Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Business, Finance, and Investing Making money, investing in markets, and running businesses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-15-2017, 01:05 PM   #20851
onetimebabydoll
newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 15
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Karpeles admits he was using a bot back in the mtgox days to pump price!!

Ver accuses another man of liking heavyset broads!!

Coinbase throwing away money (if you got money on there, might wanna look into this)

https://youtu.be/lkNCghVpDUk

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenzor View Post
I watched the first three minutes and it was like watching a video of two stoners discussing phonetically the review section of amazon products. You should consider a name change to crypto talk while blasted on weed. I would offer feedback but I genuinely don't even know what you were trying to do with this video.
All good, I'm just experimenting, that title might be a little long but something like Stoned Crypto Talk would sum it up right?
onetimebabydoll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 06:15 AM   #20852
DoOrDoNot
adept
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,003
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

So much for decentralized secure store of value eh bitcoiners?
As I predicted earlier in this thread the clash between miners and source developers doom this project.

Burn mother****er burn.
DoOrDoNot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 06:15 AM   #20853
iloveny161
old hand
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,771
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by ECTAE View Post
oh my lord bitcoin crashing hard, why?
Every market's gotta bleed (to force out the people with low pain tolerance ) before it can go on the next rally.

Last edited by iloveny161; 07-16-2017 at 06:21 AM.
iloveny161 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 07:15 AM   #20854
Zenzor
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,899
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoOrDoNot View Post
So much for decentralized secure store of value eh bitcoiners?
As I predicted earlier in this thread the clash between miners and source developers doom this project.

buy mother****er buy.
FTFY
Zenzor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 08:28 AM   #20855
sofocused978
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
sofocused978's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Tampa Baby Baby
Posts: 6,486
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

I have less than half a bitcoin on coinbase. Should I send it to my blockchain wallet before **** hits the fan on the 1st? I was hoping to have my ledger wallet by now but still waiting. Never sent bit coin. If I send it to myself and its value is more than I bought it for a couple months ago is that a taxable event? Thinking bout buying more today with the drop.
sofocused978 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 03:17 PM   #20856
Mat Cauthon
journeyman
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 346
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by sofocused978 View Post
I have less than half a bitcoin on coinbase. Should I send it to my blockchain wallet before **** hits the fan on the 1st? I was hoping to have my ledger wallet by now but still waiting. Never sent bit coin. If I send it to myself and its value is more than I bought it for a couple months ago is that a taxable event? Thinking bout buying more today with the drop.
Create a wallet on your phone and send it there. It's super easy and one of the most secure wallet types, but if you really don't want to, then definitely send it to blockchain.
Mat Cauthon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 04:02 PM   #20857
IveGotUrOuts
old hand
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,417
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mat Cauthon View Post
Create a wallet on your phone and send it there. It's super easy and one of the most secure wallet types, but if you really don't want to, then definitely send it to blockchain.
So like a Ledger Nano S is fine?
IveGotUrOuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 04:26 PM   #20858
Two SHAE
old hand
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: life
Posts: 1,740
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by aggo View Post
the best and most secure way to store your bitcoin is

#1- hardware wallet (e.g. trezor/ledger)
lol

Pretty damn far from being the "best" or "most secure"

It is probably the easiest somewhat safe way
Two SHAE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 04:44 PM   #20859
TheMVP
grinder
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 454
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Explain? ^
TheMVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 05:25 PM   #20860
Two SHAE
old hand
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: life
Posts: 1,740
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

