170
171

We need to talk. The Bitcoin that Satoshi envisioned is dying as people just walk away. (self.btc)

singularity87 が /r/btc に 投稿

 

We need to have a talk.

I've been a part of the bitcoin community since 2011 and right now I genuinely think Satoshi's vision for bitcoin is on the very edge of disappearing forever. Long-time community members are simply throwing their hands up and walking away. I know I have come pretty close to doing that myself.

If we don't do something before too many users leave we will have no hope in changing Bitcoin's course back to what everyone originally envisioned. In all honestly we may already be too late. If you look at the charts for this sub you will see the use of it has been steadily declining over the past few months. I'm noticing less and less participation is happening in each post with only 2 or three post on the front page getting much conversation going and they are usually over some controversy.

There are a number of reasons why this is happening. Firstly, one of the major reasons is Gregory Maxwell and his foot soldiers. He is outsmarting everyone here because the reality is, he is smarter than most people here. Here is what some of their main tactics are though. If you know them and take my advice it may help the situation;

Greg and his supporters accuse his opponents of all the things that he and his side do. This is highly effective, as to a casual observer it makes it very difficult to differentiate who is the one that is actually causing the problem. Most observers will simply think both groups are as bad as each other. It is not unlike the situation in sci-fi movies where there is an alien (or something similar) that transforms into a replica of someone and both are standing side-by-side calling the other the "phony" and only upon close inspection you are able to see which is the actual "phony". This is very difficult to defend against.

A second tactic they commonly use is to make some kind of prophecy based on little to no evidence, then they will work towards making that prophecy come true by any means necessary.

 

Some examples; r/btc has been under social attack from day one. It is a similar social attack that has been going on (and has succeeded) on r/bitcoin. There is a slightly different tactic being used on r/btc though.

On r/bitcoin they had the explicit support of theymos which meant that when the social attack started last year, anyone who went against it (i.e. pretty much everyone in the sub) theymos would simply ban them until the voice of the attackers outweighed or balanced the voice of the supporters. r/bitcoin being the main sub for bitcoin communication meant it is usually the first place new users become part of the bitcoin community. What they then get is a completely alternative view of bitcoin than the one most of us got any time before summer 2015. This was then taken to be the status quo by the new users and therefore was the view that they held. This meant that the sub started to fill with these new users who support the arguments given by the attackers. It worked, and if you go read the comments in r/bitcoin now you can see that it is a completely different community than at any time before summer 2015.

A trip down memory lane

The social attack on r/btc is different than the one on r/bitcoin in that they don't have the explicit support of the top mod here (/u/memorydealers). This makes their task more difficult as they can't simply have the view they want to be removed eradicated by banning anyone who states those views. It is worth noting that originally they did try to make this tactic possible by getting /u/btcdrak on the list of mods. He did this by socially engineering /u/memorydealers through social media. It was effective until the community here made enough of a fuss to have him removed. Instead their backup plan is now to make this place the "cesspool" they are proclaiming it to be (remember I said one of their tactics is to make prophecies come true). They do this by having a team of people posting in here day in day out stirring the pot and causing messy arguments. Over the last month or so they have been upping the ante and Greg himself has been coming here to create as much controversy as possible. Specifically he is trying to draw the devs of Bitcoin Classic and Bitcoin Unlimited out by attacking them both personally and professionally. He and his foot soldiers are purposely trying to turn r/btc into a shithole to push people away from the sub, and it's working. You can see posts here all the time from valuable members of the community saying they no longer want to be a part of the community any more. The stats back it up as well. Large numbers of the community are moving into other cryptocurrencies or simply giving up on cryptocurrency all together.

They are winning.

 

There only three ways to defend against this kind of attack.

  1. Do not engage with these people. Their effectiveness comes from how big their platform is. The more you engage with them the bigger their voice is. I understand the argument that bad/false arguments should be corrected, but this is not effective. It takes 1000 times more effort to counter bullshit than it does to counter the truth. You will never win this way (unfortunately). If you feel what they are saying does not have value or has negative value simply downvote and discuss with other people in the thread. That is not to say that people should not debate with genuine people, but there are specific users who ARE NOT GENUINE. They are not here for genuine debate.

  2. /u/memorydealers you need to remove the trolls . There are some here that would call it censorship but you are not banning an idea. You are banning the shit stirring that goes on here on a daily basis. What these attackers want most is a platform. It's the reason why they spend so much time complaining about the censorship here but spend zero time complaining about the censorship in r/bitcoin. They don't actually care about about censorship. They care about socially attacking the community and to be able to do that their accounts need to be able to post here. I am sure there will be some amount of community backlash but at this point what do you have to lose? The community here is dying anyway.

  3. We need to fork bitcoin and stop debating whether a block size increase should happen or not. The debate has happened. No compromise was made by Core and they have decided they are going to do what they want to do and nothing anyone else is going to say is going to stop them. Miners have shown almost 100% support in bitcoin core and there is absolutely zero indication that this will change. If anything, their support seems to be growing. We need a divorce and one that happens as cleanly as possible. A clean divorce is far better for everyone than an unhappy marriage. That means we have to simply stop engaging with core and hoping that things will change. Support for a fork needs to increase and all effort needs to go into making it successful. This is the ONLY way users are going to be given a voice. We need support from the teams of Bitcoin Classic and Bitcoin Unlimited. All of these teams (including the one that is gathering around the btcforks project) supports a multi-client and free-choice development environment and all support on-chain scaling. If we work together we will have a much much higher likelihood of success.

These are the users that I believe to be attacking both r/btc and r/bitcoin (and I am certain there more):

 

No one has to take my advice and you are welcome to call this all bullshit but I decided to put in all the effort I can over the next months in a last ditch effort to try and save bitcoin, and that includes trying to save the community here. I'd like to end this with a quote from the movie Interstellar;

 

"We used to look up at the sky and wonder at our place in the stars, now we just look down and worry about our place in the dirt."

 

EDIT: There is a perfect example HERE in this thread of what I am talking about.

/u/Lejitz stirs shit up. Then /u/mufftrader response which encourages /u/Lejitz to fling twice as much shit.

EDIT: It seems to be working. The trolls are now resorting to simply talking to themselves in this thread.

 

EDIT: I should add that if you want to take part in the btcforks project you can join our sub at r/btcfork or you can join our slack at btcforks.signup.team.

全 176 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]vjeuss 45ポイント46ポイント  (24子コメント)

i've hodling btc for a few years now and watching the main events. However, and bettting i am not the only one, i still dont quite get what is going on. I am even less taking sides. I am too little informed to do that.

It all feels to me a battle of personalities or about block sizes.

Reading your long post I still dont understand what is going on. Is there anyone able to write a couple of paragtaphs (and no more than that please) connecting all the dots (gmaxwell, blockstream, rogerver, ...) in an objective, helpful and impartial - as much as possible - way so people like me can build a personal understanding?

The only thing I may be able to have an opinion is about a call to fork bitcoin. That does seem dangerous esp. now that we have the Eth example. What benefits would it bring and, most importantly, how will it not just create a lose-lose situation and destroy the value bitcoin has so painfully acquired over the last years?

Please trust me when i say I am not taking sides and even less stirring the mud. Ans sorry if I am missing something obvious - that's because I am for sure. Thanks all.

[–]singularity87[S] 28ポイント29ポイント  (21子コメント)

I'll try, but in all honesty you are not going to get the full picture from only a couple of paragraphs.

