SV chain against faketoshi's wishes, resulting in two competing SVs.  The difficulty is low enough that someone might still be tempted to mine that chain and keep it going.


I'm curious to know what's illegal in doing what I said. Their license ambiguously describes that the blockchain that is forked must contain that hash in that block. Does this mean that if I create another chain, named "BSOV (Bitcoin Satoshi's Original Vision)", let it have that hash in that block, and state that I'm the real Satoshi with no evidence whatsoever, just as Wright, will I get sued?
Whatever you create will not contain the "longest persistent chain of blocks accepted by this Software" ("this Software" being CSW's BSV software). Therefore, you will have modified the code in such a way that it is no longer being used on the BSV blockchain, and therefore CSW would claim that you are in breach of this license and likely try to sue you for it.

I'm curious about this.  What if you managed to implement a change that still followed the longest persistent chain?  Like a softfork, for example?  I suspect SV is so centralised that it would be fairly easy to force a softfork through.  Imagine how pissed off CraigShitWeasel would be if we upgraded his network to SegWit.   Grin

Obviously it comes with the downside of people having to debase themselves by mining that shitcoin.  I don't know if that stench ever washes off.  But still, imagine the meltdown he'd have.   



  • Bitfinex
Are you crazy? This is a top exchange

Only for ignorant people, or those without taste or morals.  So naturally you wouldn't understand.  Anyone who is paying attention knows that Bitfinex (and their USDT shitcoin) is loosely equivalent to a cancer.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
That's why a global initiative of mass abandonment of Bitcoin trading through all centralized crypto exchanges should be launched
As much as I would love to see the end of centralized exchanges, when we can't even convince the majority of people to stop using them when it is clearly in their own best interests (security of their coins and avoidance of losing coins via scams/hacks/bankruptcies/insolvencies/bad loans/seizures/account freezes, security of their data and avoidance of identity theft or personal information otherwise being shared/sold/hacked/leaked, censorship, high fees), then we are unlikely to be able to convince them on ideological reasons such as them being anti-bitcoin. Won't stop me from trying though. Wink

I'm curious to know what's illegal in doing what I said. Their license ambiguously describes that the blockchain that is forked must contain that hash in that block. Does this mean that if I create another chain, named "BSOV (Bitcoin Satoshi's Original Vision)", let it have that hash in that block, and state that I'm the real Satoshi with no evidence whatsoever, just as Wright, will I get sued?
Whatever you create will not contain the "longest persistent chain of blocks accepted by this Software" ("this Software" being CSW's BSV software). Therefore, you will have modified the code in such a way that it is no longer being used on the BSV blockchain, and therefore CSW would claim that you are in breach of this license and likely try to sue you for it. I mean, obviously the license is complete nonsense since the code he is trying to license was not written by him and was instead plagiarized/stolen from Satoshi and other real bitcoin devs, but that wouldn't stop him from trying I'm sure.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
In other words, it says that BSV is whatever chain they say it is, regardless of network consensus, and so if you refuse to follow their fork to implement this stupid code, then they will take legal action against you.
I'm curious to know what's illegal in doing what I said. Their license ambiguously describes that the blockchain that is forked must contain that hash in that block. Does this mean that if I create another chain, named "BSOV (Bitcoin Satoshi's Original Vision)", let it have that hash in that block, and state that I'm the real Satoshi with no evidence whatsoever, just as Wright, will I get sued?
legendary
Activity: 3234
Merit: 5637
Blackjack.fun-Free Raffle-Join&Win $50🎲
Most exchanges have a serious conflict of interest against bitcoin:  https://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=607
Some, however, are worse than others. Supporting BSV is pretty bad and at least most of the big ones don't do that.

That's why a global initiative of mass abandonment of Bitcoin trading through all centralized crypto exchanges should be launched, so let all their owners face reality and find some other way to attract people to trade with shitcoins. It's far from happening (at least not in the near future), but it would be nice to see people start using Bitcoin the way it's only right, keeping it in non-custody wallets and trading through DEX.

