Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19532. (Read 26609874 times)

Fixed that.


In all seriousness apart from the mining hardware race. Mining was a voluntary service given to use bitcoin much like any distributed computing projects that you can participate on using BOINC clients.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7388#issuecomment-173563835

wangchun commented 8 hours ago
ACK

RBF is steal. This PR should be merged asap to prevent potential financial loss.



So,

Wangchun says:

1) 2 MB HF
2) No RBF


And core responds with... 2017 maybe we'll do something? After segwit? That's funny, cause Wanghun says segwit should be HF and after 2mb hf.

yes , you can see it's the most requested change to Bitcoin Classic at the top.

https://bitcoin.consider.it/

So... Where & what is it? Or do I gotta "respect ur privacy" because jackbooted banksters are about?

Physical bitcoin mines tend to shutdown due to obsolete hardware when new technology goes online. Most recently the new ASIC chips 0.06J/GH vs the best bitmain has to offer that was recently sold at 0.25J/GH or the older hardware of 0.55J/GH.

What I was making reference to is that people who point hardware at the pools can point them to other pools rather simply. Many have backup pools pre-programmed for any downtime the primary target pool has.

Is there a official poll?

No, what we are witnessing is the Tragedy of the Commons. Chinese Miners know that the first one to defect will face considerable resistance and likely loss of profits, so they all wait for someone more brave or for Core to miraculously pull their heads out of their collective ass.  Even if they know we need a scaling solution toot sweet, they will keep on keeping on at ramming speed toward that brick wall and grab as much $$ as they can before the big crash. These are not risk-taking heroes like us early adopters. They are conformists who were taught their whole lives not to make waves.  This will end badly.

Indeed. Personally, I don't see why China producing BTC blocks is so much different than, lets say, China producing rare earth metals. The real question is, how dependent does it make the world outside of China? How fast can production be started up if needed? With rare earth metals, it takes years. So that's tricky, you don't want that. With BTC difficulty can adapt, and miners elsewhere can take over quickly. The main vulnerability is that the difficulty will take a long time to adjust if the hashrate drops sharply. Perhaps that rule should be improved upon?

Fixed that.


That's BECAUSE you're batshit insane. Paranoiac of some sort, can't be more specific than that, I ain't no doctor.

The physical bitcoin mines cannot be moved easily.  The ChiComs can nationalize them, merge the pools and double spend until we fork away from them. Then they can point at the new fork and do it again. Only forking away from SHA256 can stop them.  You can imagine the damage that will do.

From what I can tell and what I perceive, is that you have a greater understanding to the whole spectrum of what Bitcoin consists of and how each part makes up the project as a hole.

However the points you harp on and the way you present them leaves me with the impressions that you are attempting to get people to ignore the important points that should be considered.

The way you go on is as a disingenuous person "pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

China is intentionally low profile in terms of international "incidents". They don't want to draw too much negative attention.

Even if the western elite hate bitcoin with a passion, they will (hypocritically) crucify the chinese for such an attempt. They'll make it top news that "China is panicking and is now after Bitcoin and bitcoiners". The chinese have learned the western modus operandi, they aren't idiots. They have an attitude of "maintain a low profile and steady as she goes" particularly for things related to things which aren't exclusively domestic and/or have international reach. I feel the western elite tried to exploit them with the hearn article, by putting them on the spotlight, presenting them as some kind of "problem" so that they can then try to mitigate this "perception" and thus make them react like "we are not the problem, we'll increase blocksize" to preserve their low profile. Thus they were "played" to start getting out and supporting the "Classic" in order to ...prove that "we aren't the problem, we are easy-going miners, we only want peace and stability, all these stuff that were written about us are false"...

The western elite like to play chess and play everyone like a pawn... what is the chinese miner attribute? Low profile, we don't want any problems, we do what we do and don't really bother with anyone... so with a little bit of upsetting the status quo after the Hearn article => they are placed into the spotlight as a "problem" => this activates their instict to go back to low profile and say "yeah yeah 2mb it is, just leave us alone so we can go back to low profile mode where nobody notices us". However by doing that they are shooting themselves on the foot since forking bitcoin is destructive both for them and bitcoin.

Sounds good to me.


That seems to be the majority of bitcoiners. They only have to because Core lost touch with reality.

What does that even mean? The hashpower is a bunch of factory mines in China. They could be banned/seized by the Chinese government (possibly to mine their own crypto, possibly to add some extra "disruptive" to Bitcoin.
Migratory?


But reaching the consensus is nearly impossible, as a year of hilarious infighting has so aptly illustrated. It's a flaw, at the conceptual level. You can't fix it, like you can't fix a broken perpetual motion engine. it's totally forked


Of course agreement is necessary. Without it you can't solve emerging problems, "at a moments notice" or in a year. Doh.


WTF are disingenuous views?

It is true that mining has been a community service more than a self sustaining endeavor that would result in long turn profit.

The sooner people recognize that mining profitably and mining to get a lions share of the daily bitcoin subsidy pool the richer the local economy in that area will be.

For instance if a government or corporation recognized the value of mining bitcoin they would subsidies hardware development and support building infrastructures that would employ members of the local community.

For one example would be to use bitcoin mining as a way to subsidies operating costs of a power plant. Why have simply the local community pay for the electricity, why not get the global population that use BTC to pay for the power plant operating costs... Wind solar and so on. Many options have presented themselves in China but due to the ever changing landscape of the technology that is used to mine bitcoin being competitive only lasts on average 3 to 6 months before your initial investment costs are no longer recouped and you are forced to "UPGRADE".

Well some of us suspected Bitcoin Classic was a trojan horse meant to change governance and than switch to BIP101 and the numbers are indeed reflecting that --

Up at the highest rated approval we have BIP101

https://bitcoin.consider.it/BIP101

Democracy in action folks! Letting the mobs of idiots and people who want to destroy bitcoin vote for its future.... wonderful.

Laws and contracts are useless if there is no third party with power to enforce them and settle disputes. 

See for example the Ver x OKcoin caper over the domain bitcoin.com.  Apart from the forged signature, the contract that they agred to was useless because it did not specify the jurisdiction, and did not even specify the legal entity involved (OKCoin China, or its Singapore subsidiary?).  So, when they disagreed over its terms, all they could do was to exchange insults on reddit. 

For contracts, the two parties could still use arbitrators by mutua agreement; but if one party refuses to do what the arbitrator determiens, what then?  For that, and for disputes or acts between random people not covered by contracts, there has to be a government of some sort, that defines the laws and has the power to apply them.

Now, those laws are either approved by the majority, or they are approved by a minority (maybe empty) and disapproved by the majority.  The latter situation is unstable, unless the minority has somehow more power than the majority (e.g. they have the bigger guns, or they are the only ones who can read the stars and predict the time to sow the maize).  Anyway, if you are part of that minority, you may like it; but chances are that you will not be, and anyway the society as a whole will be unhappy.


That is a nice idea, but don't expect me to take it seriously until you can point out one example of a society, anywhere and anytime, that managed to function for any reasonable length of time without the members creating some sort of government with power to determine the fate of individuals in spite of their wishes...

≠ congestion failure 

Anyone feel like updating this one for Bitcoin them emailing it to core?

http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt

Why the impatience? Bitcoin is more alive then ever, look at the endless walls of text in this Wall Observer thread. Longer term I am not worried at all, a lot of people seem to care about Bitcoin's (bright) future.