Currently the number of transactions that bitcoin can handle per block is has a static limit of 1MB worth of transactions. This is part of the consensus logic meaning that if you change it a hard fork will occur. The 1MB limit was not originally in bitcoin when it was released but actually put in later as way of stopping an attacker from bloating the blockchain by filling every block with a large number of transactions. This would make the blockchain grow very rapidly and would harm the network in a number of ways. A decision was made last year by a small number of developers to start using this 1MB limit as a different function. They would use this limit to limit the number of transactions on the network and therefore put up fees (i.e. increasing demand * static supply = increasing price). Many reasons have been given for doing this and this is a whole debate on it's own. Essentially these developers believe that bitcoin cannot scale and that the only way you can allow more transactions to happen is to do these transactions off-chain (i.e. not on the bitcoin network). The way they are proposing to do this is to use a layer 2 network to send transactions and then only publish transactions to the bitcoin network when absolutely necessary.

Our side of the debate believes that no evidence at all has been given to show that bitcoin cannot scale on-chain therefore there is a social contract to make sure that bitcoin is allowed to scale on-chain and off-chain systems must be allowed to succeed on their own merits without restricting bitcoin to force people onto these layer 2 systems. We also believe that the security model of these layer 2 systems fails when bitcoin is run at capacity (i.e. blocks are always full). The layer 2 systems they are proposing are not proven in anyway and are currently just concepts. We feel that making an enormous change in the technical and economic model of bitcoin based on a non-working concept is dangerous and unfair to all the participants who worked to make bitcoin what it is today based on the original social contract.

A heavy debate has gone on over the last year to get these bitcoin developers to make some sort of compromise but absolutely non has been given therefore a large portion of the communities interests are not being served by them. We feel that the only way to allow the original vision of bitcoin to succeed is to fork bitcoin allow the participants and market which the best way forward is. People should be allowed to freely chose the network they support and not be forced or coerced into following whatever a small group of people decide.

The only thing I may be able to have an opinion is about a call to fork bitcoin. That does seem dangerous esp. now that we have the Eth example. What benefits would it bring and, most importantly, how will it not just create a lose-lose situation and destroy the value bitcoin has so painfully acquired over the last years?

The ETH, ETC example is exactly what model we are taking. The communities were able to split into separate ideologies and each participant was able to freely decide which ideology suited their interests best. This is not dangerous. The ETC ETH split happened in the worst circumstances possible and everything turned out fine. We are working towards a forking process that will be far safer, simpler and cleaner than the ETH ETC split. It is important to note that the total value of the two side ETH and ETH was actually worth roughly the same as ETH before the fork happened. No value was lost. Everyone who held ETH before the fork held the same total value after the fork.

What we are creating is a spin-off. When a company feels that two parts of the whole will be worth more when working independently then a spin-off happens. This is what we are doing with bitcoin.

[–]pd67 5ポイント6ポイント  (15子コメント)

when will the btc fork happen?

[–]singularity87[S] 13ポイント14ポイント  (14子コメント)

I'd say currently the consensus is within 2 months. The code changes are relatively simple. The biggest challenge is going to be getting enough support before the fork happens and, making sure an ecosystem is in place. We are making in-roads though.

[–]JacobElProdigy 5ポイント6ポイント  (9子コメント)

You guys really will have enough hash power to pull that off in two months you think? That would be amazing.

[–]singularity87[S] 6ポイント7ポイント  (8子コメント)

We have a certain amount of hashing power promised to us but the majority of miners should switch over just because it will be more profitable to miner a chain that has far less competition on it.

We aren't aiming for >50% at first (although that would of course be ideal) but it seems that it should theoretically be possible to survive without the majority hash power. If we are attacked to the point of the fork failing we will likely instantly be moving over to a ASIC resistant POW (probably ethereum's) where normal users will be able to mine again. Ethereum will soon be moving to POS and there will be an enormous amount of GPU hash power available looking for a home.

[–]JacobElProdigy 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

Aha. That makes your road map much more understandable. When should we expect real solid answers to the expected dates and what's the next big road block?

[–]singularity87[S] 6ポイント7ポイント  (3子コメント)

  1. Release MVF (minimum viable fork) requirements and design spec. - Next week.
  2. Release first code for the MVF. - 2 to 3 weeks.
  3. MVF on testnet. - 3 to 4 weeks.
  4. MVF client release. - 4 to 5 weeks.
  5. Fork launch (at specific block height). - 2 months.

These dates are obviously not set in stone though. It's just my estimate based on what is going on in the slack.

Getting a major exchange to be onboard with the fork is going to be one of the key things that we need to achieve. I have heard that Adam Back has been doing the rounds at exchanges right now (although I don't have a good source for it) so maybe this is why.

[–]todu 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Getting a major exchange to be onboard with the fork is going to be one of the key things that we need to achieve. I have heard that Adam Back has been doing the rounds at exchanges right now (although I don't have a good source for it) so maybe this is why.

Have you talked to /u/evoorhees who owns Shapeshift? He could probably easily provide a Bitcoin<->Bitcoin-spinoff currency pair as a start until proper exchanges add fiat pairs. But that would require a wallet app for Iphone and Android that can handle the Bitcoin-spinoff unless you expect everyone to install a Bitcoin-spinoff full node just to be able to store the currency for themselves.

I don't understand what you wrote about Adam Back. Can you elaborate?

[–]singularity87[S] 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

We have been in contact with various exchanges with varying levels of success. I think it will get a lot easy to talk with them once the code is available.

I don't understand what you wrote about Adam Back. Can you elaborate?

Someone told me on our slack (I can't remember who) that he had recently been going round to the exchanges for talks. You can consider that unverified though as I have no source. If you can find anything though it would be pretty useful.

[–]tylercoder 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

How will this impact the value of btc?

[–]singularity87[S] 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Well, ethereum split in adverse circumstances. Neither of the forks added anything new. The value of the forks in aggregate held their value though.

The fork we are working on will aim to make bitcoin scale on-chain and therefore add value to the network. My guess is that, if we are successful we will add value to the total value of both blockchains (BTS-S and BTC-C)

[–]Hitchslappy 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

My guess is that, if we are successful we will add value to the total value of both blockchains

With no other precedents than ETC/ETH I don't know how you worked that one out. Even given the circumstances everyone thought ETC would be dead within hours and look what happened.

IMO it's more likely BTC-C will lose X% value because of general uncertainty and anxiety, and all the people who have faith in Core (pretty much the entire industry) will dump their BTS-S within one day of it going live.

[–]pd67 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

ok, what do you mean by eco system? like miners picking up the fork?

[–]singularity87[S] 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

Miners, exchanges, wallets (desktop, mobile, web), payments, blockchain explorer, openbazaar, businesses etc.

[–]todu 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

For a potentially friendly explorer you could talk to blocktrail.com. They recently got bought by Bitmain which is the same company that owns Antpool. Jihan Wu (/u/Jihan_Bitmain) is co-owner of Antpool and he is very much pro raising the blocksize limit. They would probably be supportive of what you're trying to accomplish with your spinoff. Assuming that Jihan Wu has any influence over Antpool's decisions which is not a given considering he wants to mine BIP109 blocks but Antpool is still not mining them.

[–]vjeuss 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

many thanks. very helpful. I suppose that layer 2 is segwit?

[–]singularity87[S] 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

The lightning network is layer 2.

[–]singularity87[S] 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

No, segwit is just changing how actual bitcoin transactions are formatted.

Segwit is being proposed as a scaling mechanism but actually make scaling more difficult as an attack can bloat the blockchain more than twice as fast as would happen normally. I.e. With segwit you can get around 1.7x more 'normal' transactions. But an attacker gets 4x more transactions.

[–]DaSpawn 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

That does seem dangerous esp. now that we have the Eth example

this was the goal of ETC "supporters" and unwilling supporters convinced of the immutability unicorn, to make forking look like a bad thing in any way possible and to keep the fear level at max when it comes to a bitcoin fork (which has already happened in the past and most did not even hear about/realize it), even thought the ETH/ETC fork shows it's actually success in allowing people to pick their path

same political story that has played throughout history, play on peoples fears to seize control or gain an edge

[–]satoshis_sockpuppet 30ポイント31ポイント  (5子コメント)

At a certain point you have to admit, that the enemy won. And I think we've reached the point, Greg, Blockstream and Theymos have won. They have the control over a so-called "decentralized system".

