Tag Archive | fraud

Did Bitcoin Supporters Just Get Played?

I think they did, and I think that it’s entirely possible–even probable–that Shrem and other Segwit2x supporters did it knowingly and intentionally as a way of driving up the value of Bitcoin, selling off, making their announcement, and shifting into Bitcoin Cash, which has already solved the problems that Segwit2x was supposed to partially address. So let me give you the rundown of what I’m thinking.

I noticed a few weeks ago that Bitcoin.Com wrote an article saying that they would refer to the Segwit2x chain as “B2x” and the other chain as “Bitcoin.” This makes sense, really, though I did take note of it at the time, because just a few days later, a phrase started appearing regularly in their articles in regard to Bitcoin Cash: “the REAL Bitcoin.”

Over and over again for the last month, Bitcoin.com referred to Bitcoin Cash as “the real Bitcoin,” and even went as far as writing an article and including a diagram about how Bitcoin Cash is the most uninterrupted continuation of the Bitcoin blockchain. I found this very odd, especially given all the controversy around Segwit2x and Core, that this major Bitcoin site–the one who owned Bitcoin.com for fuck’s sake–would suddenly start bashing the two major Bitcoins in favor of this offshoot that had existed for months with very little support. In fact, I’m almost certain that I recall reading an October article from them about how Bitcoin Cash was doomed to failure because it lacked support.

Something weird has happened, my friends, and, if I was a statist, I would probably be calling for investigations of fraud. And if Shrem (whose first name I don’t recall) sold even one hundredth of a Bitcoin before he made his announcement about the cancellation of S2X, then I think fraud is almost certain, so let’s refer to a few facts.

  • Regardless of where one stood on the matter, the New York Agreement never came close to a genuine consensus, as notable people were not invited at all, and, among those who were, it was not even possible to bring in 100% of the Bitcoin user base, the only way a consensus can truly be taken.
  • Despite this ambiguity, the “unanimous agreement” of the Segwit2x agreement was touted for months. Segwit was implemented, at which point Core and others, in a perhaps related venture, pulled out of the 2x part.
  • Bitcoin.com released its naming conventions for the coins as “Bitcoin2x” and “Bitcoin.”
  • Bitcoin.com began calling Bitcoin Cash “the real Bitcoin.”
  • Despite the rising contentiousness of the fork, Segwit2x proponents–among them Shrem–continued stating up until about a week ago that the fork would go ahead as planned, because “the community” had spoken and had agreed to implement the upgrade.
  • Seeing as this is the cryptocurrency equivalent of a stock split, lots and lots of people got into Bitcoin, driving the values up to record levels. It peaked at $8,000 at one point, and there is no doubt among crypto users that fork hype was the reason why. Whatever Bitcoin you had at the time of the fork would effectively be doubled–just in different currencies. One of these could easily and quickly be sold off, or converted into something stable like Ethereum. This is what I intended to do to both, in fact, using Shapeshift or Changelly–send one Bitcoin into Ethereum and the other into Litecoin. That way, it became irrelevant to me which was successful. Lots and lots and lots and lots of people who otherwise avoid Bitcoin (evidently I’m not alone in this regard) did the same.
  • Then, with Bitcoin basically at its peak, Shrem took to the world to announce that the fork was cancelled.
  • Immedate sell-offs began, because all of these people like me who just wanted in for the fork wanted back out, into our preferred cryptos (for me, Litecoin, Ethereum, and Blackcoin).

My Tentative Accusation

Elements within the Bitcoin community laid the groundwork for Bitcoin Cash to replace Bitcoin altogether, both Bitcoin and Bitcoin2x. I have no idea if the information can be gained or not, but I would be extremely fascinated to learn which S2X major players sold off Bitcoin before or shortly after the announcement, and I would throw a red flag on the play if even a single one of them converted 0.00001 BTC into Bitcoin Cash.

I’m not accusing anyone of anything, not really. I’m just saying that it’s all very, very suspicious. Given that Bitcoin Cash had already solved the problems that Bitcoin2x was supposed to partially solve, it’s not hard to see a connection between the two cryptos. Let’s face it: Bitcoin Cash’s main features at this point are that it’s the most uninterrupted Bitcoin blockchain, and that it already handled blocksize increases (up to 8 MB, instead of Segwit2x’s 2MB), and significantly lowered transaction fees in the process. These are the biggest problems Bitcoin faces.