Good article, thanks for sharing.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
Ok. But, what the fuck does that mean?
It means you can only modify the software in such a way that it is still compatible with BSV, and then it defines BSV as the chain which forked at block 556,767 and is accepted by the software put forward by Bitcoin Association. In other words, it says that BSV is whatever chain they say it is, regardless of network consensus, and so if you refuse to follow their fork to implement this stupid code, then they will take legal action against you.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
He would no doubt advance sham litigation accusing you of running code which you didn't have the rights to or accusing you of attacking his business.
I quickly ran to Bitcoin SV's LICENCE in Github, and you won't believe it!  Grin

Quote
Open BSV License version 4
Horseshit seems from the start. Have you ever heard of the Open BSV License? Me neither. Let's see.

Quote
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so
Sounds fair.

Quote
subject to the following conditions:
O-oh.

Quote
2 - The Software, and any software that is derived from the Software or parts thereof, can only be used on the Bitcoin SV blockchains.
Ok. But, what the fuck does that mean?

Quote
The Bitcoin SV blockchains are defined, for purposes of this license, as the Bitcoin blockchain containing block height #556767 with the hash "000000000000000001d956714215d96ffc00e0afda4cd0a96c96f8d802b1662b"
Let me repeat: What the fuck does that mean? That software can be altered with the condition that block 556,767 has a hash of "000000000000000001d956714215d96ffc00e0afda4cd0a96c96f8d802b1662b"? Or perhaps that it just contains the hashed message "000000000000000001d956714215d96ffc00e0afda4cd0a96c96f8d802b1662b", in a transaction for example? Or that it's just an empty block with this message in the header?

Quote
and that contains the longest persistent chain of blocks accepted by this Software and which are valid under the rules set forth in the Bitcoin white paper (S. Nakamoto, Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System, posted online October 2008) and the latest version of this Software available in this repository or another repository designated by Bitcoin Association
The longest persistent chain of blocks, in comparison with what?

Sounds exactly like Satoshi's vision. Censorship resistant unless you decide to fork yourself off the network.

Quote
Version 0.1.1 of the Bitcoin SV software, and prior versions of software upon which it was based,were licensed under the MIT License, which is included below.
But, MIT seemed like a bad choice, because it gives more freedom than the users deserve.  Roll Eyes

Just lol.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
There are a few other exchanges that could be added in the OP:
AscendEX, ProBit Global, MEXC, WhiteBIT, Bitvavo, BitMart, and others.

Why isn't Coinbase in this list?
The list in OP shows exchanges that have listed BSV on their platforms. According to the data I see on CoinMarketCap, Coinbase hasn't done that. Although you mentioned other good reasons for not using Coinbase, this is a somewhat different matter.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
Do you know what's funny about this? Cheesy We could literally find 20 people in this forum who are willing to buy 7TB of HDD space to spin up BSV nodes and vote against Craig's 9 nodes. It would be great, just showing that it is this easy to attack a not properly decentralized blockchain.
Yeah, but either you run this new modified code which allows him to help himself to any BSV he likes, or you continue to run the current code at which point him, Ayre, CoinGeek, and the rest of the BSV scammers call you a fork and threaten you with lawsuits. Who knows which chain the exchanges would follow in such a scenario.

Also would he be basically committing theft, from a legal standpoint?
He's already committed everything from identity theft to fraud to tax evasion. A few charges of theft won't bother him. He's also banking on the fact that Satoshi is not going to return, and so will not file charges of theft for the coins CSW is stealing. (Like Satoshi would even care about his BSV tokens being stolen in the first place.)

legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 10611
Do you know what's funny about this? Cheesy We could literally find 20 people in this forum who are willing to buy 7TB of HDD space to spin up BSV nodes and vote against Craig's 9 nodes. It would be great, just showing that it is this easy to attack a not properly decentralized blockchain.
Technically you only need the chainstate to verify blocks which is a lot smaller than that, that is what pruning does anyways (with the addition of storing only a handful of blocks). There may even be some ways to pretend to be a full node Wink
legendary
Activity: 2240
Merit: 2003
A Bitcoiner chooses. A slave obeys.
~snip

A perfect chance to neutralize BSV by having it delisted?

Sounds to me that we should try to alert the exchanges to the upcoming danger. If I were running an exchange, I would definitely want to hear about this to hedge my risks and get away from BSV in case shit hits the fan. Not that I am a friend to exchanges nor do I believe the very concept of temporary centralization of your wallet in third party hands will have a future with Bitcoin.