"One CPU one vote" degenerated to "One farm - one vote". And out of the miners, exactly one is left, that seems to care about Bitcoin, but is a coward. The rest consists of complete idiots whose only qualification is to connect
heating units to to the power socket. I've been very patient with the miners but they didn't even gave the slightest hint, that they are going to change anything. And the few that voted on Slush showed me, that even in the smaller mining department, there are more than enough idiots.

The miners seem to have looked at cores node count and thought that this showed support for core. 90% of these node operators just don't know better. We had and have enough nodes to fork with 60% of the hashing power. The forked Bitcoin would have been worth more than the crippled chain and node after node, the people would have left Core. But that didn't happen. I see it everywhere, noobs get interested in Bitcoin, they read bitcoin.org and /r/bitcoin and start a core node in good faith. This won't change.

It is sad, what happened to the original idea of (a) great mind(s).

It is disgusting, how shareholders have about no weight in this debate. I might be wrong, but from all the people I know, the longtime holders, who got their coins, when Greg wasn't even around, no one is supporting core. To me, it looks like a waiting game, when the first real whales are going to sell and move to other things.

Bitcoins market share is going down and down and everybody, who supports core, is happy. The atmosphere around core followers is "creepy". It's the scary bagholder attitude one could observe so often, when companies went down the drain. You have to face it: People who still support core, although they know of the alternatives, are just plain idiots. Maybe I am to sensitive here, but generally I've had a pretty good gut instinct about such behavior in the past and I won't go down with these retards.

I've had some hope for a PoW fork, but the forking idea seems to have ended in "generally all forks are super", instead of just doing one fork. And there aren't nearly enough developers to create a reasonable fork.

So I'll let my Unlimited node run for the "foreseeable future" and I'm keeping my sentimentality coins, but I think I'll concentrate on competitors to Bitcoin. Maybe there is a good one out there, maybe not. I'll find out.

One thing I know for sure: With lunatics like Luke, pyschopaths like Greg (controlling about everybody else in this list), slimeballs like Adam, wannabe geniuses like Todd, limited code monkeys like Laan and politicians like Pieter controlling Bitcoin, it won't succeed in the future. And I think the mess, Bitcoins code is, isn't just by chance. I find it very plausible, that they are trying to obfuscate it more and more, to control it.

Bitcoin is a product, these people didn't understand that, or pretend to don't understand it. And a product will vanish if it's not needed.

A tip for core: Think of the core following idiots, who will want to see their idol Greg decapitated when he fucked it up. I have no idea, how one person can be blind enough, to run a billion dollar economy into the ground and has no problem with being responsible for it. The same idiots following him blindly, will hate him with the same enthusiasm, they love him with now. I doubt, that they will think too much about that, but dissapointed cult members aren't fun people. And you might be a bunch of fuckheads, but I sincerely hope, that nobody will get hurt physically in this shit show in the end.

Overall: Good job, Blockstream. Only 70e6 $ to fuck up Bitcoin completely, that's quite the success. One thing I know for sure: I will never use any of your services (if you ever finish anything) and I hope your name will be remembered for the disgusting piece of shit company it is. And good job Adam, for completely destroying your reputation in just a few months.

Yes, that's a rant, full of insults. Yes, Core members, you are victims of so much abuse, although you just want the best for everybody.

[–]singularity87[S] 7ポイント8ポイント  (4子コメント)

I've had some hope for a PoW fork, but the forking idea seems to have ended in "generally all forks are super", instead of just doing one fork. And there aren't nearly enough developers to create a reasonable fork.

I don't know where you got that idea from. We aren't saying "all forks are super". We are trying to create a process for forking simply, safely and cleanly but also think that forks should be able to survive on their own merits. If someone wants to create a 0.5MB fork then fine, I'm not going to say it's fine though. People should be free to support what they want to support. Forking is and should be difficult and should only be used as a last resort. We are at the last resort phase which is why a fork is happening.

[–]satoshis_sockpuppet 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

We are trying to create a process for forking simply, safely and cleanly but also think that forks should be able to survive on their own merits.

I don't see the necessity for such a process and I don't know why there needs to be any complexity added.

What is wrong with just saying: At SW activation we will Hardfork to PoW X with Blocksize Y and it will be called Bitcoin. Transactions different from the Segwit fork will be marked by Z, so you don't confuse Bitcoin with Bitcoin SegWit.

[–]anarcoin 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

The thing is that yes if you held money on eth and then on etc you have the same value.

1st problem. Is we don't know if that was a fluke.

2nd, if we agree it wasn't a fluke and every fork will equal out in value like this then the problem I still have as a dumb consumer is that I have to always have money in every fork and it's fucking enoying and hard to deal with. Let's say someone creates a wallet that combines all the forks so you as a consumer don't need to see or deal with the forks. Well then we have massive inflation as the amount of tokens goes towards infinite.

Just thoughts.

[–]singularity87[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

The thing is that yes if you held money on eth and then on etc you have the same value.

Yes, everyone will hold an equal number of coins on both sides of the fork after the fork happens.

1st problem. Is we don't know if that was a fluke.

It certainly could be, but if you look at the charts for ETH and ETC the total price of both was almost perfectly balanced. I have never seen such a strong linking of currencies. As the value of one went down the other went up by the exact opposite amount. The charts looked like a mirror image. They have now mostly decoupled but it lasted around a month, which IMO builds a strong case for the value being held in the short-term after a fork happens.

2nd, if we agree it wasn't a fluke and every fork will equal out in value like this then the problem I still have as a dumb consumer is that I have to always have money in every fork and it's fucking enoying and hard to deal with. Let's say someone creates a wallet that combines all the forks so you as a consumer don't need to see or deal with the forks. Well then we have massive inflation as the amount of tokens goes towards infinite.

I think this is only a problem if lots of forks happen that gain any serious support, which I find unlikely. Forking is (rightly) difficult and getting enough support to get an ecosystem around it is even more difficult still. I also think that over time some forks will die and some will survive so infinite inflation won't happen.

Also, it is not like traditional inflation. Traditional inflation steals from everyone to give to the few. This kind of inflation (if you can even call it inflation) give everyone an equal share of the new coins. It's more like making bitcoins divisible by 1,000,000,000 rather than 100,000,000.

[–]anarcoin 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Interesting idea of the inflation. Thanks.

[–]Bitcoin_forever 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I am bitcoin_forever so even if everybody will walk away, I will still be using Bitcoin...

[–]seweso 17ポイント18ポイント  (43子コメント)

Don't censor, don't ban, let them say whatever they want to say. Just point out logical fallacies. And use the down-vote button when its appropriate.

[–]singularity87[S] 16ポイント17ポイント  (19子コメント)

I've made my argument for why that doesn't work. They don't care if they are right or wrong. In fact I'd guess that they know they are wrong. All they want is a platform and you're giving it to them on a plate. All it is doing is having the exact same argument hashed over again and again in every thread. This is pushing away legitimate community members and this is exactly what the trolls want.

[–]chernobyl169 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not just know they are wrong, but actively relish the opportunity to derail the conversation.

[–]peoplma 5ポイント6ポイント  (3子コメント)

I agree wholeheartedly. Here's a thread where the people you speak of are denying basic arithmetic https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4z70jm/bitcoincoredev_bitcoin_core_0130_released/d6tynb1?context=3

Facts and logic don't work with these people.

[–]singularity87[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's sad that Gavin's facts are just falling on deaf ears over in r/bitcoin. His skill would achieve so much more by supporting our fork.

