|
[–]BTCPHD 20 points 6 hours ago /u/theymos is a loving coward. He wants so badly to have control over the underlying community, it's sickening. I am very suspicious of someone like that. He's a sneaky, manipulative oval office and I can't wait until he gets what's coming to him. I already know of two groups putting together bounties in an effort to handle this problem.
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 16:39 |
|
|
CampingCarl posted:
I think there's a zombie child about to bite the ice cream man's rear end
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
 up uP UP
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
context: bitcoin XT controls 5.5% of all nodes now. if 75% of all nodes are running XT, or pretend to be, the blockchain will fork edit: as below, it's 75% of produced blocks Nagato fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Aug 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Nagato posted:context: bitcoin XT controls 5.5% of all nodes now. if 75% of all nodes are running XT, or pretend to be, the blockchain will fork 75% of hashpower, not nodes, i think ed: it's when 75% of the last 1000 (or something) blocks have the new XT version number
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
Nagato posted:
i'm the absence of scale on the X axis
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
Tanith posted:i'm the absence of scale on the X axis i'll be the linear scale on the Y axis then
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
CampingCarl posted:
What becomes of any of us in the wintertime? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
Tanith posted:i'm the absence of scale on the X axis the website itself (xtnodes.com) has labels, no idea why they aren't in that screencap XT nodes went from ~100 yesterday to ~350 today
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
Nagato posted:context: bitcoin XT controls 5.5% of all nodes now. if 75% of all nodes are running XT, or pretend to be, the blockchain will fork 6.46 % with 406 nodes now this one's updated a lot faster: https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/nodes/
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
can't someone just vm that and force it or does it have to be 75% of hashing power?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
DrPossum posted:can't someone just vm that and force it or does it have to be 75% of hashing power? believe it or not but they are not that incompetent
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
DrPossum posted:can't someone just vm that and force it or does it have to be 75% of hashing power? i think the 75% was just to show that they were weren't forcing it on everyone, that it would only go into effect when the majority agreed to it
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
theymos didn't start the subreddit, he was gifted it when the original creator, Atlas, tried to sell it off and the community blew up. also the way the reddit mod system works is that you cannot remove mods who show up above you in the mod list. everyone has the same mod powers otherwise but you can effectively command complete control by telling another mod to not remove specific posts or else they will get removed as a mod. no one can remove the top mod from modship. the only one who can remove a top mod is a reddit admin and their stance is officially "make a new subreddit instead".
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:theymos didn't start the subreddit, he was gifted it when the original creator, Atlas, tried to sell it off and the community blew up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
Wait why would a company use a blockchain? Efficiencies? What?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
i can actually almost think of a legit use for the idea behind bitcoin as some dumb regulation at work wanted us to use WORM storage for documents to prove we hadn't modified them and we were quote like 500k for software to do it but otoh that's because the vendor holds the liability if it is inadmissible in court or whatever and telling a judge "no you see it's a distributed network that is centralised but not controlled based on...." would get you thrown out of court
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
once 75% of miners have XT, and the minimum date has passed, the change takes into effect. those miners who have upgraded to xt will begin to make bigger blocks. those miners who have not upgraded will get "forked off", meaning they will be mining a chain that the rest of the network sees as an orphan chain. the voting mechanism only counts nodes that are creating blocks (mining). if your node is only acting as a relaying node, then you aren't counted. most likely once the XT count gets closer to 50% the core devs will concede and bitcoin-core will also issue a change to write bigger blocks its also possible that the XT count goes up to about 30-40% and stagnates so that it never comes near 75%. In that case the fork doesn't happens, everyone forgets about XT, and bitcoin stays at 1MB blocks for the foreseeable future. the worst case scenario is that exactly 50% support XT and exactly 50% support small blocks. In that case there will be two chains where neither is the clear winner, and the fork will most likely linger indefinitely while the price drops probably below $100.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:Wait why would a company use a blockchain? Efficiencies? What? plenty of perfectly respectable companies already use ridiculously inefficient technologies (e.g. ruby), all you need is managers without a clue + dunning-kreuger techies obsessively pushing fads, and neither of those things is in short supply
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
School of How posted:most likely once the XT count gets closer to 50% the core devs will concede and bitcoin-core will also issue a change to write bigger blocks well, right now XT is at 0% (of miners, who gives a poo poo about nodes?) so i don't see that happening. bitcoin belongs to the 4 chinese farming groups and will do whatever the gently caress it is they want.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
 to the moon! quote:[–]BartKoen 16 points 3 hours ago
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
I think you guys are missing the big picture. if the blockchain forks then anyone holding bitcoin classic can spend them on the xt fork, and then spend them again on the classic fork. so really the incentive here is to cause a temporary split, everyone doubles their money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
The Management posted:I think you guys are missing the big picture. if the blockchain forks then anyone holding bitcoin classic can spend them on the xt fork, and then spend them again on the classic fork. so really the incentive here is to cause a temporary split, everyone doubles their money. the general consensus on reddit is to hold your bitcoins (sorry merchants) until the fork has been clearly resolved so I expect bitcoin retail sales to plummet like a rock in the ocean (from 2 to 0) in the coming weeks