The community could prevent much damage just by spreading fake-toshis plans, so that we can successfully counter them. We might even get BSV delisted everywhere. What a nice thought that is, wouldn't you say?

Also would he be basically committing theft, from a legal standpoint?
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5834
not your keys, not your coins!
I'm actually thinking about using this as a list of exchanges to avoid (as in, high risk - do not trade on ever).

I already have a small list of exchanges if I ever need to quickly withdraw or cash out something:

- Binance (this will be primary)
- One or more of Gemini, FTX, or Kraken as an immediate backup.

Coinbase is off of this list because they are too overzealous in chattering about any event from depositing/withdrawing crypto to failing KYC, to the Feds.
To be honest, for 'quickly withdraw or cash out', I can tell you that the Bisq order book for me usually has enough offers that I can just take one and get my fiat money (or BTC) within a few hours.
If you want even faster, I found Robosats to be quite fast as well, getting my own offers taken within 1-2 hours.

I don't (and don't recommend to) rely on centralized exchanges anymore; they almost all want KYC and almost all can freeze / steal your money at any time. Too risky.

I’m surprised that shitcoin is still functioning, weird that Ayre & Wright are still towing the party line. You would have thought they’d have just sold everything & given up by now. Satoshi’s Vision, the real bitcoin? Don’t make me laugh.

If you’re looking for a trustworthy exchange then I highly recommend Kraken. It’s my go to exchange, never had any issues. Obviously though as gmaxwell said in the OP, you shouldn’t be leaving any amount of bitcoin on an exchange long term.
What's nice about Kraken is that you can even withdraw through Lightning! I understand that people in some parts of the world can only afford to buy very small quantities of Bitcoin; and withdrawing from an exchange on-chain would cost them almost all they've got. Meanwhile Lightning withdrawals are completely free, as far as I know.

Fun fact, BSV network is totally unsustainable, and like Jameson Lopp recently posted on twitter, it exceeded 7 TB, adding 4 GB per day, priced at ~$50 per gigabyte in transaction fees  Cheesy
It's probably worth pointing out that this is completely intentional. As Greg has pointed out above, CSW's team will be releasing code which allows him to arbitrarily seize BSV. This will only work if the majority of nodes run this idiotic code. This would obviously be impossible on a decentralized network such as bitcoin, where >99.9% of nodes would simply refuse to run such code. But since they've deliberately made it so difficult to run a BSV node (there are currently a grand total of 9 nodes at the chain tip), it becomes much easier to get a majority of nodes to implement these changes, particularly since the majority of nodes are being running by CSW, Ayre, or another member of his team.
Do you know what's funny about this? Cheesy We could literally find 20 people in this forum who are willing to buy 7TB of HDD space to spin up BSV nodes and vote against Craig's 9 nodes. It would be great, just showing that it is this easy to attack a not properly decentralized blockchain.

In fact, the project representative on this forum once makes a statement on this forum that the project is over on their ANN thread but sadly, I look for the post for over an hour but it was taken down.
You may be able to find it on https://ninjastic.space/!
Was it this thread? https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-bsv-bitcoin-sv-original-satoshi-vision-4985868

If so, there is an archive here: https://ninjastic.space/topic/4985868
As well as here: https://loyce.club/archive/topics/498/4985868.html
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
CSW can't do nothin' about it without running more nodes
He would no doubt advance sham litigation accusing you of running code which you didn't have the rights to or accusing you of attacking his business.

Justice will prevail and he will keep on being fake-toshi with nothing to show.
But this is not relevant to what is going here. He will succeed in seizing BSV which are not his, because the entire BSV chain is so completely centralized and ran only by him and his buddies. It is little more than a glorified (and horrendously bloated) spreadsheet at this point. He will succeed in seizing BSV, which will result in exchanges either losing coins or the entire chain collapsing, which will result in exchanges having to cover their losses from other funds.
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
CZ and similar leaders (as some call them) could have chosen never to support anything that more than evidently indicated that it would turn into a greedy enterprise of a few people with dangerous intentions - but all of them, if we are honest, never cared too much for Bitcoin, nor do they today. Even when some people like @hodlonaut find themselves in court because they told the truth, none of these leaders want to show their support, or they show it in a very strange way by conditioning donations in some kind of altcoins.