[–]rezzme 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Remember the days when Gavin was respected in \bitcoin? That thread is just shameful. Good god.

[–]peoplma 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, it's incredibly disgusting. What's worse is that it's par for the course these days....

[–]jungans 4ポイント5ポイント  (4子コメント)

But how does it make us look as a community to have what looks like genuine concern being ignored and downvoted?

[–]singularity87[S] 8ポイント9ポイント  (3子コメント)

How does it make us look as a community if every single thread is just a mud fight?

[–]jungans 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

I agree, I'm just saying there is no easy way out of this mess.

[–]LovelyDay 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

When there are a couple of paid social media manipulators and volunteer trolls attacking this sub, it does have an effect. I think /u/singularity87 is spot on with the advice to ignore them, once you get to know them.

Or paste links to previous answers if they keep beating dead horse arguments in an effort to waste peoples' time. We don't owe the trolls anything, let's focus on positive, helpful replies to those who are not trolling.

[–]observerc 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

There is and OP just described it. It really is easy.

[–]todu 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

You've already created a censored, or "curated" as you like to call it, subreddit (/r/btcfork) and slack (btcforks.slack.com). You originally argued that those forums should be heavily censored against small blockers because your forums are supposed to be spinoff project forums where actual planning, coordination and organizing should be discussed.

You said that your forums assume that everyone there is a big blocker and that small blocker talk will be censored ("moderated away"). You also said that your heavy moderation would not be considered censorship because free debate, discussion and conversation can occur on /r/btc.

Fine, have your heavily "curated" forums and chats. But now suddenly you're actively campaigning to start censoring /r/btc the same way? Jesus, you're just as bad as Theymos. You just happen to be a big blocker instead of a small blocker. Stop with the censorship already!

If Bitcoin can't survive uncensored debate then Bitcoin simply does not deserve to survive. Stop censoring debate and use your up and down vote buttons like everyone else. If you especially don't like a comment made by a small blocker troll, then go ahead and press the comment button. Don't press the memory hole button. The stupid, incorrect and otherwise bad arguments need to be read, understood, disputed and refuted. That's how you win mind share and that's how you win an argument.

Your body works the same way with vaccines: You inject a little of the poison to train and strengthen your immune system. Don't be bubble boy. Don't be the anti-vaxxer of Bitcoin. Shitty small blocker arguments are good for your brain. They make your reasoning sharper and stronger. They make you consider scenarios that you never thought of before (well, sometimes at least). You'll never make the best decisions in life if you censor your political opponent from debate. Know your enemy, debunk and defeat them. Use their censorship against them. Don't do the same mistake as they do.

[–]1s44c 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Debate is when each side considers the alternative side's point of view. What's happening here isn't debate but intentional derailing of conversations.

Some compromise has to be found between allowing differing views to be expressed and not allowing the same illogical views to be expressed repeatedly and out of context. Finding that balance is hard.

[–]autourbanbot -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Here's the Urban Dictionary definition of Memory Hole :

The alteration or outright disappearance of inconvenient or embarrassing documents, photographs, transcripts, or other records, such as from a web site or other archive. Its origin comes from George Orwell's "1984", in which the memory hole was a small incinerator chute used for censoring, (through destroying), things Big Brother deemed necessary to censor.

Person One: "Did you hear about that scandal involving the President?"

Person Two: "Yeah! Looks like someone didn't have time to visit the memory hole."

Dude One: "Yo bro, I like that picture on Facebook of you wearing the "I Love Barry Manilow" shirt!"

Dude Two: "Yeah, that's definitely going in the memory hole."

about | flag for glitch | Summon: urbanbot, what is something?

[–]seweso 2ポイント3ポイント  (5子コメント)

Why does it matter if Bitcoin dies? There are more than enough alternatives. I actually like to see what happens when the blocksize-limit isn't raised for another 4(?) months.

Cryptocurrencies as a whole are unstoppable, even though some will come and go.

[–]jungans 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

It matters. Bitcoin is the face of crypto to the world. Credibility and momentum would be lost.

[–]antonivs -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Credibility and momentum would be lost.

That would be fixed very quickly, because the demand is already there. It'd be a minor setback at worst. "This is actually good news!"

[–]singularity87[S] 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

Well if you want bitcoin to die then you really have nothing to add to the debate do you.

[–]antonivs 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Saying "why does it matter if Bitcoin dies?" is not the same thing as "want Bitcoin to die."

The first is a valid question. If Bitcoin died, all the commercial entities trying to gain control of it would find themselves holding a much more empty bag. That might not be such a bad thing.

The point is that the technology behind Bitcoin is bigger than Bitcoin. You shouldn't let some sort of (emotional?) attachment to Bitcoin blind you to the larger possibilities.

But, one problem that cryptocurrency will face over and over is that without a viable governance model, it's going to struggle. Bitcoin's current problems are essentially because the governance model is ad-hoc.

[–]seweso -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Exactly this . This whole "there can only be one" thing isn't really helpful.

[–]1s44c 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

That sounds good in theory but it doesn't work well in practice. I genuinely don't believe in censorship but if certain people are poisoning the well over and over again there comes a point where they have to be banned for the good of the signal to noise ratio.

Put it this way, how long would it take for me to call you a communist? How long would it take you to answer that allegation? A lot longer for sure. What if I made up some allegation about you twice a day every day? You would spend so long answering you would give up and leave.

[–]seweso -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'd ignore the person and his comments at some point. I don't care what people think about me, especially on the internet. If most people are lazy and belief whatever is spoon-fed, then so be it. In Bitcoin's case, everyone would simply get what they deserve: a less valuable Bitcoin.

[–]1s44c 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

But new members of this subreddit will believe whatever they read because they don't know any of the history. They will leave disappointed before they figure out what is going on.

I don't want a less valuable bitcoin, I want a valuable bitcoin and a functional community of supporters around it. That means kicking some troublemakers out.

[–]observerc 3ポイント4ポイント  (19子コメント)

This approach leads to the wrong people eventually grabbing the necessary power to do those things themselves. Dont be a fool. Call it moderation if you prefer. These people singularity87 mentions should have been banned long ago.

[–]chodpaba -2ポイント-1ポイント  (18子コメント)

Just help me to be clear about this, you are in favor of censorship in order to prevent the wrong people from being empowered to act on their own. That logical argument and downvoting are insufficient means.

[–]antonivs 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

you are in favor of censorship in order to prevent the wrong people from being empowered to act on their own. That logical argument and downvoting are insufficient means.

Downvoting is a form of censorship, so you're really just arguing about the censorship mechanism.

Without any exception I know of, all of the most high-quality subreddits on reddit rely on moderation, i.e. censorship in your book. That's not a coincidence - it's a causal relationship.

Spending your community's energy battling trolls and enemies in public means you have less energy and discussion space to devote to productive activities.

Moderators are a line of defense in a kind of war. Saying that everyone should fight that war on an ongoing basis flies in the face of effective organization of human activity.

[–]singularity87[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is exactly my point. They know this though which is exactly why they are doing it. If everyone from r/bitcoin had moved over here and weren't attacked in every single thread we might have been able to move on and achieve something but instead the same arguments and simply hashed over again and again and again. What's the point? The moderation policy should be used to try and achieve this.

[–]chodpaba -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Without any exception I know of, all of the most high-quality subreddits on reddit rely on moderation, i.e. censorship in your book.

Kind of like r/Bitcoin then.

Meet the new boss

Same as the old boss

[–]antonivs 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Kind of like r/Bitcoin then.

That's a simple logical error. The fact that moderation supports and allows for high quality communities doesn't mean that all moderation leads to high quality communities.

The result of the logical error is classic "throw the baby out with the bathwater" behavior. And then people wonder why everything has gone to shit even though they got rid of what they thought was the bogeyman.

