Roger Ver has been compromised - page 8.

commandrix

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: tunctioncloud on April 15, 2017, 11:49:31 AM

I do not remember who is Roger Ver, wasn't he someone important here, in term of developpment at least ? Or wasn't he the Bitcoin Unlimited guy ? In case this fool is him, you should not wait anything intelligent coming from him.

What I've heard about him is that he's been involved in some shady stuff (if I recall, he was convicted of selling explosives on eBay; probably fireworks of some sort if I remember right). And then he helped promote Bitcoin, moved out of the U.S., and gave up his U.S. citizenship. From the sound of things, he doesn't get along well with the U.S. authorities.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: cryptoanarchist on April 15, 2017, 03:42:35 PM

Weird thing for him to use a 'No true Scotsman' fallacy. A full node is any node that keeps a copy of the blockchain.

nope a full node should ALSO validate what it receives.
EG just grabbing data from a bittorrent seed. but never independently revalidating the entire blockchain data. may contain bad data somewhere in that download
but now we are getting into the personal semantics

..
afterall would u say a prunned node is a full node
afterall would u say a stripped(no witness) node is a full node

cryptoanarchist

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1003

Weird thing for him to use a 'No true Scotsman' fallacy. A full node is any node that keeps a copy of the blockchain.

XbladeX

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Quickseller on April 15, 2017, 02:32:52 PM

I don't think I would go as far as to say that Roger is "compromised"

In satoshi's whitepaper, he referred to nodes as a mining entity, and referred to non-mining entities as "SPV clients"

In practice today, anyone who is receiving a payment of BTC prior to sending goods/services does need to be running a full node.

https://blockchain.info/en/pools

Life made HARD LOL from satoshi whitepaper assumptions - now miners join into pools and ONLY pool operator have to run full node. So according to Roger we should have today 26 FULL NODES - THAT WOULD BE GREAT SECURITY FEATURE have 26 nodes than 7000+ According to Satoshi white paper 7000 < 26 pool nodes.

I hope you see how satoshi ideal money can not work as he want.

Quote from: Tesorex on April 15, 2017, 02:32:40 PM

People have no incentive to run non mining full nodes, we need what Satoshi suggested, big server farms only running full nodes and everyone else look up to them knowing they're running on valid chain.

If you don't want send money to fork like BTU can be via spv server bug ,you have to run own full node today.
Satoshi hasn't predicted Bitmain hard-fork complications and mining power centralization.

Same goes to many projects when final build is not same like 1st draft because you can not predict road.

digaran

copper member

Activity: 1330

Merit: 899

🖤😏

When I first started with Bitcoin I was running Core for 3 months, opening it from 1:00 AM until 6:00 AM and couldn't fully sync with network

.
Back then total blockchain size was 80GB or 50GB I think with internet speed of 256kbps/8=32KBps I figured I might be slowing down other 8 nodes connected to me and was using a laptop that I bought back in 2007 so I stopped and deleted more than 40GB of blockchain data.
I even used to place a fan in front of my laptop and turning it on so it can get cooler, I consider that a burden don't you?

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

I don't think I would go as far as to say that Roger is "compromised"

In satoshi's whitepaper, he referred to nodes as a mining entity, and referred to non-mining entities as "SPV clients"

In practice today, anyone who is receiving a payment of BTC prior to sending goods/services does need to be running a full node.

Tesorex

full member

Activity: 204

Merit: 100

People have no incentive to run non mining full nodes, we need what Satoshi suggested, big server farms only running full nodes and everyone else look up to them knowing they're running on valid chain.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: XbladeX on April 15, 2017, 01:59:31 PM

Quote from: franky1 on April 15, 2017, 01:31:48 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 15, 2017, 01:22:16 PM

so you dont really agree with Ver, then?

I somewhat agree with you but its such an edge case that its almost irrelevant.

without knowing the context of the tweet. its hard to tell. afterall if you have

P - n - n - n -p

3 nodes between a pool (or lets say 6000 nodes that need to validate to form good diverse consensus)
vs
P - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - p

10 nodes between a pool (or lets say 20000 nodes that need to validate to form good diverse consensus)

the propagation time of getting the data to all entities of the network takes longer, even if your using the '6( 8 ) degree of separation' network connectivity

from other hand is harder to DDOS 10 000 nodes than 5 pools Cheesy

so having a lot nodes allso helps.
And in time of uncertainty you can use own node to validate blocks to not get on BTU trap if they fork accidentally.

agreed. hense why i was questioning the context of his tweet..
the context might be. "based on the bitcoin network of 2009, not 2017 what is a full node" being a question asked to him elsewhere, but then the question got deleted... but no one can guess the context without finding the source for WHY he make the tweet

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Lauda on April 15, 2017, 02:04:03 PM

He did not have any statements (AFAIK) that were completely against everything that Bitcoin stands for. He is a genuine small blocker.

i literally lol'd at this.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 3000

Terminated.