The device itself can be hacked

The company that sells it periodically pushes out firmware updates

The recovery seed in the wrong hands is gg for your coins

Storing encrypted private keys on a machine that has never touched the internet is obviously superior.
Two SHAE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 06:07 PM   #20861
Mat Cauthon
journeyman
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 346
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by IveGotUrOuts View Post
So like a Ledger Nano S is fine?
I have no personal experience with it, but it's supposed to be good. A hardware wallet is the safest option, that is not a total pain in the ass to set up and use.
Mat Cauthon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 12:21 AM   #20862
NLNico
journeyman
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 203
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by Two SHAE View Post
The device itself can be hacked
This is why IMO it's best to use a device that has been around for years (like Trezor), where many developers and security researchers already looked at the code and potential security vulnerabilities are already fixed. At least at Trezor there has been some vulnerabilities indeed which has been fixed already (note: afaik none on the level of "remote attacker can steal all your coins", just relatively smaller ones.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Two SHAE View Post
The company that sells it periodically pushes out firmware updates
You will have to manually update and it's open-source. If there is something malicious in the code or if the firmware checksum doesn't match, I am sure you will hear about it. I realize 99.99% of people don't look at the code, but IMO just wait few weeks before updating (unless crucial update) and you can be pretty sure some people audited the code IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Two SHAE View Post
The recovery seed in the wrong hands is gg for your coins
Yes, you should really take "backing up the seed" serious, both for this reason and for example a fire that destroys both your backup seed and hardware device.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Two SHAE View Post
Storing encrypted private keys on a machine that has never touched the internet is obviously superior.
In terms of security, that is indeed obviously superior.

But for example: there are plenty of gambling sites out there who hold thousands of coins on a Trezor. And obviously so many people by now too (also Ledger btw.) AFAIK so far the number of "lost coins incidents" are pretty much 0. The ease-of-use is so much superior against a encrypted always-offline computer, that I do think a hardware wallet is the best wallet choice for the average user.
NLNico is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 01:31 AM   #20863
onetimebabydoll
newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 15
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Really good interview on what's coming for bitcoin, the UASF, Aug 1st, and more

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GH6p3WE3v8Q
onetimebabydoll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 02:35 AM   #20864
aggo
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
aggo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: nyc
Posts: 9,655
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by Two SHAE View Post
The device itself can be hacked
Show your homework

Quote:
Originally Posted by Two SHAE View Post

The company that sells it periodically pushes out firmware updates

The recovery seed in the wrong hands is gg for your coins

Storing encrypted private keys on a machine that has never touched the internet is obviously superior.
It is so unbelievably sad that people are so upset about my opinions on ethereum that they will hunt down every post I make in an attempt to discredit or humiliate my arguments.

Fortunately for me, these people are simply wayward mETH addicts. Perhaps kazuyas bags from $400 are heavier than anticipated.


While it is true that you can inject any firmware into a trezor, doing so without the correct master key sign from trezor will result in a wiped trezor. This is hardcoded into its boot loader: an improperly signed firmware will wipe the device. To be clear, no one without the correct master key from trezor (aka satoshi labs) can inject firmware into your trezor and extract its private keys.

Periodically, satoshilabs releases new firmware to increase functionality with altcoins. Trezor's boot loader ensures that no one can remotely update your firmware: it must be physically activated. Further, a hash of the firmware update is shown on the device before it is loaded, meaning you can independently verify the firmware package being uploaded onto your trezor, if you were to ever fear that satoshilabs was pushing compromised firmware.

In summary:

For the vast majority of people who are simply users of bitcoin, a hardware wallet such as trezor is extremely secure. It's software stack is robust now that it is extremely difficult to screw something up, not like running an airgapped computer that you touch once a month and shuffle signed txns from with potentially dirty USB sticks-- from which then you'll need to be running a full node to be broadcasting your txns from.
aggo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 02:44 AM   #20865
aggo
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
aggo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: nyc
Posts: 9,655
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

aside from https://jochen-hoenicke.de/trezor-power-analysis/ an attack that requires physical access to trezor, there have been no known/accepted successful attacks on trezor or ledger.

ledger uses a industry standard open source secure enclave. I dont own one, but it is generally accepted that the two devices are interchangeable in terms of security.
aggo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 03:05 AM   #20866
TheMVP
grinder
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 454
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by onetimebabydoll View Post
Really good interview on what's coming for bitcoin, the UASF, Aug 1st, and more

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GH6p3WE3v8Q
Ok so Desantis is either a complete hack/extremist or my understanding of Bitcoin is laughably low.