Think more deeply, please. This kind of populist simplisticness is what leads to "leaders" like Trump.

Meet the new boss

Same as the old boss

This is childish. Try articulating your point, if you have one.

[–]observerc 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

If I call it moderation instead of censorship will you reply with the same logic?

[–]chodpaba 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Would you consider the moderation policy as practiced by Theymos to be censorship? Because what I am reading here is a hypocritical advancement of those policies which are so vehemently criticized as censorship.

[–]observerc 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

How is banning people that have proved repeatedly to have as the main interest boycot relevant topics comparable to umbrella ban any discussion that doesn't fit into a company's roadmap?

We are talking about specific people. There isn't even a discussion about banning any specific idea, anybody would still be able to talk about blocksize.

If the difference is not obvious, I am not sure I can help with more argumentation.

I guess some people get a moral kick out of "no censorship" fancy principles, but I am sure that if somebody comes in here with controversial ideas about, say, religion, politics, sexuality. Those same people will at once call for moderation, THEN they don't call it censorship.

Sorry about the rant, but the paradigm you are suggesting is just imaginary.

[–]1s44c 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

If people express some viewpoint that the moderators do not agree with that should not be banned for it. Health debate should always be encouraged. But if people are intentionally disruptive and derail other conversations they should be banned.

Theymos bans anyone that expresses a different viewpoint to his, that's where the real evil is.

[–]Shock_The_Stream 1ポイント2ポイント  (9子コメント)

r/bitcoin needs to ban hundreds of bitcoiners. r/btc needs to ban just 20 idiots. That's the difference.

[–]todu 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Still, it's a slippery slope. It always starts with "only 20 people". If it's only 20 people then it's easy to just down vote them and if you care enough, answer with a link where their small blocker arguments have already been thoroughly and pedagogically refuted.

[–]1s44c 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's a good argument. But I think it's necessary to remove some freedom from some people for the greater good. 20 people can do a lot of sustained damage.

I don't really agree with putting humans in prison but I'll admit I can't come up with a better way of handling hardened criminals.

[–]chodpaba -1ポイント0ポイント  (6子コメント)

So, you are in agreement that censorship is the correct course of action, and that logical argument and downvoting are insufficient tools to achieve your aims.

[–]1s44c 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes. (So you can't say nobody gave you a straight answer.)

I believe you can only logically argue with someone who is prepared to try and see your point of view. You can't logically argue with someone who only attempting to derail your discussion.

[–]Shock_The_Stream 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

Banning the most enthusiastic cheerleaders and minions of the censors is not censorhip. It is preventing a forum from totalitarian terror and suicide bombers.

[–]singularity87[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Please stop engaging with them. This is exactly what I am talking about. You are providing them with the exact platform that they want.

[–]Shock_The_Stream 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Maybe you are right, but I am not sure. I'm not sure if all that downvoted shit really helps them. What helps them the most is the disgusting behavior of the miners.

[–]chodpaba -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It appears that you wish to dictate 'correct' speech to u/Shock_The_Stream as well.

[–]chodpaba -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

You are saying that banning is not censorship. And that such bans prevent totalitarian terror.

[–]xbtdev 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

I've been a part of the bitcoin community since 2011

How is this relevant, when other people who have been around just as long as you (e.g. myself), prefer to keep blocks as they are?

[–]singularity87[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

That's fine for you to think that blocks should stay the size that they are. I'm not saying that people shouldn't be allowed to hold an opposing view. If you want bitcoin to be a settlement network only then I disagree but I respect your view. I don't think this debate is resolveable which means that if one side is not willing to accept the direction of the other side then the best option is a clean divorce.

[–]xbtdev 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The only problem I see with the 'clean' divorce is that both sides want to call their currency 'bitcoin'. I mean really, there's not much else stopping it from happening.

[–]singularity87[S] 7ポイント8ポイント  (3子コメント)

Does anyone happen to have a list of "I'm out" posts as I would like to go and contact them all and ask if they would be willing to stay and participate in this last ditch attempt to save bitcoin from its masters.

[–]sojellyfish 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

Well, you could add my name to the list. Been casually in bitcoin since 2011. I've been waiting for the blocksize to increase this whole time and not once have we gotten anywhere near an actual size increase. Now we not only have a divide concerning whether to increase or not, but also how much to increase. 1MB, 2MB, 99.722MB? Just do something already! And it seems the people capable of actually making this increase happening can't be bothered.

r/bitcoin is like the Republican and Democratic national convention that regurgitates the same old bullshit over and over until people believe it. r/btc is like Ron Paul trying to end the Fed. It's not working and aside from an actual crisis (e.g. the price plummeting) I doubt anything is going to change.

I'm by no means selling out, but I'm placing my bets on other coins to overtake bitcoin.

[–]singularity87[S] 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Just do something already!

Well that's exactly what we are doing. We are going to fork bitcoin. Would you support the fork?

[–]sojellyfish 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I've been supportive of a fork since day one. Bring it on. Let the great Bitcoin experiment continue! If it fails then by god at least we gave it a shot.

[–]SirEDCaLot 5ポイント6ポイント  (11子コメント)

Here's the problem:

Let's say we do a 'hostile hard fork' of Bitcoin. New proof of work that's ASIC-resistant, fix a few bugs like transaction malleability, clean up some of the crud in the old Satoshi codebase now that we're not relying on it anymore. All of this is doable. And let's for arguments sake say the new coin is called BTF (BiTcoin Fork)....

Obviously it would have the advantage that existing balances would be there, which is good. But what's our value proposition?
How do we persuade merchants to accept BTF or take it seriously? How do we persuade people to use BTF? Why is BTF better than others such as Ethereum or Dash or Steem or Monero or any of the other 600ish altcoins that all want a piece of the pie?

Remember if we are making changes, we can't rely on momentum. One of the advantages of a block size increase is it could be done with few changes to existing custom Bitcoin software. If there's a hard fork, new PoW, new transaction format, whatever; all that code will need serious work. How do we persuade the people that BTF is better than ETH or any other?

Also to make this happen you'll need some serious coding talent. Mike Hearn ragequit last year, Gavin fought this fight twice (XT and Classic) and I think is sick of it, and most of the current Core guys work for Blockstream. Do you have a core group of contributors or perhaps expressions of support from some of the alt-clients (IE Bitcoin Unlimited)?

These are real questions, I'm very curious to hear your answer, because I'm quite unhappy with where BTC is right now (stuck between a rock (devs who refuse to do what the community wants) and a hard place (mining centralized with 10 guys who won't rock the boat))...

[–]singularity87[S] 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

But what's our value proposition?

If there wasn't a value proposition, we wouldn't be doing it. The value proposition is that participants in the network get a direct voice in the development of bitcoin. We are giving them the choice to choose making bitcoin scale on-chain (us) or chose making bitcoin a settlement layer and scale off-chain using extra layers (core).

How do we persuade merchants to accept BTF or take it seriously? How do we persuade people to use BTF?

Low cost, fast and reliable and secure transactions using a system and economic model that is well understood (it's been working well since 2009) and has a plan to keep it that way.

Why is BTF better than others such as Ethereum or Dash or Steem or Monero or any of the other 600ish altcoins that all want a piece of the pie?

Because it has the most diverse userbase and is the most understood out of all cryptocurrencies. If we can get >10% of hash power of core, which seems to be reasonable, then we will have a larger proof of work than every altcoin.

Remember if we are making changes, we can't rely on momentum. One of the advantages of a block size increase is it could be done with few changes to existing custom Bitcoin software. If there's a hard fork, new PoW, new transaction format, whatever; all that code will need serious work. How do we persuade the people that BTF is better than ETH or any other?

