"Compromise is not part of Honey Badger's vocabulary. Such notions are alien to Bitcoin, as it is a creature of the market with no central levers to compromise over. Bitcoin unhampered by hardcoding a 1MB cap is free to optimize itself perfectly to defeat all competition." ~ u/ForkiusMaximushttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5y7vsi/compromise_is_not_part_of_honey_badgers/
Purely coincidental... ~ u/ForkiusMaximushttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/6a72vm/purely_coincidental/
Latest Segwit Trickery involves prominent support for "SW Now 2MB Later" which will lead to only half of the deal being honored. Barry Silbert front and center. Of course.~ u/SouperNerd
The people we are dealing with are the WORST type of manipulators and liars.~ u/BitAlien
There is absolutely NO reason why they should not deliver a 2 MB block size at the same time as SegWit.
This is like a dealer saying "hey gimme that $200 now, I just gotta run home and get your weed, I promise I'll be right back".
Barry Silbert's "proposal" is just another bait and switchhttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/6btl26/barry_silberts_proposal_is_just_another_bait_and/
Right, so the wording is:~ u/edmundedgar
I agree to immediately support the activation of Segregated Witness and commit to effectuate a block size increase to 2MB within 12 months[Based] on [their] previous performance [in the Hong Kong agreement - which they already broke], they're going to say, "Segregated Witness was a block size increase, to a total of 4MB, so we have delivered our side of the compromise."
Barry is an investor in Blockstream. What else needs to be said?~ u/coinlock
Initially, I liked SegWit. But then I learned SegWit-as-a-SOFT-fork is dangerous (making transactions "anyone-can-spend"??) & centrally planned (1.7MB blocksize??). Instead, Bitcoin Unlimited is simple & safe, with MARKET-BASED BLOCKSIZE. This is why more & more people have decided to REJECT SEGWIT.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5vbofp/initially_i_liked_segwit_but_then_i_learned/
Segwit cannot be rolled back because to non-upgraded clients, ANYONE can spend Segwit txn outputs. If Segwit is rolled back, all funds locked in Segwit outputs can be taken by anyone. As more funds gets locked up in segwit outputs, incentive for miners to collude to claim them grows.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ge1ks/segwit_cannot_be_rolled_back_because_to/
"So, Core wants us to trust miners not to steal Segwit's anyone-can-spends, but will not let them have a say on block size. Weird."~Cornell U Professor and bitcoin researcher Emin Gün Sirer.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/60ac4q/so_core_wants_us_to_trust_miners_not_to_steal/
Brock Pierce's BLOCKCHAIN CAPITAL is part-owner of Bitcoin's biggest, private, fiat-funded private dev team (Blockstream) & biggest, private, fiat-funded private mining operation (BitFury). Both are pushing SegWit - with its "centrally planned blocksize" & dangerous "anyone-can-spend kludge".https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5sndsz/brock_pierces_blockchain_capital_is_partowner_of/
u/Luke-Jr invented SegWit's dangerous "anyone-can-spend" soft-fork kludge. Now he helped kill Bitcoin trading at Circle. He thinks Bitcoin should only hard-fork TO DEAL WITH QUANTUM COMPUTING. Luke-Jr will continue to kill Bitcoin if we continue to let him. To prosper, BITCOIN MUST IGNORE LUKE-JR.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5h0yf0/ulukejr_invented_segwits_dangerous_anyonecanspend/
"SegWit encumbers Bitcoin with irreversible technical debt. Miners should reject SWSF. SW is the most radical and irresponsible protocol upgrade Bitcoin has faced in its history. The scale of the code changes are far from trivial - nearly every part of the codebase is affected by SW" Jaqen Hash’gharhttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rdl1j/segwit_encumbers_bitcoin_with_irreversible/
"We had our arms twisted to accept 2MB hardfork + SegWit. We then got a bait and switch 1MB + SegWit with no hardfork, and accounting tricks to make P2SH transactions cheaper (for sidechains and Lightning, which is all Blockstream wants because they can use it to control Bitcoin)." ~ u/URGOVERNMENThttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ju5r8/we_had_our_arms_twisted_to_accept_2mb_hardfork/
Here is a list (on medium.com) of 13 articles that explain why SegWit would be bad for Bitcoin.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/646kmv/here_is_a_list_on_mediumcom_of_13_articles_that/
"Why is Flexible Transactions more future-proof than SegWit?" by u/ThomasZanderhttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rbv1j/why_is_flexible_transactions_more_futureproof/
Core/Blockstream & their supporters keep saying that "SegWit has been tested". But this is false. Other software used by miners, exchanges, Bitcoin hardware manufacturers, non-Core software developers/companies, and Bitcoin enthusiasts would all need to be rewritten, to be compatible with SegWithttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5dlyz7/coreblockstream_their_supporters_keep_saying_that/