It's most likely the latter.

Would love to hear what some of the more experienced people here think of him?
TheMVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 03:45 AM   #20867
NLNico
journeyman
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 203
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by aggo View Post
aside from https://jochen-hoenicke.de/trezor-power-analysis/ an attack that requires physical access to trezor, there have been no known/accepted successful attacks on trezor or ledger.
There has been other (relatively small) security vulnerabilities. For example in 2014 there was a way to potentially stop the "PIN brute-force delay" with special hardware (initially found by Ledger and fixed here.) This is why I like Trezor, the firmware is open-source for years and therefor it is likely that most security vulnerabilities are already fixed
NLNico is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 04:35 AM   #20868
OlafTheSnowman
centurion
 
OlafTheSnowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 134
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by onetimebabydoll View Post
that title might be a little long but something like Stoned Crypto Talk would sum it up right?
High Crypto Guy imo
OlafTheSnowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 04:49 AM   #20869
Two SHAE
old hand
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: life
Posts: 1,740
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by aggo View Post
Show your homework



It is so unbelievably sad that people are so upset about my opinions on ethereum that they will hunt down every post I make in an attempt to discredit or humiliate my arguments.

Fortunately for me, these people are simply wayward mETH addicts. Perhaps kazuyas bags from $400 are heavier than anticipated.
You are a little too sensitive, pal. I am not attacking you personally nor "hunting down your posts". What you posted was categorically untrue and I felt compelled to inform people who may not have known. If you were early in either btc or eth and have life changing money in crypto now, it is totally worth it to learn more about this.

While there are prob many people on this forum who bought high looking for the free monies who you may classify as "mETH addicts", you should realize that I am not one of these people.
Two SHAE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 07:42 AM   #20870
0desmu1
old hand
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,515
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

everyone should know segwit2x is actually bad news and not good:

https://medium.com/@WhalePanda/the-c...n-eb87c18fad60

it's a highjacking attempt to take bitcoin development from Bitcoin Core.

UASF Aug 1st or bust imo.
0desmu1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 12:24 PM   #20871
TomCollins
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
TomCollins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: The Blockchain
Posts: 42,482
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenzor View Post
Maybe.

I just don't see the incentive for miners to back UASF. The status quo got Bitcoin to $3k. If Jihan kills NYA with mysterious new China mining pools or whatever excuses he conjures up, it still seems far-fetched to believe that other pools will mine the 148 chain. The status quo is too juicy for them to risk Jihan forking off, thereby plummeting $BTC for a long time, even if he is bluffing.
Yup, status quo has been good to Jihan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by onetimebabydoll View Post
His bluff is getting called so hard. These Chinese miners are going to go down fighting, though. They're ****in gangsters... I talk about it in my latest video here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VO-DCTYKfQ
It almost worked. Luke-jr pretty much revived 148 from the dead (at a point I was ready to give up on it), and it scared the piss out of the miners into capitulation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMVP View Post
Ok so Desantis is either a complete hack/extremist or my understanding of Bitcoin is laughably low.

It's most likely the latter.

Would love to hear what some of the more experienced people here think of him?
DeSantis is an interesting guy, definitely on the extreme side, definitely paranoid (just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you).

Quote:
Originally Posted by 0desmu1 View Post
everyone should know segwit2x is actually bad news and not good:

https://medium.com/@WhalePanda/the-c...n-eb87c18fad60

it's a highjacking attempt to take bitcoin development from Bitcoin Core.

UASF Aug 1st or bust imo.
WhalePanda is good people. He gets it right more than just about anyone.
TomCollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 03:06 PM   #20872
andr3w321
adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,075
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Core has no one to blame but themselves for segwit2x. They should have written code to hard fork and honor the hong kong agreement years ago but they didn't and instead they're stuck with Jeff Garzik's largely untested code.

You can't deny that

1. Tx malleability bug needs to be fixed
2. The blocksize must get raised eventually

You may not like the implementation or timing, but if you/core doesn't like it you/they could have written your own implementation and proposed a new timeline. Instead core said fix 1) and MAYBE we'll talk about 2). The miners didn't like that. Ultimately it's been a fight about how the tx fees are going to be divied up in the years to come. Core/blockstream want more on layer 2. Miners want more layer 1. Segwit2x is a reasonable compromise imo considering all that's happened.
andr3w321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 03:14 PM   #20873
TomCollins
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
TomCollins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: The Blockchain
Posts: 42,482
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by andr3w321 View Post
Core has no one to blame but themselves for segwit2x. They should have written code to hard fork and honor the hong kong agreement years ago but they didn't and instead they're stuck with Jeff Garzik's largely untested code.
This is incorrect. The code was written and all obligations were met. The community rejected it. There's been a lot of lies about this. Miners, on the other hand, broke the agreement within one week. Luke and Johnson did what was asked of them anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by andr3w321 View Post

You can't deny that

1. Tx malleability bug needs to be fixed
2. The blocksize must get raised eventually

You may not like the implementation or timing, but if you/core doesn't like it you/they could have written your own implementation and proposed a new timeline. Instead core said fix 1) and MAYBE we'll talk about 2). The miners didn't like that. Ultimately it's been a fight about how the tx fees are going to be divied up in the years to come. Core/blockstream want more on layer 2. Miners want more layer 1. Segwit2x is a reasonable compromise imo considering all that's happened.
I can deny #2. It doesn't have to get raised. SegWit in fact is proof of it - it increases the capacity without increasing the base block size.


Core wrote something that solved malleability (the bad kinds) and also increased capacity 2-4x. Miners blocked it to protect ASICBoost. Miners did not disclose this information until it was reverse engineered.


SegWit2X is nothing more than a corporate takeover that Amir Taaki warned about years ago. They want to be the new middlemen and shape Bitcoin to fit their future monopoly. Water cannot compromise with poison and be safe.

TomCollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 03:20 PM   #20874
andr3w321
adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,075
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Segwit alone only gets bitcoin to ~15 transactions per second max. It's not enough long term as a settlement layer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCollins View Post
Core wrote something that solved malleability (the bad kinds) and also increased capacity 2-4x. Miners blocked it to protect ASICBoost. Miners did not disclose this information until it was reverse engineered.
Why was there no BIP?

Edit: I see by capacity increase you're not actually referring to blocksize increase. They didn't actually write code that increased the blocksize. If they did please point to the BIP.
andr3w321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2017, 03:34 PM   #20875
TomCollins
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
TomCollins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: The Blockchain
Posts: 42,482
Re: Bitcoins - digital currency

Quote:
Originally Posted by andr3w321 View Post
Segwit alone only gets bitcoin to ~15 transactions per second max. It's not enough long term as a settlement layer.
~15 tx/sec BASE LAYER.

Other improvements can simply use other layers. Drivechain is one model that will allow users to choose a different security model with different tradeoffs, for example, while still using Bitcoin. LN will allow a few hundred million users. That will last us a while.

Quote:
Originally Posted by andr3w321 View Post
Why was there no BIP?
Because it was not popular enough to warrant one. It was basically ignored, no one actually wanted that.

The research is here: https://bitcoinhardforkresearch.github.io/

Quote:
Originally Posted by andr3w321 View Post
Edit: I see by capacity increase you're not actually referring to blocksize increase. They didn't actually write code that increased the blocksize. If they did please point to the BIP.
The block size increases. There just is a way to create smaller blocks for unupgraded nodes. The block size is now replaced with a block weight of 4M units, which is a maximum size of 4MB.
TomCollins is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ę 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online