These people who openly admitted to supporting a way of partially solving these problems with S2X cancelled at the last minute, while others were literally laying the groundwork for Bitcoin Cash to become accepted as “the real Bitcoin.” I don’t know, man. That’s fishy as hell. And I’m out 0.015 Bitcoin–which is a lot of money for me, honestly, it is… It’s taken me about 3 months to put that much money into cryptocurrencies–because of it. Not only that, but if I ever do get my Bitcoin back (see my coinomi complaint below), Bitcoin has fallen so much and BCH climbed so much that I won’t get anywhere near the BCH that I should have gotten if this shit went through yesterday. So what am I really out? Right now, 0.15 Bitcoin and 0.1 Bitcoin Cash. That’s pocket change to some people, but for me it’s my savings. It’s money that I can afford to lose, but it’s all my savings. And the reasons for this are two-fold: the cancellation of S2X and Coinomi’s failure to manage transaction fees as any ordinary user would expect them to.

Which brings me to a complaint I have to level at Coinomi.

Coinomi

I’m a pretty smart chick, you know? I saw the writing on the wall almost as soon as I woke up yesterday morning and looked into what had been going on. So what did I do? I immediately attempted to use Changelly to shift my Bitcoin back into Litecoin and Ethereum, and stated openly that, after doing so, I was going to shapeshift/changelly half of the ETH and half of the LTC into Bitcoin Cash. If I had done this, I would have gained more than $200 in the last 24 hours. This is why it has me so angry. $200 is a lot of money to me. As it is, because of this fuckup with Coinomi, I was forced to convert my Blackcoin into Bitcoin Cash (only $44 of it), which still has gained me $10, allowed me to purchase 0.01 LTC, and allowed me to rebuy 9 Blackcoin (I have no intention of getting out of Blackcoin–being the world’s first 100% proof of stake coin, I have very high hopes for it).

We normal people use Coinomi because we don’t want to calculate mileage and transaction fees. That’s one of the main freaking appeals of using these multi-currency wallets, in fact. They do all that background stuff for us. If I wanted to do that, i would exclusively use Parity (which I use for Ethereum to some degree, and, obviously, for Airswap Tokens). I don’t want to look up the current average mileage fees, calculate them, and do that work. No one does. That’s why we use these apps.

The last thing I ever expected was that Coinomi would use a Bitcoin transaction fee with its built-in Changelly function that was so low that the transaction would go unconfirmed for more than 24 hours. At the time of writing, the transactions are still unconfirmed, and the Bitcoin network is more congested than ever. There’s no chance the transactions are going to be confirmed. At best, it will take months. My only hope is to download the Bitcoin -QT software, sweep the wallet, and double spend them. This requires downloading the 200 GB blockchain, which I’ve got someone doing for me. But, even then, this might take days to complete. Keeping in mind that I’ve already missed out on doubling my money because of this, how much will I have missed out on by the time I finally get my Bitcoin back? Fuck, man, at least Coinbase automatically cancels unconfirmed transactions after 24 hours! The evil Coinbase!

I even considered contacting John McAfee and asking him to use his miners to confirm the transactions, but I doubt that he actually has 12 independent ones that can do it, even as a favor to me, this chick that he has never met and doesn’t know. I’ve contacted Coinomi support, and they should get back to me “within the next 24 hours.” By then, I expect BItcoin Cash will be over $2000, and I’ll have lost out on even more money. And that’s if they can help me resolve the issue right then and there, which is exceedingly unlikely. They’ll ask me more questions, and then tell me there is nothing they can do about it and send me a bunch of links to information that I’ve already read.

We’re talking a lot of money here–at least for me. And there’s presently nothing I can do about it, because my Bitcoin is lost in the ether, probably never to be confirmed. Double spending is the only option, and the Coinomi app intentionally prevents that (most apps do). I’m hoping they have some sort of override, can take control of my phone directly, and use some developer commands to force the app to allow doublespending. If not, my only hope may be to decompile the software and have a friend go through it and see if he can modify it in a way that would allow doublespending. See how grave this problem is? And it’s not my fault. It’s Coinomi’s fault. Sure, if you go to their website–their website for this app that only supports mobile devices in other words why in the world would you ever go to their website–they will tell you to make sure to increase your transaction fees when processing things for Shapeshift and Changelly, but that’s buried in their site. And no one will even go to look for that until they have already had this happen.