"SegWit [would] bring unnecessary complexity to the bitcoin blockchain. Huge changes it introduces into the client are a veritable minefield of issues, [with] huge changes needed for all wallets, exchanges, remittance, and virtually all bitcoin software that will use it." ~ u/Bitcoinopoly (self.btc)https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5jqgpz/segwit_would_bring_unnecessary_complexity_to_the/
3 excellent articles highlighting some of the major problems with SegWit: (1) "Core Segwit – Thinking of upgrading? You need to read this!" by WallStreetTechnologist (2) "SegWit is not great" by Deadalnix (3) "How Software Gets Bloated: From Telephony to Bitcoin" by Emin Gün Sirerhttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rfh4i/3_excellent_articles_highlighting_some_of_the/
Normal users understand that SegWit-as-a-softfork is dangerous, because it deceives non-upgraded nodes into thinking transactions are valid when actually they're not - turning those nodes into "zombie nodes". Greg Maxwell and Blockstream are jeopardizing Bitcoin - in order to stay in power.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mnpxx/normal_users_understand_that_segwitasasoftfork_is/
As Benjamin Frankline once said: "Given a choice between Liberty (with a few Bugs), and Slavery (with no Bugs), a Free People will choose Liberty every time." Bitcoin Unlimited is liberty: market-based blocksizes. SegWit is slavery: centrally planned 1.7MB blocksize & "anyone-can-spend" transactionshttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5zievg/as_benjamin_frankline_once_said_given_a_choice/
u/Uptrenda on SegWit: "Core is forcing every Bitcoin startup to abandon their entire code base for a Rube Goldberg machine making their products so slow, inconvenient, and confusing that even if they do manage to 'migrate' to this cluster-fuck of technical debt it will kill their businesses anyway."https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5e86fg/uuptrenda_on_segwit_core_is_forcing_every_bitcoin/
Just because something is a "soft fork" doesn't mean it isn't a massive change. SegWit is an alt-coin. It would introduce radical and unpredictable changes in Bitcoin's economic parameters and incentives. Just read this thread. Nobody has any idea how the mainnet will react to SegWit in real life.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5fc1ii/just_because_something_is_a_soft_fork_doesnt_mean/
"They [Core/Blockstream] fear a hard fork will remove them from their dominant position." ... "Hard forks are 'dangerous' because they put the market in charge, and the market might vote against '[the] experts' [at Core/Blockstream]" - ForkiusMaximushttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/43h4cq/they_coreblockstream_fear_a_hard_fork_will_remove/
The real reason why Core / Blockstream always favors soft-forks over hard-forks (even though hard-forks are actually safer because hard-forks are explicit) is because soft-forks allow the "incumbent" code to quietly remain incumbent forever (and in this case, the "incumbent" code is Core)https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4080mw/the_real_reason_why_core_blockstream_always/
Reminder: Previous posts showing that Blockstream's opposition to hard-forks is dangerous, obstructionist, selfish FUD. As many of us already know, the reason that Blockstream is against hard forks is simple: Hard forks are good for Bitcoin, but bad for the private company Blockstream.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4ttmk3/reminder_previous_posts_showing_that_blockstreams/
Core/Blockstream is living in a fantasy world. In the real world everyone knows (1) our hardware can support 4-8 MB (even with the Great Firewall), and (2) hard forks are cleaner than soft forks. Core/Blockstream refuses to offer either of these things. Other implementations (eg: BU) can offer both.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ejmin/coreblockstream_is_living_in_a_fantasy_world_in/
If Blockstream were truly "conservative" and wanted to "protect Bitcoin" then they would deploy SegWit AS A HARD FORK. Insisting on deploying SegWit as a soft fork (overly complicated so more dangerous for Bitcoin) exposes that they are LYING about being "conservative" and "protecting Bitcoin".https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/57zbkp/if_blockstream_were_truly_conservative_and_wanted/
If some bozo dev team proposed what Core/Blockstream is proposing (Let's deploy a malleability fix as a "soft" fork that dangerously overcomplicates the code and breaks non-upgraded nodes so it's de facto HARD! Let's freeze capacity at 1 MB during a capacity crisis!), they'd be ridiculed and ignoredhttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5944j6/if_some_bozo_dev_team_proposed_what/