You should really join our slack to see what is going on. Very few changes are being made. We are creating a minimum viable for. We'll be releasing a specification for this fork most likely next week and the code for it not long after.

Also to make this happen you'll need some serious coding talent. Mike Hearn ragequit last year, Gavin fought this fight twice (XT and Classic) and I think is sick of it, and most of the current Core guys work for Blockstream. Do you have a core group of contributors or perhaps expressions of support from some of the alt-clients (IE Bitcoin Unlimited)?

I agree it is an uphill battle but there are already quite a few people involved. I am hoping both the Classic and Unlimited devs will come out and support us, which I feel is also in their best interest. It would certainly help if people showed that they support them giving us their support so that they don't have to fear any backlash from the community.

[–]ShadowOfHarbringer 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

Let's say we do a 'hostile hard fork' of Bitcoin. New proof of work that's ASIC-resistant, fix a few bugs like transaction malleability, clean up some of the crud in the old Satoshi codebase now that we're not relying on it anymore. All of this is doable. And let's for arguments sake say the new coin is called BTF (BiTcoin Fork)....

Obviously it would have the advantage that existing balances would be there, which is good. But what's our value proposition?

The value proposition is doing 70+ transactions per second instead of 3,5 transactions per second.

If think that is enough value.

[–]DavidMc0 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Absolutely - on chain scaling is missing from Bitcoin. If a fork can deliver this, plus a team to back it up, and some industry backing / support / acceptance, it could have a chance of succeeding.

Easier said than done perhaps? I hope it can happen.

[–]NervousNorbert -2ポイント-1ポイント  (7子コメント)

most of the current Core guys work for Blockstream.

There were over 100 contributors to Core 0.13. Most of them obviously do not work for Blockstream. It should be possible to attract talent from Core.

[–]satoshis_sockpuppet 4ポイント5ポイント  (6子コメント)

Of these contributors almost everybody just had trivial commits.

The hundreds of contributors to Core are a joke.

[–]singularity87[S] -3ポイント-2ポイント  (5子コメント)

In fact it was actually literally exactly 100. Coincidence or trying to make sure there was a 3 digit amount of contributors?

[–]NervousNorbert -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

It was 101. They are all listed, so it's not like they just pulled a number out of a hat.

[–]singularity87[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

When it was announced it was exactly 100. I put it into a spreadsheet to count it.

[–]NervousNorbert 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

Maybe we've seen different versions somehow. No names have been added since publication in the official version, at least.

[–]singularity87[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

This was where I first saw it.

[–]NervousNorbert 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Same history there, no names added or removed. So I can't explain what you saw, but ultimately it's not important. I think it's very unlikely that there's some sort of trickery going on where they realised that 100 sounded fake so they added one. The contributor list can be extracted from git.

[–]fury420 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

You've got to be kidding me, I've made #2 on a list of "users that I believe to be attacking both r/btc and r/bitcoin" ?

This seems pretty damn close to harassment to me, as just some random user I don't appreciate being publicly branded an enemy of Bitcoin just because I often choose to argue viewpoints that apparently differ from yours, and do so without personal attack.

What exactly have I said to you or anyone that attracts such demonization? Have we even interacted before?

Do you honestly want an echo chamber here, where nobody dares to debate and everybody toes the party line?

I try my best to be civil, and to argue reasonable points backed by quotes & links that support them. But... because I'm seen as arguing for the "other side", I'm regularly downvoted and treated quite poorly here.

It seems like you didn't even bother to review my comment history, as I can't imagine what you could possibly see as unfairly attacking in these comments:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4zukac/greg_maxwell_unullc_expresses_his_censorship/d6yzjm0

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4zlvld/peter_todd_zanders_understanding_of_bitcoin_is/d6x3wq5

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4zlvld/peter_todd_zanders_understanding_of_bitcoin_is/d6xvnhj

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4zlvld/peter_todd_zanders_understanding_of_bitcoin_is/d6xup73

Or my comment in your subreddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btcfork/comments/4vsoz0/pow_to_change_or_not/d614jjg#d614jjg

Oh wait, I found our one previous interaction:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4lvvdp/roger_ver_on_twitter_per_the_original_bitcoin/d3qk07g

it seems I also asked about the rules of your subreddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4ycidw/rbtcfork_is_a_yes_men_community/d6mt9sa

Edit: added a link, adjusted others to point futher up the comment chains.

[–]kingofthejaffacakes 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Being really brutal -- it doesn't matter if bitcoin fails. What matters (in a "for the good of the world" sense) is that a cryptocurrency succeeds. I think that is now inevitable.

It would be sad if the one that led the way, bitcoin, didn't turn out to be the one; but so be it. That isn't the end of the world.

The best way to "fork" bitcoin, is to buy another cryptocurrency that has the features you want. Converting fiat to crypto is hard; but crypto-to-crypto is easy. Rather than fork bitcoin, just pick an alternative. It's much easier, and requires far less politicking.

[–]Instiva 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I've chosen to place money in similar coins and also in the separate competition (non-btc based) and I have to say I think you're correct. It's going to be far easier to lift an alt up than fork btc itself. Hopefully it doesn't die but its future seems a little rough as of right now

[–]ABlockInTheChain 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

These are the users

That's a pretty good list. All but four of them I already had them RES tagged as belonging in that category.

The strange thing is that I also had the OP tagged.

[–]fiah84 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Chalk me up as a disillusioned bitcoin holder. With all the shit going on I wonder how I can still justify not selling out and forgetting about this whole mess. For me, the problem is not so much that there are toxic actors in the community that are destroying bitcoin for whatever reason, but more that there are plenty of normal people who eat up all the shit they spew and ask for seconds. Memories seem very short and critical thought is in low supply, and the endless torrent of shit is too much for the few rocks to hold up against much longer

[–]1s44c 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's just the way these things work. A very small core of disruptive people kick up a lot of fuss and draw along a massive number of normal people who are only half paying attention. The small core makes it look like there is a massive amount of controversy when there really isn't.

Ban the trolls from here and everything will improve quickly. Talk to the miners and everything will improve quickly.

[–]ylbam 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

I always find making such lists of people a bit disturbing :|

[–]tophernator 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I also saw /u/ylbam consorting with the devil. Goody ylbam is a witch, burn her!

[–]loveforyouandme 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

We need to fork bitcoin and stop debating whether a block size increase should happen or not. The debate has happened. No compromise was made by Core and they have decided they are going to do what they want to do and nothing anyone else is going to say is going to stop them.

This is what needs to happen. Let them go their way, we will go ours, the market will sort it out.

[–]llortoftrolls -5ポイント-4ポイント  (0子コメント)

please fork already. I want to see the laughable market price which encompasses this subs bad ideas.

[–]YRuafraid 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sorry I'm not gonna participate in your FUD fest, I'm with the Core and I would rather have a carefully calculated HF

Frankly I think you FUDsters are making a bigger deal out of this than it is. "OMG bitcoin got hijacked!" "Satoshi's vision is dead"... yeah whatever. In time this is going to be a thing of the past and the market will move on. Reddit and its censorship issue is a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme

[–]Tawse 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't have enough tin foil for this thread.

[–]himself_v 1ポイント2ポイント  (7子コメント)

Your arguments and proposals seem to be reasonable and convincing, except for the censorship one. Banning by emotional judgement is dangerous. Why not invent some rules as to what exactly is not allowed? Rules can be discussed so that they do not limit free expression of opinions but only the misuse of it.

[–]singularity87[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

At what point is moderation not censorship, because honestly the opinion I often see around here is that moderation=censorship. Everyone has a different opinion of what censorship is. IMO it should be up to the mods to make that decision and they should make that decision based on what is best for the sub and community in general. Theymos split the community in half so obviously his idea of what moderation is was a poor decision. Not to mention he also purposely manipulates information by changing the sorting order for specific posts and hiding deleted posts.