I was honestly surprised that so many CEX are still supporting a project backed by someone like Faketoshi...

Most exchanges have a serious conflict of interest against bitcoin:  https://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=607

Some, however, are worse than others. Supporting BSV is pretty bad and at least most of the big ones don't do that.

hat would imply that either their nodes are not accessible or they are relying on someone else's node for transactions.
Not good either way.

In BSV anyone but miners running a node is an unsupported and highly discouraged configuration. In their view, exchanges should be using an API offered by a miner.

Since those APIs mostly don't exist it's more likely that just many of them have firewalled off nodes-- it's a good security practice after all.  Though with so few working reachable nodes the network is extremely fragile.

Also keep in mind that many obscure exchanges are whitelabeled -- so some of the exchanges on that list may be using common backend infrastructure.

It's not even unheard of for some "exchanges" to just be entirely operated out of third party hosted wallets.  However bad you might imagine that ecosystem the reality is likely worse.  People aren't kidding when they recommend not keeping assets on exchanges.
newbie
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
"Tulip Trading Limited".

Tulips...
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 6382
Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!
I don't begrudge the exchanges for doing it. They don't exist because they like us, the exist to make a profit so from that angle they are doing what they say they are going to do.

Clearly the exchanges do it for profit. And probably a big number of traders too.

Still, a network with only 9 nodes and the risk of getting funds seized is not something a business should spend time with if they want to be called reputable. But I guess that they don't care since if this happens BSV may also become worthless in no time, allowing the exchanges reimburse their affected users without a significant loss.

Still these exchange should not bite the hand that feeds them (mostly Bitcoin, I'd expect), hence do this (delist BSV), if not for the sake of their own (and their users') solvability, then as a gesture of courtesy.
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
Fun fact, BSV network is totally unsustainable, and like Jameson Lopp recently posted on twitter, it exceeded 7 TB, adding 4 GB per day, priced at ~$50 per gigabyte in transaction fees  Cheesy
It's probably worth pointing out that this is completely intentional. As Greg has pointed out above, CSW's team will be releasing code which allows him to arbitrarily seize BSV. This will only work if the majority of nodes run this idiotic code. This would obviously be impossible on a decentralized network such as bitcoin, where >99.9% of nodes would simply refuse to run such code. But since they've deliberately made it so difficult to run a BSV node (there are currently a grand total of 9 nodes at the chain tip), it becomes much easier to get a majority of nodes to implement these changes, particularly since the majority of nodes are being running by CSW, Ayre, or another member of his team.

If there are only 9 nodes at the tip how are these exchanges operating. That would imply that either their nodes are not accessible or they are relying on someone else's node for transactions.
Not good either way. However, in the end it's just a shrug to most security minded people since as we all keep saying you really should not be leaving your coins on an exchange anyway. On -> Trade -> Off.

I don't begrudge the exchanges for doing it. They don't exist because they like us, the exist to make a profit so from that angle they are doing what they say they are going to do.

-Dave
legendary
Activity: 2240
Merit: 2003
A Bitcoiner chooses. A slave obeys.
I agree that we should always keep our coins off exchanges as much as humanly possible but I think you might be panicking a bit too soon about that Faketoshi will get what he wants or even close to it. Justice will prevail and he will keep on being fake-toshi with nothing to show. Nobody will fall for his scam because he has nothing to provide as evidence, nothing to show that he is who he says he is. All he has is a long history of sad and pathetic ego-circle-jerk litigations which always end up him trying and failing to screw someone over to get what he wants. He's a schizo sociopath, there is no other word.
full member
Activity: 626
Merit: 234
hero member
Activity: 2660
Merit: 651
Want top-notch marketing for your project, Hire me
Apart from the shady trick pulled by the BSV team lately, the project is a complete mess right from the beginning due to the dramatic entry of Craig Wright and his allies (Ver) who now turn foes after the betrayal that happen between them.
If we evaluate all these things only a naive person won't understand that it doesn't take Craig anything to steal from the BSV supporter.