"Negotiations have failed. BS/Core will never HF - except to fire the miners and create an altcoin. Malleability & quadratic verification time should be fixed - but not via SWSF political/economic trojan horse. CHANGES TO BITCOIN ECONOMICS MUST BE THRU FULL NODE REFERENDUM OF A HF." ~ u/TunaMelthttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5e410j/negotiations_have_failed_bscore_will_never_hf/
The proper terminology for a "hard fork" should be a "FULL NODE REFERENDUM" - an open, transparent EXPLICIT process where everyone has the right to vote FOR or AGAINST an upgrade. The proper terminology for a "soft fork" should be a "SNEAKY TROJAN HORSE" - because IT TAKES AWAY YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5e4e7d/the_proper_terminology_for_a_hard_fork_should_be/
Blockstream is now controlled by the Bilderberg Group - seriously! AXA Strategic Ventures, co-lead investor for Blockstream's $55 million financing round, is the investment arm of French insurance giant AXA Group - whose CEO Henri de Castries has been chairman of the Bilderberg Group since 2012.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/47zfzt/blockstream_is_now_controlled_by_the_bilderberg/
If Bitcoin becomes a major currency, then tens of trillions of dollars on the "legacy ledger of fantasy fiat" will evaporate, destroying AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderbergers. This is the real reason why AXA bought Blockstream: to artificially suppress Bitcoin volume and price with 1MB blocks.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4r2pw5/if_bitcoin_becomes_a_major_currency_then_tens_of/
Who owns the world? (1) Barclays, (2) AXA, (3) State Street Bank. (Infographic in German - but you can understand it without knowing much German: "Wem gehört die Welt?" = "Who owns the world?") AXA is the #2 company with the most economic poweconnections in the world. And AXA owns Blockstream.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5btu02/who_owns_the_world_1_barclays_2_axa_3_state/
Double standards: The other sub would go ballistic if Unlimited was funded by AXA. But they are just fine when AXA funds BS-core.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/62ykv1/double_standards_the_other_sub_would_go_ballistic/
The insurance company with the biggest exposure to the 1.2 quadrillion dollar (ie, 1200 TRILLION dollar) derivatives casino is AXA. Yeah, that AXA, the company whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group, and whose "venture capital" arm bought out Bitcoin development by "investing" in Blockstream.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4k1r7v/the_insurance_company_with_the_biggest_exposure/
Bilderberg Group -> AXA Strategic Ventures -> funds Blockstream -> Blockstream Core Devs. (The chairman of Bilderberg is Henri de Castries. The CEO of AXA Henri de Castries.)https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/576ac9/bilderberg_group_axa_strategic_ventures_funds/
Why is Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc trying to pretend AXA isn't one of the top 5 "companies that control the world"? AXA relies on debt & derivatives to pretend it's not bankrupt. Million-dollar Bitcoin would destroy AXA's phony balance sheet. How much is AXA paying Greg to cripple Bitcoin?https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/62htv0/why_is_blockstream_cto_greg_maxwell_unullc_trying/
Core/AXA/Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell, CEO Adam Back, attack dog Luke-Jr and censor Theymos are sabotaging Bitcoin - but they lack the social skills to even feel guilty for this. Anyone who attempts to overrule the market and limit or hard-code Bitcoin's blocksize must be rejected by the community.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/689y1e/coreaxablockstream_cto_greg_maxwell_ceo_adam_back/
"I'm angry about AXA scraping some counterfeit money out of their fraudulent empire to pay autistic lunatics millions of dollars to stall the biggest sociotechnological phenomenon since the internet and then blame me and people like me for being upset about it." ~ u/dresden_khttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5xjkof/im_angry_about_axa_scraping_some_counterfeit/
Greg Maxwell used to have intelligent, nuanced opinions about "max blocksize", until he started getting paid by AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group - the legacy financial elite which Bitcoin aims to disintermediate. Greg always refuses to address this massive conflict of interest. Why?https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mlo0z/greg_maxwell_used_to_have_intelligent_nuanced/
This trader's price & volume graph / model predicted that we should be over $10,000 USD/BTC by now. The model broke in late 2014 - when AXA-funded Blockstream was founded, and started spreading propaganda and crippleware, centrally imposing artificially tiny blocksize to suppress the volume & price.https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5obe2m/this_traders_price_volume_graph_model_predicted/