[–]himself_v 3ポイント4ポイント  (5子コメント)

and they should make that decision based on what is best for the sub

What if they don't?

What you're suggesting is authoritarian government which shares your views. Practice shows authoritarianism rarely continues really being "People's Republic" for very long.

But most importantly, this goes against the very ideals of bitcoin which you are trying to defend. Don't you think this is inconsistent?

Societies and communities should be based on the rule of law. If you think there's a reason to ban some people, formulate that reason and propose it as a law.

  1. People reject that law? Then people don't want those offenders banned. Sorry! Any ban would not be "for the people".

  2. People reject the law but want those banned? Then there must be some other reason which you failed to formulate.

[–]CosmicHemorroid -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

/u/singularity87 already has his own sub rbtcfork where a list of users were put on a blacklist, unable to post or comment, before the sub even officially opened.

[–]singularity87[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

So you agree that moderation=censorship then.

[–]himself_v 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

How did you come to that conclusion? I don't. I never even said anything about censorship.

[–]singularity87[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

But most importantly, this goes against the very ideals of bitcoin which you are trying to defend. Don't you think this is inconsistent?

You are saying any kind of moderation is censorship.

[–]himself_v 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

No. I was saying authoritarian rule is bad and rule of law is good?

[–]gynoplasty 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I used to think the idea of another coin taking a large share of the market was impossible. But seeing the crisis of leadership that bitcoin has faced for about two years now has driven me more and more into the arms of more friendly altcoin communities

[–]GrixM 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

I think there are a lot of drama queens around.

In the first place, what exactly is "Satoshi's vision for bitcoin"? And why is it so important that we follow it? Bitcoin isn't an autocracy, I don't think Satoshi himself made bitcoin only for people to follow his own ideologies, because his ideology is precisely based on the free market doing as it pleases. If bitcoin takes a different direction than he may have wanted, that is what he designed bitcoin to be able to do, so he'd have no reason to complain.

There are certainly things I'd consider problems in the bitcoin community, like censorship and strife. But this is simply impossible to avoid. Any community will have problems like this, our goal shouldn't be to get rid of problems like this because it is futile. It is human nature, and especially in a system like bitcoin with very few absolute rules, human nature will be embodied in some ways or another.

I don't think bitcoin is in any particular danger at this point. And if it is, there are plenty of other cryptocurrencies to take its place. The overall idea of a free currency will live on no matter what. If you want to help bitcoin, use it, and use it the way you want to. Show other potential users that it is worth using. That's IMO the only thing that really matters. Get involved with the politics if you want, get involved with developing if you want. Fork if you want, but don't expect everyone else to have the same idea of what bitcoin should be, as you. Bitcoin is what the people who use it does with it.

[–]Shock_The_Stream 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Get involved with the politics if you want, get involved with developing if you want. Fork if you want, but don't expect everyone else to have the same idea of what bitcoin should be, as you. Bitcoin is what the people who use it does with it.

That's why we fork it. Nobody expects that everyone will/should fork with us. As OP wrote: "We need a divorce and one that happens as cleanly as possible. A clean divorce is far better for everyone than an unhappy marriage."

[–]phro 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

You really think a peer based digital cash system was intended to be corrupted into a corporate settlement layer? Zero conf was an accident to be patched out? Add your name to the list above.

[–]GrixM 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

Sure, I guess I, who have accepted bitcoin in my store since 2012, and also convinced three other stores to start accepting it, and still regularly use bitcoin when spending whenever it is possible, need to add my name to a list of people attacking bitcoin.. Can you please try to understand that everyone who disagrees with you isn't part of some grand conspiracy?

[–]phro 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Satoshi's vision as stated in the very first sentence of the whitepaper was "A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution". When you try to question this mission or engage in apologetics for those intentionally deviating from it you're part of the problem outlined by OP.

[–]GrixM 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't see how anyone is working against that.

[–]chodpaba -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think there are a lot of drama queens around.

No doubt. Perhaps one of them will compile a list of the others.

[–]singularity87[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4zz9ej/we_need_to_talk_the_bitcoin_that_satoshi/d706t0n

It was the best decision I made for the sub. It is very productive in there and people don't have to constantly be harassed by trolls. People are able to discuss all facets of the fork. No shit stirring at all. It's like bitcoin in the old days where people actual looked forward to bitcoin progressing.

[–]TotesMessenger 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

[–]Lejitz 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Haha. OP lists a group of people (with yours truly included) that he would like to insult and blame for his shortcomings. I respond with brilliantly humorous sarcasm. Then, in direct conflict with his admonition not to engage me (remember, he called me out), he edits his post to call me out once again to accuse ME of flinging shit?? What in holy hell is going on??

I have to say. This place never ceases to amuse.

[–]Hernzzzz 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hilarious! For those interested in drak's evil plan to destroy bitcoin you should listen to this rare interview where he reveals all https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjP6hezfpUI

[–]chodpaba 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh goody, I'm at the top of an enemies list.

It should really be no wonder to anyone why this is the case. From early on I have been calling out the disingenuous argument that underlies BTCFORK. Which, for me marks it as just another twist on the pump-and-dump altcoin game.

BTCFORK seems to purport a claim to the legacy of Bitcoin. The main problem I see is that the fork crates a new ledger with all new coins. In altcoin parlance this is essentially a premine, or an instamine, according to your preferred language. The only difference being that the initial distribution matches that of Bitcoin by virtue of copying the UTXO database at the time of the fork.

My position is that if BTCFORK really wishes to claim the legacy of Bitcoin the value of the new blockchain would be 'funded' by requiring a proof of burn on coins from the original blockchain before vesting them in the forked blockchain. This preserves the original economic assumptions of Bitcoin that have made it attractive to many as 'digital gold'. The creation of new coins on the forked chain is a violation of the original economic assumptions if BTCFORK is going to be held out as Bitcoin.

But of course if it is going to be just another instamined altcoin this is not a conflict... It is just not Bitcoin. My objection is that there are those holding out BTCFORK as Bitcoin. Thus my claim that the argument being made for BTCFORK by some is disingenuous.

Furthermore, if it is the aim to make BTCFORK just another isolated blockchain this dooms it the the same niche market fate as many other altcoins. Without the ability to extend its reach through smart contract networks it becomes just this. In the end it will be the largest, best supported network which claims the most value according to the assumptions of Metcalfe's Law. And I still believe that Bitcoin on its current development path is best positioned to command such an extensive network.

[–]llortoftrolls -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm noticing less and less participation is happening in each post with only 2 or three post on the front page getting much conversation going and they are usually over some controversy.

Because this place is a circle-jerk and you offer nothing new or insightful. You repeat the same shit every day, down-vote anyone who disagrees, then pat yourselves on the back with posts that start with "I completely agree with you,.."

Anyone who disagrees is pummeled with 30+ down-votes, regardless of content.

It's already an ECHO CHAMBER and now you want to make it a safe-space too.

[–]0xf3e 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

I gonna help with point 3 on your list by setting up a few Bitcoin Unlimited nodes.

[–]singularity87[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

Running BU does not actually help with point 3. BU only follows the mining majority which follows core.

[–]0xf3e 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

Uh, ehm any other way I can help with a lot of spare resources on servers around the world?

[–]singularity87[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

btw, I am not saying don't run BU (it's a great client), but you could help by joining our slack btcforks.signup.team. Soon the first code will be launched and we will need people running it on testnet. We'll need people checking deterministic builds. Then finally we will need people running the client before the fork happens.

[–]0xf3e 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Thanks! It's making me sad to see what direction bitcoin is moving with the core devs and we can't stop them. :(

[–]singularity87[S] 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Me as well. That's why we need to make one last push.