In fact, the project representative on this forum once makes a statement on this forum that the project is over on their ANN thread but sadly, I look for the post for over an hour but it was taken down.
legendary
Activity: 3234
Merit: 5637
Blackjack.fun-Free Raffle-Join&Win $50🎲
~snip~

CZ and similar leaders (as some call them) could have chosen never to support anything that more than evidently indicated that it would turn into a greedy enterprise of a few people with dangerous intentions - but all of them, if we are honest, never cared too much for Bitcoin, nor do they today. Even when some people like @hodlonaut find themselves in court because they told the truth, none of these leaders want to show their support, or they show it in a very strange way by conditioning donations in some kind of altcoins.

I was honestly surprised that so many CEX are still supporting a project backed by someone like Faketoshi...
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
It's probably worth pointing out that this is completely intentional. As Greg has pointed out above, CSW's team will be releasing code which allows him to arbitrarily seize BSV. This will only work if the majority of nodes run this idiotic code. This would obviously be impossible on a decentralized network such as bitcoin, where >99.9% of nodes would simply refuse to run such code. But since they've deliberately made it so difficult to run a BSV node (there are currently a grand total of 9 nodes at the chain tip), it becomes much easier to get a majority of nodes to implement these changes, particularly since the majority of nodes are being running by CSW, Ayre, or another member of his team.

If someone had a million dollars a year to spend, they could use it to break their tactics on their own chain by running 2x the amount of nodes that they are running, so that's 18 more nodes - all in the cloud. CSW can't do nothin' about it without running more nodes, which will burn a hole in his pocket and especially Ayre's pockets. Grin

Running those nodes anonymously would be an even better tactic.
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
Yep, the unsustainability of BSV isn't an accident.  The original, successful, attack was removing the capacity limits.  From there they could at no cost slowly drive almost everyone else off the network.  That opens the door to adverse rule changes.

This is an attack these scammers wanted and tried to perpetrate against Bitcoin but the Bitcoin community fought them back.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
Fun fact, BSV network is totally unsustainable, and like Jameson Lopp recently posted on twitter, it exceeded 7 TB, adding 4 GB per day, priced at ~$50 per gigabyte in transaction fees  Cheesy
It's probably worth pointing out that this is completely intentional. As Greg has pointed out above, CSW's team will be releasing code which allows him to arbitrarily seize BSV. This will only work if the majority of nodes run this idiotic code. This would obviously be impossible on a decentralized network such as bitcoin, where >99.9% of nodes would simply refuse to run such code. But since they've deliberately made it so difficult to run a BSV node (there are currently a grand total of 9 nodes at the chain tip), it becomes much easier to get a majority of nodes to implement these changes, particularly since the majority of nodes are being running by CSW, Ayre, or another member of his team.
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 10611
- Binance (this will be primary)
I think it is worth remembering that Binance (and some others like it that don't list BSV today) have been supporting this scam altcoin for a long time before they removed it. Basically they were all happy to list this obvious scam as long as it had a high volume and could give them a lot of money and delisted it as soon as the volume dropped and the pressure from the community became bigger than the profit they could make.

Lest we forget how Binance was offering mining pools money to commit a 51% attack just to reverse their stupidity (when they got hacked).
member
Activity: 1218
Merit: 49
Binance #Smart World Global Token


I am glad to see that most of the exchanges I am using right now are not on the list...but anyway since I am not holding a lot of coins and tokens on exchanges I think am generally safe in case something bad can happen when Craig Wrong will be gone mad. Craig never fail to be "relevant" in a bad way...as he and his team are always concocting something maybe just to land on the news and to be creating havoc on other people and organizations. This man should be in jail now by being a fraud, liar and shameless crock.
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
I already have a small list of exchanges if I ever need to quickly withdraw or cash out something:

- Binance (this will be primary)
- One or more of Gemini, FTX, or Kraken as an immediate backup.
Why are any of those better than any of the ones on the list above? All have the power to arbitrarily freeze your coins, all will use your deposits to socialize losses from hacks, scams, or bankruptcy, and all host a bunch of other shitcoins. There are plenty of other shitcoins out there other than BSV which could collapse and take entire platforms with them (e.g. Luna collapsing just a few months ago and taking the likes of Celsius and Voyager down with it).

Sure, the ones Greg has listed are perhaps riskiest right now because of the BSV scam, but looking long term then every centralized exchange is just as risky as every other one.