And I’m a tech person! I can’t imagine what a non-tech person would do if faced with this.

This sort of thing has to be worked out for cryptocurrencies to survive. Yes, the blockchain must be immutable, but there must be some changes to the code that allow for transactions to be cancelled and removed from the cloud if they aren’t confirmed even once after 24 hours.

The Assumption Liberals Make

Elements on the left seem increasingly zealous about whether Trump was, perhaps, friendlier with Russia than they want him to be, but I’m not really interested in whether the increasingly desperate attempts to engage Trump and Putin in a bromance is based on truth or some mutated psychosis leftover from the Cold War. Actually, I’d say that Cold War paranoia is more like AIDS, because AIDS isn’t actually the cause of death for HIV sufferers–some other disease infects them due to their severely weakened immune system, and this disease is what kills them. So the Cold War paranoia is the AIDS that made us susceptible to this weird, virulent strain of “Them Damn Russians!”

But whether we’ve got a severe AIDS infection or whether we have cause to distrust Trump’s Russia connections isn’t of much relevance until another question has been answered: Why should we care if Trump has these alleged connections?

The first contention is that we should care because Trump is close to the country that subverted our democracy by interfering in our election. At best, this ranks among the most dubious claims that I’ve ever heard. The leaks ripped the DNC into pieces, but progressives have benefited from that as much as Trump did, so unless they’re guilty of the same collusion (in fact, irate Sanders supporters have at least as much motive as Trump–“Oh, hello, Seth Rich!”), the claim appears to be nothing but “You possibly benefited from this, so you’re guilty of collusion, and even though we provably benefited, we’re not guilty of collusion.”

Even if we assume that all of the Democrats’ bizarre claims are true, it still doesn’t answer the question of why I should care. Hillary was no better suited to be President than Trump, and that some people are willing to eat a plate full of dog vomit over a pile of festering shit is of no consequence to me, and certainly not reason for me to get mad that more people (by the weight of the political rules we all agreed to beforehand) scarfed down a helping of turds.

Even if Trump only won because of these ties to Russia (which, again, we’re assuming are true), so freaking what? If you’re going to hold up electoral processes as wonderful, quasi-magical things that must be insulated from influence of the outside world, and whose integrity must be beyond reproach, I’d take your claim more seriously if you hadn’t spent the last six months rioting because you didn’t get the election result that you wanted.

Until actual evidence has been put forward–something more than a laundry list of “He Said, She Said” bullshit–and as long as we live in a place where one of the great social principles is that one is innocent until proven guilty, it follows that the only people undermining the integrity of the election are the Democrats. Mind you, this is after Jill Stein’s recount attempts showed no disparity at all with the results.

So let’s be clear about this. It’s not “The election” that democrats are claiming was influenced. The vote totals were not changed via Russian meddling, and, to my knowledge, only the most uninformed and absurd progressives are making such claims. For the greater part, what liberals actually mean when they allege that Russia influenced the election is that Russia influenced voters.

Again, I must ask: “So?”

By the Constitution of the United States, an American voter has the immutable right to not only believe whatever the hell they want, but also (an extension modern liberals gloss over) to act in accordance with those beliefs. It doesn’t matter if Bob votes for Trump because he’s a Christian, as is Bob, and if Bob was convinced of Christianity by Americans or by Russian Jesuits. Why Bob believes what he believes is his own business, not ours, and we can’t threaten that without also curtailing his right to believe what he wants.

So, too, if Jim voted for Trump because he believes Hillary is the worst thing since gonorrhea, it’s not of any relevance to us whether he believes that because of the “documentary” “Clinton Cash,” because of the DNC Leaks, because of Wikileaks, or because he was taught to be Republicans by his parents and never looked any further. He cast his vote, and his reasons for doing so may be whatever he wants. Maybe he doesn’t like Hillary’s hair, or maybe he finds Hillary to be somewhat more psychopathic than the unpredictable Trump.

Whatever his reasons are, they are his reasons, and the alleged beauty of the American political system is that he gets the same number of votes to express his values as does anyone else. It’s fine that liberals would disagree with his reasons–either because they believe those reasons are factually incorrect, or they believe that one should value other things–and it’s fine for them to express this disagreement through the one vote that they each have.