Just as a reminder: The main funder of Blockstream is Henri de Castries, chairman of French insurance company AXA, and chairman of the Bilderberg Group!https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5uw6cc/just_as_a_reminder_the_main_funder_of_blockstream/
AXA/Blockstream are suppressing Bitcoin price at 1000 bits = 1 USD. If 1 bit = 1 USD, then Bitcoin's market cap would be 15 trillion USD - close to the 82 trillion USD of "money" in the world. With Bitcoin Unlimited, we can get to 1 bit = 1 USD on-chain with 32MB blocksize ("Million-Dollar Bitcoin")https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5u72va/axablockstream_are_suppressing_bitcoin_price_at/
Bitcoin can go to 10,000 USD with 4 MB blocks, so it will go to 10,000 USD with 4 MB blocks. All the censorship & shilling on r\bitcoin & fantasy fiat from AXA can't stop that. BitcoinCORE might STALL at 1,000 USD and 1 MB blocks, but BITCOIN will SCALE to 10,000 USD and 4 MB blocks - and beyondhttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5jgkxv/bitcoin_can_go_to_10000_usd_with_4_mb_blocks_so/
Bitcoin Original: Reinstate Satoshi's original 32MB max blocksize. If actual blocks grow 54% per year (and price grows 1.542 = 2.37x per year - Metcalfe's Law), then in 8 years we'd have 32MB blocks, 100 txns/sec, 1 BTC = 1 million USD - 100% on-chain P2P cash, without SegWit/Lightning or Unlimitedhttps://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5uljaf/bitcoin_original_reinstate_satoshis_original_32mb/
Could you talk a little about the software development process that Graft uses? What development methodology does Graft use? Is it an industry-standard model (such as agile, incremental, or waterfall) or something custom designed? Perhaps you could walk us through how the process works, for example how a concept goes from initial idea to implementation to testing to competition?
"I currently scan various blockchain projects"". Ive noticed several unresponded pull requests that seem to be ignored"" In understanding C++ for a number of years. They seem to be solutions for a drastic fix. I can not involve myself in a blockchain that the dev doesn't fix issues in a timely manner. How can i invest with any courage the dev and the project is community oriented if they do not listen to pull requests! Is there any particular reason why PR are being ignored and is the super node RTA going to launch without any review from all pull requests?"
It is appreciated that the Graft Team have said many times that people who buy GRFT aren't investors. But if GRFT is truly a 'community' coin then it would help if someone is available to give one consistent message from the Graft team to the people that form the community. There is often misinformation and confusion in the telegram and elsewhere because there isn't someone from the core team that is managing communication with the community. Will you be hiring an individual or team to manage communication with the community?
In the current alpha implementation, the RTA SuperNode requires a hot wallet with full spend keys on the VPS running the SuperNode. This seems dangerous: if we imagine graft at $1, that means a T4 is holding a hot wallet worth a quarter of a million USD, which makes it a tempting target for hacks—someone who gains access to the VPS could steal the entire stake plus any transaction fees. Why did Graft decide to go with a hot wallet approach as opposed to the cold-stake approach (of submitting stakes as time-locked transactions on the blockchain) commonly used by other Masternode systems?
"The recently announced stimulus plan for supernodes was unveiled without any details at all as to how it will work. This has led the community taking wild guesses as to how it might work (e.g. with the unofficial calculator floating around) and what the payoffs might be. Proper planning for potential supernode operators requires the actual details. When do you plan to formalize the stimulus payoff details so that people can start deciding whether or not they want to run supernodes?"
There has been quite some discussion recently on the GRAFT blockchain telegram channel about the upcoming Monero CNv2 fork and the impact it may have on the GRAFT blockchain. Some are convinced that the fork will lead to a substantial migration of ASIC/FPGA hashrate to GRAFT (being the most profitable CNv1) from XMR. This in turn could lead to centralization of the network, a potential drop in value (as the farms are less like to hold their GRAFT) and even outright attacks. It would be great to get more information from you on this topic, if you plan to fork to CNv2 or any of the CNv1 derivates in the coming months?
Where are we with Verifone and Ingenico exactly? What will be procedure for merchant to turn on GRAFT as currency on their POS machines, and will it require manual update?
Could you briefly share the Graft Team marketing plan and road marks that you are following to implement the plan?