[–]paulh691 -1ポイント0ポイント  (5子コメント)

the small block proponents seem to want to recreate the 1970's banking system with 3-day settlement

[–]Ant-n 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

And they completely miss the point of cryptoanarchy..

My last exchanges on rbitcoin many seem to fully support and find excuses the "central planner" attitude and the fact that core/BS is taking advantage of mining centralisation.. (every second months meeting between miner and core/BS)

Bitcoin is slowly becoming similar to Ripple, I never been interested in Ripple but many seems happy with that.

...

Sorry but it seems the influence of theymos and some selected few is just too great, I don't think Bitcoin can recover from it.

Somehow and contrary to many believed (including me) Bitcoin was not at all anti-fragile or political resistant... It has been deceptively easy to capture..

And crazy enough.. with a lot of help and support from part of the community itself (!!)

..

I have hope that some other projects can return closer to was the Satoshi experiment meant... Otherwise that would mean that p2p ecash without middleman and trust is unfortunately.. impossible..

[–]uuyd88 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

Otherwise that would mean that p2p ecash without middleman and trust is unfortunately.. impossible..

What's your opinion on Monero?

[–]Ant-n -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

I think Monero is cryptocurrency the closest achieve that goal.

I have almost completely exit BTC for XMR over the last few months..

[–]uuyd88 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

You are ahead of the game and have obviously made some good money then ;)

[–]Ant-n -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Indeed, I wasn't expecting Monero to get some much love so early! (:

[–]zeiandren -2ポイント-1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Weird how everyone always claims they got in in 2011.

[–]singularity87[S] 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

2011 was bitcoin's first bubble so it is the time when many old-timers got into it. It was the first time bitcoin was mentioned in the media.

[–]zeiandren 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

That, or 2011 is a good time to claim to get in to not admit you lost a ton of money.

[–]Odbdb 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

I don't think it will ever fully die. I think Satoshi's vision is still very far away from being fulfilled. Most likely 50+ years. I'd be perfectly happy with the Bitcoin as gold scenario in the meantime.

[–]ChaosElephant 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't think you understand. Satoshi's Bitcoin will never see the light of day if we let Core / Blockstream have their way. Bitcoin needs a fork to survive.

[–]pb1x -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Oh man how did I get cut from the updated "thought enemies" list? I must be slipping in my forbidden point of view that cannot be engaged with

[–]llortoftrolls -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Slacker! I lost over 300 karma in the last 2 days to get my name on that list.

[–]blessedbt -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

The reason this sub is under attack is because of its never ending squeal of shrill hysteria.

And if it isn't justified then it goes all out to find some justification even when it isn't there.

I don't regard it as an objective place and it's just as much of a joke as r/bitcoin.

And for the record I believe in big blocks too but this sub is not doing them any favours.

[–]Shock_The_Stream 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

And if it isn't justified then it goes all out to find some justification even when it isn't there. I don't regard it as an objective place and it's just as much of a joke as r/bitcoin.

You are a joke if you compare a censored forum with an uncensored one.

[–]ethereum_developer -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Blockstream.com stole a software development project called "Bitcoin" from a developer.

Blockstream.com is now looking at ways to increase fees to profit while building software to control the way Bitcoin transacts, google "Chainanchor".

Blockstream.com, our competitor, attacked a project named "The DAO", resulting in millions of losses (you may have read about it in the news).

Blockstream.com has been manipulating the Bitcoin market through Bitfinex and now that their brokerage is in shambles, the manipulation has stopped.

Blockstream.com is continuing to scam investors through Ethereum Classic, another software development they stole.

Is that easy to understand?

[–]FR_STARMER -5ポイント-4ポイント  (2子コメント)

Holy shit who fucking cares. I thought Bitcoin was deregulated and free.

[–]ish2f4f 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

lol... did you read any of the stuff above?

I thought bitcoin was deregulated and free

that's the whole argument going on

[–]FR_STARMER -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, so censoring people isn't exactly free.

[–]1s44c -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

It may seem paranoid to call this a coordinated attack against the bitcoin community but I believe that's exactly what is happening. We can stop it.

I fully support banning known trolls from this subreddit as a means to improve the signal to noise ratio.

I will fully support a block size increase by running a fork on a few fast and well connected machines. I currently run classic but could change to unlimited or whatever else the community decided on.

I have full faith in the judgement of Gavin and suggest we all forget and forgive the Craig Wright business.

[–]SK_Btc -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I have faith that things will correct themselves naturally.

In the meantime, consider shorting bitcoin... a major price drop is inevitable.

[–]tl121 -2ポイント-1ポイント  (4子コメント)

It seems unlikely that any or all of your three suggestions will solve the problem. It's time to think "outside of the box".

[–]singularity87[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

It seems unlikely that any or all of your three suggestions will solve the problem.

Could you at least provide an argument for that conclusion?

[–]tl121 -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

The first two solutions might make r/btc more pleasant, but would do nothing to reunite the lost community and allow us to regain the Bitcoin that Satoshi envisioned. The toxic people and toxic money would remain as the root cause of the problem.

The technical issue of a Blocksize increase was a trivial two line code change. It did not, and could not happen because of the split in the community. All the other proposals involved much larger changes and hence were much easier to attack, including by "divide and conquer".

The third proposal (fork) adds even more complexity and opportunities for the enemy to "divide and conquer".

I am not going to list any specific actions that might improve the situation. People need to do their own thinking outside of the box. They also need to get clear in their minds how much they care about Bitcoin, and hence how much action they are prepared to put behind their thoughts.

[–]singularity87[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

The first two solutions might make r/btc more pleasant, but would do nothing to reunite the lost community and allow us to regain the Bitcoin that Satoshi envisioned. The toxic people and toxic money would remain as the root cause of the problem.

Unless you have a guaranteed way of removing theymos, this is impossible. Asking for impossible things is guaranteeing failure.

The technical issue of a Blocksize increase was a trivial two line code change. It did not, and could not happen because of the split in the community. All the other proposals involved much larger changes and hence were much easier to attack, including by "divide and conquer".

It couldn't happen because the people in power demanded 100% consensus which was impossible.

The third proposal (fork) adds even more complexity and opportunities for the enemy to "divide and conquer".

No it doesn't. This fork is the simplest fork that has ever been proposed. We don't need to listen to the opposition any more because we aren't making any compromising. We ARE forking and people are either with us or against us. The fork is literally the community's only option for scaling bitcoin on-chain.

[–]thestringpuller 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It couldn't happen because the people in power demanded 100% consensus which was impossible.

When you use Bitcoin don't you "opt-in" to the consensus rules? These rules have been pretty consistent if not identical to when you allegedly contributed to the community in 2011. The Byzantine General problem can be solved with PoW as long as people have faith the consensus rules stay consistent. If not, you have consensus failure, where every peer in the network disagrees with every other and the entire system fails. This is why hard forking is hard. It takes significant effort to fork from the main army, revolt against that army (for whatever reason), and maintain longevity.

We don't need to listen to the opposition any more because we aren't making any compromising.

What is this the war on terror?

[–]gt897 -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I just sold over half my bitcoin for Monero. I'm not looking back. I will likely dump most of the rest and hold on to just a couple of coins over the coming days.

Bitcoin cannot be saved or helped at this point. Bitcoin is Internet Explorer. It is only good for getting other coins.

I also bought around 100 bucks worth of GoldCoin. They have a good community and it's like a penny now each and keeps popping in the top 100. A good, non-toxic community right now is far better than most coins if you ask me. I'd rather invest in coins with teams willing to change when they see other things that are effective or desirable.

[–]KellyMPD -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why fork Bitcoin? Why not just pick a better coin and dump all your original BTC into it?

I wasn't happy with where BTC was headed, so I dumped into Ethereum and its now not my problem.