Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19243. (Read 26608075 times)

You crack me up, schmadzi. 1MB4EVA is dead. Killed by Adam Back of all people.  What's the weather like down there under the bus?  Now let's see how Maxwell and the other Prima Donna's like getting pushed around by the help.

I find that too much jaegermeister further dulls my ability to make the distinction, often with hilarious results...

Indeed.

Nah, Peter Todd has already thought of that. 0.12+ will probably start blacklisting any non-segwit nodes (initially for bootstrapping reasons, but no reason why it cant use it as a banning criteria).
No, it doesn't matter what level of 'consensus' they have, as long as >51% mine on their fork, 95% of the non mining nodes can go to hell.

All right, that's more like it. Welcome back asshole. How much do they pay you to hijack your account for the evening?

yeah, I'm not so sure, they could sorta be a cartel, I guess, but the real problem is that if they are ever perceived as doing something wrong like a51% attack, the very asset they are mining will lose value. It's all about incentives, that's the only thing that works. And if you ask me if I trust USG vs heavily incentivized Chinese? I'd go with the Chinese, every time.

The more interesting part is the ongoing infiltration attack from Billy Joe Bullshit...

Hey Billy,   oh yeah? Since when?
You used to be one of the biggest badass swinging dicks in this thread. I guess that hubris is one thing they don't teach at shill school.

Coin



Explanation

Bitcoin now crossing the boundary into the fabled Gox Resistance Field GORF.

3rd attempt at penetration.

I'm a firefighter who lives in the swamp. I put dollar bills in your mom's G string.

How you like them Big Blocks?

China is leading this rally because they think this roundtable agreement means we have consensus. That is far from certain. I'm thinking the main sticking point with Core will be/is:

1. getting boxed into a time frame, even an extraordinarily accommodating one.
2. no pledge to stick with Core even if they renege.

Bigblockers seem to all be smart enough to know that this is Core's deal to blow. We'll take the deal. But if Core Doesn't take it too even though they basically won,  then we go to war and it will be Core against the world. Everyone will know who the bad guys are. Smallblockers will lose.

I kinda hope they don't take it.  This was a last ditch effort on the part of miners to keep Core in the loop for the sake of market stability.  I care less about market stability than an end to the Divine Right of Kings.  

You got nowhere to go, Smallblockers. Take the deal or we will bury you.

Sure, but they can't form a cartel, 'cause then someone else will just whoop their asses. In this way Bitcoin is pure, although brutal.

You don't even know if you're a big blocker, or a small blocker, do you?

Yeah, not even close.

Hey Billy, why don't you tell us about your job and where you live, if it won't take you too much time to search the back history of the account you bought?

Hmmmm, there was a good interview with a guy who had been talking with Chinese miners, and mentioned that the Chinese miners are running into a diminishing returns problem where if they control too much of the market, when they add hash power they are competing against themselves.

David Johnston, it's in the first 15 minutes. https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/the-crypto-show-with-dapps-david-johnston-and-the-breaking-live-fbi-siege-in-burns-oregon

see, that's exactly what I mean about changing the subject.  It means you don't have an answer.

Ahhh, thank you, so nice to talk to a real account (I hope).

Yes, of course, you're totally bang on with your assessment. If there were a serious attack like this I suspect there might be a fork, maybe... Let's say China double spends, um I guess on bitstamp? So now bitstamp is on the short end and presumably they lost money.

Wouldn't be the first time. Probably not the last. But, you could argue that we should roll back and start you mine the original chain (this is similar to the fork in 2013 except the btcguild won't be able to switch back and regain consensus on the longest chain.)

It would be contentious, but if the offending double spend was egregious enough it could be deemed invalid and all clients that agree that it's invalid would continue creating new blocks from that point on. (Very similar to how a proposed hard fork might turn out, if it does not have sufficient consensus)

Anyhow, any shenanigans or wrong doing on the blockchain would likely such a negative effect on the value of the blockchain tokens as to make such an attack unprofitable and undesirable.

If you want to perform such an attack regardless of cost, and with unlimited budget, I believe it has already been proven that the Byzantine general's problem is unsolvable, (lacking sufficient incentives)

It's likely that the incentive structure is the only thing that truly protects the blockchain.

Keep creating bigger blocks 16MB make things less centralized right?

No many coins for sale left on finex. If China breaks 3000 this could turn in a firework

I'm not suggesting miners are or could be or want to collude. It's in their best interest not to do that unless...they are coerced by the government, Communist Party or central bank.  My concern is that 75% hashpower in the same POLITICAL jurisdiction (not where most people live) threatens censorship resistance.
Nothing anyone has said changes that.

I know the U.S. has suppressed voices of dissent, but in modern times we've had nothing like the Tienanmen Square Massacre. There are levels of Statist evil. Still, I don't want to defend myself or my country, both of whom merit legitimate criticism because it changes the subject.
The issue, no matter how badly everyone wants to ignore it is the Bitcoin is centralized now, not in a way we predicted or worried about, but centralized all the same.  I would have the same objection if mining was concentrated here, but probably not as strongly. Mining cannot be concentrated in ANY one political boundary without compromising censorship resistance.

If we can at least agree on that, we can talk about what to do about it, but ignoring it, changing the subject, making personal attacks is not constructive. This is a real problem.




Scmadz seems to think I'm an agent or something, but i usually don't respond to ridiculous attacks. This one has been repeated many times, so no Dude. It's still me.  

Coin



Explanation