Many people have attempted to send coins from the mobile wallet to Cryptopia. The transaction fails because the mobile wallet does not support non-integrated payment ID's. The users then contact Cryptopia about the lost coins and then Cryptopia asks for a payment ID. There are a few problems with this all too common scenario, but the biggest problem in my opinion is that the mobile wallet does not provide access to transaction ID's. Will the mobile wallet soon be able to display transaction ID's?
When will the results of the RTA alpha testing (bug reports/fixes/etc.) be made public? Or if they won't be, when will you start accepting public bug reports for RTA supernodes?
Do you plan to conduct any external security audit of the platform (RTA/Exchange brokers/etc.) before the final production release?
What is the long-term plan for continuing Graft’s management? Some other coins have defined organization structures that are designed to continue without the present Dev teams. Has the Graft team thought about how Graft will be managed on an ongoing basis once the project reaches maturity?
Multiple sites out there already support payments with cryptocurrency. How's GRAFT different?
I've heard that early supernode holders will be incentivized to participate in the graft network and I applaud that. Doesn't it make sense to incentivize merchants to encourage graft usage by offering a transaction fee holiday for some time period up front? You could still pay the network supernode participants out of the coins set aside for incentives (or not). I think that incentivizing the vendor will go MUCH further towards promoting crypto adoption.
Service Brokers are going to be One of the most critical part of the Graft Ecosystem. Considering an example where Bitcoin payment is made by a buyer and Merchant's payout choice is in Fiat USD. This is the most obvious use case I could think of. And the kind of liquidity needed for converting BTC to USD is going to be huge (to make settlement seemless). I fear individuals (SN owners) could provide this liquidity. Unless a major exchange could be a service broker I personally feel this will be difficult. Hard fact being we are facing difficulties in listing Graft on a bigger exchange, so what's the plan on getting a high liquidity exchange?
One problem with almost every cryptocurrency is the boundless growth of the blockchain data. One of the numbers that got pulled from the reward post was 100k transactions per day. Graft transactions average about 12kB, so put those together and you get the blockchain growing by 1.2GB/day. It'll hit nearly 100 gigs after 2 months, nearly 500 gigs after a year.Does Graft have any long-term plan to reduce that storage requirement at the node and/or supernode level?
We appreciate your efforts to involve the community in the project, how would you like to improve this relationship over the next few months?
How does GRAFT handle void transaction? Is that similar to void transaction of Credit card's?
Therefore we can use a quadratic form, that is ax^2 + bx + c, where a,b and c are variables. This is the quadratic least squares moving average (qlsma), a not so official term, but we'll stick with it because it still represent the aim of the filter quite well. In this indicator i make the calculations of the qlsma less troublesome, therefore ... Solve quadratic equation in standard form. Ask Question Asked 1 year, 2 months ago. ... import time def quadratic_solver(a, b, c): """ Solves quadratic equations of the form ax**2 + bx + c """ print("ax^2+bx+c ausrechen UwU, Bitte Achte!!! Bei Kommazahlen . benutzen, nicht , Beispiel: 0.5 0.7 1.6") ... Now, if you want to check the type of your arguments you can do a simple: type(val) is int ... The quadratic semaphore indicator is an indicator that find confirmed market u-turn with the help of 2 quadratic regression calculated with Highs and Lows over the last “length” periods. - “p” setting is candlesticks quantity to confirmed the quadratic regression has formed a High or Low parabola, such as Fractals. Consecutive same signals can happen due to the use of different price ... Bitcoin Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for Bitcoin crypto-currency enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up. Sign up to join this community. Anybody can ask a question Anybody can answer The best answers are voted up and rise to the top Bitcoin . Home ; Questions ; Tags ; Users ; Jobs; Unanswered ; ScriptSig content during signature (quadratic hashing) Ask Question Asked 3 ... quadratic — Check out the trading ideas, strategies, opinions, analytics at absolutely no cost!
[index]          
Graphing Quadratic Functions Axis of Symmetry, Vertex & Standard Form, X Y Intercepts, Word Problems - Duration: 47:00. The Organic Chemistry Tutor 406,473 views Graphing quadratic equations in standard form. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue But how does bitcoin actually work? - Duration: 26:21. 3Blue1Brown Recommended for you. 26:21. Changing a Quadratic from Standard Form to Vertex Form - Duration: 3:44. MrsQuesnelle 500,604 views ... Graph quadratic functions that are in standard form by using the axis of symmetry formula then creating a table of points. Notes for Lufkin High School Algebra 1. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue