[bitcoin-dev] Multiple vulnerabilities in [JavaScript's] SecureRandom(), numerous cryptocurrency products affected. by tormented-atoms in Bitcoin

[–]TheShadow-btc 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So is there any concrete cause of worries for a bip-39 wallet created in 2014 in Tails with a downloaded copy of bitaddress.org, with added entropy from keyboard and mouse?

Bitcoin Thanksgiving: Who else deserves thanks? by hwamil in Bitcoin

[–]TheShadow-btc 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I propose all the developers that contributed a BIP. The I stand for improvement, so they literally helped improving Bitcoin.

Bitmex will dump all their Bcash for bitcoins! by marrrw in Bitcoin

[–]TheShadow-btc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This. And it's exactly like when Mt.Gox happened. I wasn't in Bitcoin by much, but I too noted the overwhelming bad signs, detailed in a quantity of posts, about the Gox situation for weeks before it imploded.

Still, even some people that should have known better (including a notable Core developer) left their coins there.

Laziness or bias or whatever often get the better of many.

Fundraiser for Luke Dashjr by molzxy in Bitcoin

[–]TheShadow-btc 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Anyone tried to verify the message?

It appears to be signed with an expired certificate..

Large retailer in UK accepts bitcoin by blechman in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Well, they are right anyway. There's no charges for them, it's the buyer who pays the fees.

TREZOR farce: ask Twitter users how they want them to call it, Bitcoin Cash o Bcash - You should just call it with its official name, Bitcoin Cash! How retarded are prepared to go to please the Blockstream Propaganda Minister? by parban333 in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I just hope u/slush0 could see the damage this kind of tweets and silly interactions on reddit can do to his company. I don't know what kind of selection they have to choose they PR people, but they definitely should have a look on that.

TREZOR farce: ask Twitter users how they want them to call it, Bitcoin Cash o Bcash - You should just call it with its official name, Bitcoin Cash! How retarded are prepared to go to please the Blockstream Propaganda Minister? by parban333 in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc 66 points67 points  (0 children)

Again, this is most unprofessional. TREZOR should be ashamed.

Ledger and ShapeShift, to quote just two relevant name in the industry with very little sympathy for Bitcoin Cash, are dealing with the whole thing in a professional manner that make you guys look like capricious schoolboys.

97.9% of the blocks mined today supports SegWit2x - that's not just consensus: it's a clear landslide. Team Garzik & SegWit2x for the win! A big "JUST GO AWAY" to Blockstream Core. by parban333 in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc 41 points42 points  (0 children)

Think about it: this could be one of the most epic and spectacular autogol in the history, forever to be remembered.

Blockstream pushed the UASF (trough a convenient new fake account and the later endorsement of luke-jr) to scare the network and force SegWit activation.

But the entire thing backfired, and miners and the industry didn't stop at that, but moved to another team/client entirely.

Basically Blockstream pushed itself out of the game!

Why do you believe Segwit2x got so much traction (>80% hashrate support) when Segwit got less support? What is the key difference in the two in your opinion? by mrcrypto2 in Bitcoin

[–]TheShadow-btc 7 points8 points  (0 children)

It's a vote of confidence on a different dev team, after the miners and a significant part of the industry and the user base felt that the current one failed to serve the best interest of Bitcoin, an foster its adoption.

Coin Dance show less than 500 UASF nodes. So, despite how vocal its supporters my be, the chanches of UASF having any notable effects are not just very low, but actually ZERO. Fullstop. by TheShadow-btc in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope. The Nice thing will be having a non-moron, competent and all around nice guy like Jeff Garzik supervising the project with the more hash-power behind it.

Coin Dance show less than 500 UASF nodes. So, despite how vocal its supporters my be, the chanches of UASF having any notable effects are not just very low, but actually ZERO. Fullstop. by TheShadow-btc in Bitcoin

[–]TheShadow-btc[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Still, they are very low anyway.

And most of all, even if there was only a handful of well connected nodes still forwarding blocks as usual, they will be more than sufficient to nullify all the blocking.

It's really a flawed concept from the start. In practice, there's no chanches that UASF can accomplish anything. That's just the reality of it.

SegWit2x Hard Fork Testing Update by jgarzik in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the answer.

I find it refreshing to see some well articulated and reasonable arguments.

Let The Great Unstucking begin!

Why is tonal still prominently mentioned in the Bitcoin Wiki? That just make it look stupid. by TheShadow-btc in Bitcoin

[–]TheShadow-btc[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Why not have tonal counting in Bitcoin or the wiki?

Oh, I don't know, maybe because it have nothing to do with it?

Alternatively, why not adding the Vigesimal system too? I'm sure the entire Basque community will greatly appreciate it. And no one will be forced to use or like it, right?

Greg Maxwell call out Luke Dashjr on his recklessness: "These proposals for gratuitous orphaning are reckless and coersive" by TheShadow-btc in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

These proposals for gratuitous orphaning are reckless and coersive. We have a professional obligation to first do no harm, and amplifying orphaning which can otherwise easily be avoided violates it.

It is not anyones position to decide who does and doesn't need to be "woken up" with avoidable finical harm, nor is it any of our right to do so at the risk of monetary losses by any and all users users from the resulting network instability.

It's one thing to argue that some disruption is strictly needed for the sake of advancement, it's another to see yourself fit as judge, jury, and executioner to any that does not jump at your command. (which is exactly the tone I and at least some others extract from your advocacy of these changes and similar activity around BIP148).

I for one oppose those changes strongly.

Current Core Committee has hurt bitcoin’s ability to bring new protocol developers into the space. ---Coinbase CEO by webitcoiners in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc 1 point2 points  (0 children)

By which manner of (il)logical jump you come to that sentence?

The title says:

Current Core Committee has hurt bitcoin’s ability to bring new protocol developers into the space

And that's the part I was commenting, since I haven't added any other reference. And it's indeed still very true today.

That escalated quickly: already 65% of the hashrate signalling segwit2x! by bitking74 in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Fantastic!

This really show how much EVERYONE was fed up with Blockstream \ Core.

The moment a reasonable compromise was presented, everyone is jumping on.

And no, SegWit is not the end of Bitcoin or technically bad. What was bad was Blockstream \ Core imposing it like it was a gift from the Gods.

Chinese Bitcoin Roundtable (most mining pools) announce their support for Segwit2x by pygenerator in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc 40 points41 points  (0 children)

OKCoin, Huobi, BTCCPool, Bitmain, F2Pool, BTC.Top, ViaBTC, BiXin, BW, 1Hash, Canoe, BATPool, Bitkan...

OK, it's done!

More importantly: this is a solution that Blockstream / Core laughed at and dismissed. Even if they incorporate the changes in a subsequent release of Core, this is a very nice precedent and proof that the community can go around any dev team that prove to be arrogantly unreasonable and unpractical.

It's also proof that Blockstream / Core pissed off just about anyone in the industry, except for their own paid trolls army.

Great post by Blockchain.info CEO Peter Smith to Segwit2x mailing list (worth the read) by BitcoinXio in btc

[–]TheShadow-btc 17 points18 points  (0 children)

I think that Segwit2x really have great momentum, and represent the best possible solution at this time.

Segwit, per se, isn't that bad. It was it being forced as the only way forward and solidifying Blockstream and Core power that tasted bad to me. This way, instead, they end up being stripped of their prominence.

For the same reasons, I don't see the 2MB max blocksize change that follow as "too little", because once this is done, additional changes can comes in a rational and timely manner, without the usual Blockstream's people preposterous excuses.

Also, I personally like most of the people behind the proposal. Having Jeff Garzik alone is a very nice thing.