The below is an off-site archive of all tweets posted by @lopp ever

March 24th, 2017

@OptimistLib @rubicon59 @alansilbert If there’s an emergency fork / attack, I’ll contribute to the best of my abilities.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to OptimistLib

morcosa I just published “Why Bitcoin doesn’t need a solution” medium.com/p/why-bitcoin-ā€¦

via Medium (retweeted on 5:43 PM, Mar 24th, 2017 via Twitter Web Client)

@olivierjanss I’m personally unaffected by Litecoin’s activation parameters; aren’t we talking about Bitcoin?

via Twitter Web Client in reply to olivierjanss

Google officially no longer trusts Symantec. arstechnica.com/security/2017/ā€¦

via Twitter Web Client

@olivierjanss OK, that’s a very different issue… deployment parameters are very different from claiming feature itself has issues.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to olivierjanss

@olivierjanss You lost me. Are you saying Litecoin only has as many nodes as Bitcoin’s Testnet?

via Twitter Web Client in reply to olivierjanss

@olivierjanss Network partitioning is an artifact of how few nodes are on testnet: mesh is thin. Once again, a very different network.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to lopp

@jedigras A wide variety of reasons including frustration, impatience, concentration of power, and capitalization.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to jedigras

@olivierjanss If you spent time on testnet, you’d know that it has /always/ experienced crazy reorgs. It’s a very different network.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to olivierjanss

@alansilbert Yeah, @GeminiDotCom has been publicly tweeting support replies for a while despite my recommendations otherwise…

via Twitter Web Client in reply to alansilbert

Great post by @brucefenton on civility during these contentious times. medium.com/@brucefenton/cā€¦ pic.twitter.com/1k17UW6gl5

via Medium

@btcguy_ Invalid segwit spends is possible same as invalid p2sh spends are possible. Good incentive for miners to not create invalid blocks.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to lopp

@btcguy_ Network split highly unlikely because mainnet has orders of magnitude more nodes - better connected network mesh.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to btcguy_

@btcguy_ It could have been a network partition or it could have been someone creating blocks w/invalid segwit spends. My bet is on former.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to btcguy_

@ryanxcharles It’s unfortunate to hear anyone saying that they want to see conflict and strife. šŸ˜ž

via Twitter Web Client in reply to ryanxcharles

@rubicon59 @alansilbert I wouldn’t worry about it too much; it’s outside of our control šŸ˜Œ

via Twitter Web Client in reply to rubicon59

@rubicon59 @alansilbert It’s just posturing until it’s an actual attack. Pre-emptively countering posturing is a waste of resources.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to rubicon59

@rubicon59 @alansilbert For major economic players, probably. But that’s not the only option. šŸ™‚

via Twitter Web Client in reply to rubicon59

@rubicon59 @alansilbert Anyone who wants to transact on a BU chain fork is free to do so. I suspect disruption would last < few days.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to rubicon59

@jessedain @theonevortex @alansilbert @ChandlerGuo It’s a real threat, it would be disruptive, it wouldn’t be effective permanently.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to jessedain

@rubicon59 @alansilbert No, anyone can change the code they run at any time.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to rubicon59

@rubicon59 @alansilbert Machine consensus can always be changed via human consensus. Nothing is set in stone.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to rubicon59

@theonevortex @alansilbert Unless you are the person moving the market or spoke with those who are, trying to extract meaning => speculation

via Twitter Web Client in reply to theonevortex

@rubicon59 @alansilbert By rendering the attackers’ ASICs useless, which could be done in a variety of ways.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to rubicon59

@alansilbert @theonevortex I suspect either side will just claim that they are morally justified in “looking out” for those people.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to alansilbert

@theonevortex @alansilbert Seems to me that those who consider it immoral vs moral are already split.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to theonevortex

In the event of perpetual protocol pause, the “winners” will be those who keep their heads down and innovate w/o asking anyone’s permission.

via Twitter Web Client

@alansilbert Seems simple to me. Morality of an attack is irrelevant. What’s relevant is that such an attack would be parried.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to alansilbert

Brinkmanship behooves nobody in Bitcoin. In fact, it very well may be that Bitcoin is resistant to traditional political strategies.

via Twitter Web Client