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Robawesome posted:you can run a private chain that can't be mined by the chinese superpowers - private companies have already started using blockchain tech for internal ledgers Anything that isn't vaporware? (Seen lots of vaporware to this effect.) Soricidus posted:plenty of perfectly respectable companies already use ridiculously inefficient technologies (e.g. ruby), all you need is managers without a clue + dunning-kreuger techies obsessively pushing fads, and neither of those things is in short supply There is that. Are there any that have actually happened yet, or is this for future blocks on the laughchain?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Robawesome posted:i agree, it doesn't make much sense to use this stuff over a regular database. please do because that article says that the only user of whatever that is is the bitcoin exchange that made it
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Midjack posted:please do because that article says that the only user of whatever that is is the bitcoin exchange that made it http://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/nasdaq-and-chain-to-partner-on-blockchain-technology-initiative-20150624-00446
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
divabot posted:There is that. Are there any that have actually happened yet, or is this for future blocks on the laughchain? there was some place in england, hull i think, that obviously had a bitcoin guy get on the it department at town hall because they said that they were going to make hullcoin that would be privately mined by them but they were going to need to buy an expensive miner to help with the mining
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
Boxturret posted:there was some place in england, hull i think, that obviously had a bitcoin guy get on the it department at town hall because they said that they were going to make hullcoin that would be privately mined by them but they were going to need to buy an expensive miner to help with the mining apparently they got a grant from the comic relief 'tech for good' programme
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
divabot posted:Anything that isn't vaporware? (Seen lots of vaporware to this effect.) http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/29/everledger/ and the above-linked NASDAQ blockchain thing almost certainly will not use Bitcoin's blockchain, though it's only a trial they are running and not a practical implementation honestly i'm yet to read a compelling argument for using a blockchain instead of a shared DB where you can view who changed what but it's hilarious to see bitcoiner's squirm to argue their lovely 3 transaction-per-second bitcoin blockchain is still relevant
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:so you've made r/bitcoinxt and r/bitcoin_xt already, right? /r/bitcoinxt already has 1000 subscribers
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
Man I wish I had gotten into techshit there is so much money waiting to be scammed
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
If Mike and Gavin wanted could the XT hardfork restore the lost MTGox coins? (self.Bitcoin) submitted 3 minutes ago by cryptoidiot2 Other comments on Reddit make me think they could. If no, what technical issue prevents it? Isn't it just another line of code like the block size? This would be a good reason to move to XT. I lost most of my savings at Gox. Has anyone asked for this yet? I am thinking of writing the trustee to suggest they make sure it happens but I would need to pay a Japanese translator. I want to be sure to get the facts correct.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Robawesome posted:the general consensus on reddit is to hold your bitcoins (sorry merchants) until the fork has been clearly resolved so I expect bitcoin retail sales to plummet like a rock in the ocean (from 2 to 0) in the coming weeks divide by zero error
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
yeah i "lost"  20000 coin in mtgox, please add them to 1HitLerDidNothingWrongggggghJewfv in xt thanks devs
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
I guess the only code-based solution that didn't need extreme individual proof would be to invalidate any transactions that were sent to an address that sent to gox storage (the intermediary step being unique wallets for tracking deposits). That would basically free all deposited coins from the black hole, and all coins that were spent from the storage address would just be "oh well" dupes that would be ignored to keep the history of the market stable, but lol at the shitstorm that even that would generate. Off the top of my head * This wallet with 1000btc was mine but I deleted the private key * The above, shouted by a thousand different people * the amount of whiners that would go on about how unfair it is for the victims to get their coins back and how they should have learned a lesson * The enormous price crash from everyone cashing out at once * The enormous price rise from the advertising it would generate * The pressure to do it again for every minor scam in existence * The fact that it would prove coins aren't immutable at all
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
DrPossum posted:What becomes of any of us in the wintertime?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Sentient Data posted:I guess the only code-based solution that didn't need extreme individual proof would be to invalidate any transactions that were sent to an address that sent to gox storage (the intermediary step being unique wallets for tracking deposits). that would also give coins back to anyone who paid someone for something by sending coins to a gox wallet, instead of giving it to the intended recipient.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
So if I'm reading this correctly, the fork made 2 incompatible versions of bitcoin floating around, and the new fork has yet to yield any bitcoins from being mined? Maybe?  Why can't THE FREE MARKET fix this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
EorayMel posted:So if I'm reading this correctly, the fork made 2 incompatible versions of bitcoin floating around, and the new fork has yet to yield any bitcoins from being mined? Maybe? Bitcoin Core is being mined right now. Miners choose which version of Bitcoin Core they are mining The newest XT release still mines from Core, but when 75% of the last 1000 blocks have been mined by miners using the XT version, the fork will occur Now that 75% of miners will be mining a new chain capable of 8MB blocks, and the holdouts still using a non-XT core version will be mining Core 1MB Bitcoin, though in all likelihood they would join the XT mining efforts immediately rather than continue mining the orphaned 1MB Bitcoin Core blockchain
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 16:39 |
|
|
EorayMel posted:So if I'm reading this correctly, the fork made 2 incompatible versions of bitcoin floating around, and the new fork has yet to yield any bitcoins from being mined? Maybe? no, there's two fully compatible versions using the same blockchain. at some hypothetical point in the future, if a 75% threshold is met, then they'll diverge and the new one will be mining blocks the original won't accept. so far no one using the new client has managed to mine a single block, but if they do, for now it will still be accepted by the original client
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 19:13
|
|