What you said is true, but the general perception of the average crypto user is that giant exchanges which have been around for a long time and have a history of surviving hacks are much less at risk of bankruptcy than the rest. Let's assume a well-behaved user who is already verified. Insolvency scares the crap out of users more than anything then.

Bisq is obviously the best choice but I haven't gotten around to installing that yet... don't even know its system requirements. Could serve as the new primary for the list.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Of course, since the BSV ecosystem has been engaging in non-stop harassment of Bitcoiners including multibillion dollar lawsuits against Bitcoin developers and non-BSV supporting exchanges it's probably prudent to not to business with exchanges still supporting this ecosystem to begin with, if you care about the value of your Bitcoins'. If an exchange will support this scam just to make a bit of extra money-- what else might they do?
There are more exchanges that have BSV shitcoin listed, and most volume reported on Coingecko is in Digifinex exchange, and you can also add AscendEX (BitMax) exchange.
I don't think withdrawing Bitcoin from this exchanges will solve anything, and people shouldn't really hold coins on any centralized exchange.

Fun fact, BSV network is totally unsustainable, and like Jameson Lopp recently posted on twitter, it exceeded 7 TB, adding 4 GB per day, priced at ~$50 per gigabyte in transaction fees  Cheesy
It's just a matter of time when this crap will stop existing by itself:


https://nitter.fly.dev/lopp/status/1577741709693403159
legendary
Activity: 3556
Merit: 9709
#1 VIP Crypto Casino
I’m surprised that shitcoin is still functioning, weird that Ayre & Wright are still towing the party line. You would have thought they’d have just sold everything & given up by now. Satoshi’s Vision, the real bitcoin? Don’t make me laugh.

If you’re looking for a trustworthy exchange then I highly recommend Kraken. It’s my go to exchange, never had any issues. Obviously though as gmaxwell said in the OP, you shouldn’t be leaving any amount of bitcoin on an exchange long term.
legendary
Activity: 3948
Merit: 3191
Leave no FUD unchallenged
Why isn't Coinbase in this list? Besides being a privacy nightmare and KYC beggar, Brian Armstrong has been really silent with the Hodlonaut's case. He's also blacklisted Russian-related addresses, treating bitcoin as non-fungible, goes in bed with regulators such as the IRS and DEA, and is willing to sell personal data to whoever asks for it. There's no doubt he'll trade his principles for profit for once more.

Between the list in this thread and the list in the "taint-proclaiming" thread, it should cover all the bases.  If you are a conscientious consumer, avoid all these so-called services.  A popular idiom has always been that you "vote with your wallet", so it becomes almost literal in this instance.  Nothing will improve if we don't adopt a form of activism and shun companies that aren't operating by our preferred ideals.


but looking long term then every centralized exchange is just as risky as every other one.

Absolutely.  But if people insist on using them (and some sadly always will), they could at least try to use the ones with a modicum of respectability.  Any exchange entertaining the existence of BSV or taint should be considered bereft of decency.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
I already have a small list of exchanges if I ever need to quickly withdraw or cash out something:

- Binance (this will be primary)
- One or more of Gemini, FTX, or Kraken as an immediate backup.
Why are any of those better than any of the ones on the list above? All have the power to arbitrarily freeze your coins, all will use your deposits to socialize losses from hacks, scams, or bankruptcy, and all host a bunch of other shitcoins. There are plenty of other shitcoins out there other than BSV which could collapse and take entire platforms with them (e.g. Luna collapsing just a few months ago and taking the likes of Celsius and Voyager down with it).

Sure, the ones Greg has listed are perhaps riskiest right now because of the BSV scam, but looking long term then every centralized exchange is just as risky as every other one.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
Why isn't Coinbase in this list? Besides being a privacy nightmare and KYC beggar, Brian Armstrong has been really silent with the Hodlonaut's case. He's also blacklisted Russian-related addresses, treating bitcoin as non-fungible, goes in bed with regulators such as the IRS and DEA, and is willing to sell personal data to whoever asks for it. There's no doubt he'll trade his principles for profit for once more.

