I put all this effort in for my own selfish financial gain. I realised shilling SV hard would make people not believe in SV and raise the "shill narrative". Invest in SV futures. Win.
Mad props **if** it turns out the way you expect it to.
Prediction: When this is all over next week, you are going to feel so fucking stupid for all this effort you put into a dead campaign for a psychopath.
I put all this effort in for my own selfish financial gain. I realised shilling SV hard would make people not believe in SV and raise the "shill narrative". Invest in SV futures. Win.
Is there a stress test happening or something?
Pre-test was today, the big test is on the 17th.
Remember PoSM ABC folks the hshwar is not over until Roger (memorydealers) orders his employees who are moderators on /r/btc to list Bitcoin SV in the sidebar
I'm not personally in favor of SV, but I agree that their node software really should be listed in the sidebar. They make valid blocks on the network today - some others there don't.
Good test from @Cryptogrampa just now! I put a new feature that is sending the tx twice in two different nodes. So, we can see this working now.
Am I understanding this correctly that the TX generation sends the TX's to only two separate nodes? If so, how are these nodes chosen? (Can I sign up to help as a relay node?)
Congratulations on successfully breaking a new record, and doing so consistently.
@memo how's it going with those child key derivation projects?
Does this mean the bottlenecks have been fixed?
(the stress testing tools likely seed the TX's on, or topologically close to, the BMG/SVnodes)
Does this mean the bottlenecks have been fixed?
BMG pool mined all five 32 MB blocks today. Why is that? Do they have superior hardware or is software optimized in some way (they support BitcoinSV btw).
... to learn why the other pools did not have a chance to make 32mb blocks. (the TX relay issues have been somewhat mitigated, but not solved. their mempools never filled up)
BMG pool mined all five 32 MB blocks today. Why is that? Do they have superior hardware or is software optimized in some way (they support BitcoinSV btw).
it could've gained more if it got the same attention, but without the contention and negative connotations.
The unified coin gained value due to the attention gained - same as with the stresstests.
Which is a dangerous path to take, and not one I can morally defend.
But right now, they are aren't competing to produce value; but some compete by destroying value.
As they should - miners should compete.
On that I can agree then, I too want to see the hashwar play out. Wish it happend in the S2X fork, but I'll take what I get.
They'd also start with a clear advantage in terms of social media presence, authority figures and control over communication platforms.
No, just like BCH they would start with some miners, a shared history, and vested interests by developers who share their ideology.
By "How it's done", if it encompass attacking those who produce value in the ecosystem, they will soon find themselves on a path of destruction and network effect leaving.
network effect is a human property here, and the smaller block faction with a new ticker may well have taken over the network effect.
It might not be that simple.
I don't think the Core roadmap, governance or behaviour is even remotely acceptable, but a large number of participants around the globe does, for now.
Core could well have remained a majority brand but with a new ticker, and miners would eventually have followed.
You're making assumptions that might not hold up there.