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 15, 2017, 01:48:26 PM

Quote from: Lauda on April 15, 2017, 01:33:54 PM

Anyone defending Ver or this statement at this point is really delusional or paid. I don't see any other possible explanations.

I feel the exact same way about those defending people like Luke Jr. Roll Eyes

He did not have any statements (AFAIK) that were completely against everything that Bitcoin stands for. He is a genuine small blocker.

Quote from: andron8383 on April 15, 2017, 02:02:34 PM

So Roger thinks that BTC is now BTCBitmain coin and no longer p2p currency.
I don't know how he have brain washed but he is getting worse shape EVERY day.

He's either compromised by some corporation or agency, or he is brainwashed. Correct.

This is archived just in case that he backtracks from it: https://archive.fo/54Mln

andron8383

sr. member

Activity: 333

Merit: 250

Quote from: Lauda on April 15, 2017, 01:33:54 PM

Quote from: anonymoustroll420 on April 15, 2017, 11:29:40 AM

https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/853250894162350080

Quote

Only a node that is mining is a true full node. The rest are just slowing down the propagation of blocks between the real full nodes.

At this point, I am convinced Roger Ver is compromised and is posting absurd shit like this to tip us off.

There you have it folks. One of the stupidest statements that I have ever heard in my life within the cryptocurrency ecosystem. What is Bitcoin if users can't attain financial sovereignty by running their own fully validating client? Roll Eyes

***

So Roger thinks that BTC is now BTCBitmain coin and no longer p2p currency.
I don't know how he have brain washed but he is getting worse shape EVERY day.

XbladeX

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1002

Quote from: franky1 on April 15, 2017, 01:31:48 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 15, 2017, 01:22:16 PM

so you dont really agree with Ver, then?

I somewhat agree with you but its such an edge case that its almost irrelevant.

without knowing the context of the tweet. its hard to tell. afterall if you have

P - n - n - n -p

3 nodes between a pool (or lets say 6000 nodes that need to validate to form good diverse consensus)
vs
P - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - p

10 nodes between a pool (or lets say 20000 nodes that need to validate to form good diverse consensus)

the propagation time of getting the data to all entities of the network takes longer, even if your using the '6( 8 ) degree of separation' network connectivity

from other hand is harder to DDOS 10 000 nodes than 5 pools Cheesy

so having a lot nodes allso helps.
And in time of uncertainty you can use own node to validate blocks to not get on BTU trap if they fork accidentally.

XbladeX

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1002

Quote from: anonymoustroll420 on April 15, 2017, 11:29:40 AM

https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/853250894162350080

Quote

Only a node that is mining is a true full node. The rest are just slowing down the propagation of blocks between the real full nodes.

At this point, I am convinced Roger Ver is compromised and is posting absurd shit like this to tip us off.

I agree with his ONLY BITMAIN is allowed to run full node !!!!
Noone should even dare to use one Cheesy

and try validate bloks.
Okay joking.

Roger sucks hard 1st MTgox now that pathetic SHOW guys COME ONE.
Roger got alts like DASH MONERO and after he bought them he went and share his investments Cheesy

...
I kno many good alt coins but being face of BTC and promoting alts is pathetic.
He dumped on followers and i hope those one were burned at 100$ DASH to get lesson.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Lauda on April 15, 2017, 01:33:54 PM

Anyone defending Ver or this statement at this point is really delusional or paid. I don't see any other possible explanations.

I feel the exact same way about those defending people like Luke Jr. Roll Eyes

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 3000

Terminated.

Quote from: anonymoustroll420 on April 15, 2017, 11:29:40 AM

https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/853250894162350080

Quote

Only a node that is mining is a true full node. The rest are just slowing down the propagation of blocks between the real full nodes.

At this point, I am convinced Roger Ver is compromised and is posting absurd shit like this to tip us off.

There you have it folks. One of the stupidest statements that I have ever heard in my life within the cryptocurrency ecosystem. What is Bitcoin if users can't attain financial sovereignty by running their own fully validating client? Roll Eyes

Quote from: Tesorex on April 15, 2017, 01:29:16 PM

Did you get tired of being a shill for BUgcoin and joined signature campaign? did Jihan fired you?

Anyone defending Ver or this statement at this point is really delusional or paid. I don't see any other possible explanations.

Quote from: franky1 on April 15, 2017, 01:31:48 PM

without knowing the context of the tweet. its hard to tell.

There is no context, he was not responding to anyone. He just put it out there.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Tesorex on April 15, 2017, 01:29:16 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: gentlemand on April 15, 2017, 01:24:48 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 15, 2017, 01:17:03 PM

the original Satoshi vision was that full nodes also mine. He is somewhat right in that theoretically a full node miner should prioritize propogation to other miners.
I think the main point is that we don't need thousands of thousands of nodes that don't mine and only relay, although it is good to have some non mining full
nodes to serve SPV users.

Checks and balances are what keep the world stable. I don't trust the miners to consistently do the right thing, nor do I particularly trust anyone else. The more nodes there are stating their case and enforcing the rules the better, miner or not.

agree.

Did you get tired of being a shill for BUgcoin and joined signature campaign? did Jihan fired you?

lol... i realized i was posting a lot and why not get a bit of coffee money for the honey while i'm enjoying the forum?
none of my views changed recently

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 15, 2017, 01:22:16 PM

so you dont really agree with Ver, then?

I somewhat agree with you but its such an edge case that its almost irrelevant.

without knowing the context of the tweet. its hard to tell. afterall if you have

P - n - n - n -p

3 nodes between a pool (or lets say 6000 nodes that need to validate to form good diverse consensus)
vs
P - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - n - p

10 nodes between a pool (or lets say 20000 nodes that need to validate to form good diverse consensus)

the propagation time of getting the data to all entities of the network takes longer, even if your using the '6( 8 ) degree of separation' network connectivity

Tesorex

full member

Activity: 204

Merit: 100

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: gentlemand on April 15, 2017, 01:24:48 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 15, 2017, 01:17:03 PM

the original Satoshi vision was that full nodes also mine. He is somewhat right in that theoretically a full node miner should prioritize propogation to other miners.
I think the main point is that we don't need thousands of thousands of nodes that don't mine and only relay, although it is good to have some non mining full
nodes to serve SPV users.

Checks and balances are what keep the world stable. I don't trust the miners to consistently do the right thing, nor do I particularly trust anyone else. The more nodes there are stating their case and enforcing the rules the better, miner or not.

agree.

Did you get tired of being a shill for BUgcoin and joined signature campaign? did Jihan fired you?

Tesorex

full member

Activity: 204

Merit: 100

Quote from: franky1 on April 15, 2017, 01:19:03 PM

Quote from: Tesorex on April 15, 2017, 01:13:07 PM

You could run 100 full nodes but still you'll need miners to confirm and include your transaction in blocks.
Nodes are agents of miners delivering them TXs and handing out their found blocks to rest of the network.

you could have a pool with a billion exahash, but if the block didnt follow the rules nodes have.. the block is rejected in 3 seconds.

its a symbiotic relationship of many elements

And you being a bitcoin lover without mining then running 100 full nodes just to help the network still you need to pay high fees for your tx to confirm, still nothing changes for you, miners including tx in blocks.
Of course they need to obey nodes rules otherwise it's some other coin they'd be mining, but miners have their own nodes and majority consensus agrees on those rules lol r we doing the basics all over again? we know these things already.

gentlemand

legendary

Activity: 2604

Merit: 3056

Welt Am Draht

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 15, 2017, 01:17:03 PM

the original Satoshi vision was that full nodes also mine. He is somewhat right in that theoretically a full node miner should prioritize propogation to other miners.
I think the main point is that we don't need thousands of thousands of nodes that don't mine and only relay, although it is good to have some non mining full
nodes to serve SPV users.

Checks and balances are what keep the world stable. I don't trust the miners to consistently do the right thing, nor do I particularly trust anyone else. The more nodes there are stating their case and enforcing the rules the better, miner or not.

Topic: Roger Ver has been compromised - page 8. (Read 7402 times)