Basically, any centralized exchange that lists BSV and hasn't yet removed it with all the evidence that prove Wright is a liar, should be included.
hero member
Activity: 952
Merit: 555
already have a small list of exchanges if I ever need to quickly withdraw or cash out something:

- Binance (this will be primary)

Am surprised to see how Binance does not make it to the list but that does not support the fact that they are all centralized, i admit with you that only the little amount needed to be exchanged for cash should only be with these centralized banks (exchanges)  Grin and if we must use an exchange then the decentralized ones are the best ideally ones, Binance is just populated with users allover the world but makes no difference in term of data leakage, while some avoided CEX entirely.
legendary
Activity: 2352
Merit: 6089
bitcoindata.science
I already have a small list of exchanges if I ever need to quickly withdraw or cash out something:

- Binance (this will be primary)
- One or more of Gemini, FTX, or Kraken as an immediate backup.


I would add Bitstamp to that list. They are the oldest bitcoin exchanges which is still active. Never had problems with them and I use them for some time already.


The size of this list is impressive and there are many big names like Huobi, Kucoin, Poloniex.. I didn't know that só many exchanges would support this altcoin
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 259
https://bitcoincleanup.com #EndTheFUD
I do not use any of these exchanges except Kucoin. I have an account on Kucoin. But, due to KYC issues. I haven't verified my account. Not only Bitcoin, but I also recommend everyone not use those platforms even if they want to buy altcoins. If you have altcoins in those exchanges, Get them off ASAP. It is not recommended to use Exchanges to hold any coins. But, You may need to use exchanges to buy or sell currencies, Then use Binance. Still, again, Don't hold your coins on exchanges.
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
I'm actually thinking about using this as a list of exchanges to avoid (as in, high risk - do not trade on ever).

I already have a small list of exchanges if I ever need to quickly withdraw or cash out something:

- Binance (this will be primary)
- One or more of Gemini, FTX, or Kraken as an immediate backup.

Coinbase is off of this list because they are too overzealous in chattering about any event from depositing/withdrawing crypto to failing KYC, to the Feds.
hero member
Activity: 2478
Merit: 695
SecureShift.io | Crypto-Exchange
One thing is clear, faketoshi is not satoshi, no real satoshi will go after other bitcoiners and developers of btc. If the court has any knowledge whatsoever should already know that satoshi can not attack his own.
Hope bitcoiners will take the above message seriously and take the necessary action before they will regret it.
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
As many are aware, the infamous faketoshi scammer Craig Wright has been on a campaign to use harassment, intimidation, barratry, and fraud to attempt to steal some 1.1M coins that belong to Satoshi and others.

In furtherance of this scheme his company just published code for directing the seizure of third party coins in the BSV blockchain. BSV is a scammy bitcoin knockoff that is proprietary software controlled exclusive by Wright and his agents. Users of BSV are only permitted to run the software he approves so they're able to foist their coin stealing code onto their users which would be impossible for legitimate cryptocurrencies.

Because of this I believe any user of the BSV altcoin is in serious risk of exposure to network consensus instability or outright having their assets frozen or stolen out from under them.

This would be of no direct relevance to Bitcoin users except some Bitcoin exchanges support BSV and so far whenever an exchange has gone insolvent they've pooled assets from all users in the bankruptcy. This means that if an exchange becomes insolvent due to Wright stealing or freezing BSV out from under it users Bitcoin balances may be used to make BSV customers whole.

While it's never a good idea to leave Bitcoins you aren't actively trading on exchange I'd strongly recommend getting your funds off the following exchanges ASAP (non-exhaustive list):

  • Robinhood
  • Bitfinex
  • Bittrex
  • Hitbtc
  • Huobi Global
  • Kucoin
  • Bithumb
  • Gate.io
  • Poloniex
  • CoinW
  • Indoex
  • OKX
  • CoinDCX
  • Pionex
  • Upbit
  • Bibox
  • Bkex
  • Yobit
  • Deepcoin
  • Mexo Exchange
  • Wazirx
  • CoinEx

This shouldn't be news to these exchanges as it's been known for some time that this was coming: https://twitter.com/Arthur_van_Pelt/status/1577647343595315201

Of course, since the BSV ecosystem has been engaging in non-stop harassment of Bitcoiners including multibillion dollar lawsuits against Bitcoin developers and non-BSV supporting exchanges it's probably prudent to not to business with exchanges still supporting this ecosystem to begin with, if you care about the value of your Bitcoins'. If an exchange will support this scam just to make a bit of extra money-- what else might they do?
Jump to: