@beckandbulow When talking to Bitcoiners, it’s much better to express prices and values in satoshis. They’ll understand 3 100 000 sats much more easily than .031 BTC.1 BTC has 100 million satoshis.
@SimplyBitcoin The vast majority of people don’t understand how they are being robbed. They don’t understand inflation. They think prices are rising because retailers are greedy or for some other reason. The mainstream media never tells them the truth.
@TonyDotX@phonyfiat This is the biggest fork ever. Around 20% of the network and a huge number of Bitcoiners are deeply disappointed. In 2017, these were only marginal groups; today, this is a much larger movement.
PoW is fundamentally important because it prevents money from being created easily and for free.But the two most important criteria for monetary premium to flow into a monetary asset are security and decentralization. Over time, the most secure and most decentralized form of money will absorb the monetary premium.
@sjen_anoubis@DonalDevine Bitcoin is a P2P network. It doesn’t matter how much someone owns. The only thing it can affect is the fiat price, but it cannot affect other things.
Facts:
1) Saturday, bad actors attempted a contentious hardfork with the purpose of forcing users to distribute CSAM. This spawned a new scamcoin with an airdrop (I call Bpedo).
2) Most formerly Bitcoin pools (a small handful of people) then began to attack the Bitcoin network to try to deceive the world into thinking Bpedo is "the real Bitcoin".
3) People who aren't using full nodes are easily fooled because they don't validate the blockchain. Upgrading to a full node (such as the latest release of Bitcoin Knots) will put you back on the Bitcoin network.
4) Community-led mitigations are in progress to overcome the ongoing attack on the Bitcoin network and restore it to full functionality. And update with these mitigations is expected by September 1st.
Game theory exists and assumes that participants generally seek to act in accordance with their own interests. In this case, miners could reasonably be expected to care about the long-term security and value of the Bitcoin network and to support BIP110, because it is not in their interest for the network to split and for them to lose a significant portion of users and nodes. If they nevertheless consciously chose a path that increases the risk of a fork while ignoring around 20% of the nodes, it raises the question of whether other, larger interests or incentives were driving their behavior.
Bitcoin is in serious danger.
The problem is that Bitcoin has not been used for what it was originally designed to be a P2P monetary system and an alternative to the dollar-based financial system.
Most people still don't understand what P2P money actually means. They don't use Bitcoin as independent money, they simply use it as an asset to trade for more dollars. They keep their coins on exchanges or in wallets, don't run their own nodes, and rarely transact directly with other users.
This has created the centralization we see today. When users don't run their own nodes and don't participate directly in the P2P network, exchanges, wallets, and miners gain more influence and can increasingly ignore the users who are supposed to enforce Bitcoin's rules.And once you have centralization, a small group of people can gain control over the system and influence its direction.Governments and banks don't want any alternative monetary system. They already have their own monetary system and have no interest in a competing P2P monetary network.And because the system has become centralized, they can now influence it and undermine its original purpose.
I support the fork because I believe it is the right direction. But if the PoW algorithm is being changed, it should have been made ASIC-resistant, so that anyone could mine from home using an ordinary CPU. Otherwise, mining will once again become centralized in large mining farms. Satoshi clearly described the principle of “one CPU, one vote” in the Bitcoin whitepaper
I watched your live streams on YouTube, and you seemed like a smart guy. Come on, think about it for a moment. How are you going to stop Chinese guy Chun and the mining cartel if they decide to introduce tail emission and a demurrage fee?A few people can now make a deal quickly, while the P2P network doesn’t really matter anymore.
It looks like you still don’t understand. Think about which Bitcoin has a greater chance of surviving and NGU in the long run a Bitcoin that becomes a database for storing images, NFTs, fiat tokens, and other scams, while becoming increasingly centralized because running a node becomes more difficult, or a truly decentralized peer-to-peer Bitcoin?
This guy still doesn’t understand what Bitcoin is. Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer network and digital money. Consensus is not decided by miners, exchanges, or wallets, but by users running full nodes who independently verify the protocol’s rules. Bitcoin does not recognize the authority of miners, exchanges, or wallets every full node independently validates protocol rules.Consensus is determined by full node operators, not by miners, exchanges, or wallets.
This was a good post @knutsvanholm and I'm glad you're not joining Luke's altcoin.
That said, reading your post, I'm worried that you haven't learned the right lessons from this ordeal.
It wasn't that miners ignored BIP-110 (as I told @lukedewolf) but it was almost everyone: miners, exchanges, wallets, economic actors, etc.
Yes, there are more nodes now, but it also doesn't matter whether those operators accept Bitcoin for their goods or services or not. It's about the mass of economic weight behind those nodes. You also need economic nodes willing to risk their BTC, which was largely absent.
Nodes cannot and should not be able to influence the network. Nodes can be a proxy for economic weight, but they also can be sybilled.
Proof of Work (hashrate) is what really matters because it cannot be faked, and yet even miners can falsely signal for something they do not intend to enforce. This is why thresholds for change must be so high (95%). I really hope you can understand this because it's important.
I also don't see you showing understanding that BIP-110 was in fact iatrogenic. There is nothing more harmful than well-meaning people trying to fix Bitcoin. It was the case in the Blocksize War and it is the case now.
I'm glad you will stick around and help people make the right choice between Bitcoin and Luke's altcoin, but at the same time you need to really understand these Bitcoin fundamentals so you can properly teach others.
🧡
Bitcoin is doomed to fail because most people don’t understand it, and because they don’t understand it, they don’t use it. Even those who do use it often don’t use it properly. Everyone should run their own node and be a peer on the network. It was supposed to be a P2P network where nodes enforce the rules, while miners simply follow those rules. Instead, exchanges, custodians, and mining have become increasingly centralized. Now miners can do whatever they want introduce a tail emission, demurrage fees, or change other monetary rules and there is no one left to stop them, unless BIP100 brings back the real Bitcoin decentralized P2P money.