What’s not okay is attempting to erase Jim’s vote because one disagrees with the beliefs he holds that led him to vote the way that he did. I notice there’s no criticism of the people who only voted for Hillary for stupid, demagogic reasons, or for equally asinine reasons like “Well, she’s the first female candidate!”

The liberals, it seems, don’t want to erase every vote that was based on reasons with which they disagree (since “She’s the first female candidate!” obviously flies directly in the face of the claim that “Gender shouldn’t matter,” the basis they use for criticising Trump supporters who voted for Trump because he’s a man), but only those for the other candidate with which they disagree, and, let’s be honest here, that’s basically all of them, because the entire fucking rift exists because liberals and conservatives value different things.

Is there such a thing, to the Democrat, as a good reason to vote for Trump? If there is, I’ve yet to hear a Democrat acquiesce that point.

You voted for Trump because you liked his expressed opinions on immigration? No, that’s illegitimate, you racist bastard.

You voted for Trump because you preferred his probable tax policy? No, that’s illegitimate, you elitist fool, dick-riding the rich.

You voted for Trump because you didn’t like Hillary’s arrogant and sociopathic demeanor? No, that’s illegitimate, you sexist pig.

You voted for Trump because you liked his abortion stance? No, that’s illegitimate, you fascist, because people have the right to convenient abortions.

The conservative/liberal rift occurs long before the candidates are chosen. The point of the presidential debates is not for the Republican candidate to entice Democrats, or the Democratic candidate to entice Republicans. Even independents are rarely swayed by such things. People simply don’t operate that way. Most have their value system and will vote for whoever best fits with that value system, and the divide between Republicans and Democrats is so large that there is almost no crossover. How many people voted for Trump because of Wikileaks or these presumed-to-be-true ties to Russia? I’d wager that the number is fewer than a thousand, throughout the entire country, because that’s just not how people work.

No amount of terrible things you told me about Hillary, however true they were, would have caused me to vote for Trump. No amount of terrible things you told me about Trump would have caused me to vote for Hillary. Honestly, how manipulable do Democrats think people are? At absolute best, the revelations of how much a candidate sucks will only reinforce whatever position I currently hold, and most Americans will readily pick and choose what information to take in and what information to discard.

This is practically a tautology. I’ve seen countless Democrats say that there’s no evidence that Hillary has ever done anything wrong–no hyperbole, no straw man. Yet these same people proclaim there is incontrovertible evidence that Trump did countless things wrong. Meanwhile, Republicans do the same and claim that there’s no evidence that Trump has ever done anything wrong, and that there is incontrovertible evidence that Hillary is the devil.

Anyone who is actually open to the information long ago concluded that both of these people are disgusting toads who have no business being anywhere near a position of power. That’s the keyword: open to the information. Because there is plenty of evidence that both Trump and Hillary are absolutely awful.

What we’re talking about isn’t that someone isn’t “open to the information.” It’s simply that someone disagrees with the liberal, and the liberal lost the election because of that disagreement.

Remember any of the 90s sitcoms that had families “vote” on what they were going to do, only for the adults to immediately lose the vote and say, “Well, our votes each count as two, because we’re adults”?

That’s all we’re seeing here.

And even if all this was true, no one has yet explained to me why it’s undesirable for the United States to have warmer relations with Russia. No one seems to care that the United States has warm ties to the European Union–or Pakistan, or India, or Saudi Arabia. So why Russia? In what weird understanding of the world is it bad for two great powers to get along?

Is it because of their human rights record? No, it can’t be that, because many of our Middle Eastern buddies have far worse records–as do we, as we house 20% of the world’s prison population while having only 4% of the world’s population, and you can’t get to those numbers without severe destruction of liberty and rights. Is it because Russia has nukes? So does India, Pakistan, China, many EU countries, the UK, and many others, so it can’t be that, either.

In fact, I’d bet everything that only a year ago the majority of liberals would have happily agreed that the United States needs to work with Russia. Why do liberals suddenly hate them so much that state congressional Democrats are seriously making the claim that the United States needs to break off all communications with Russia? What changed between then and now?

Democrats lost the White House. And since recount efforts showed the votes weren’t tampered with, rather than accepting responsibility and blaming themselves, they would undermine democracy itself with the contention that your vote only counts if you cast it for the reasons they want you to cast it. Put bluntly, your vote only counts if you cast it for their candidate.

They’d deny this adamantly, of course. “You can vote for a Republican,” they’d say. “Just not freaking Trump!”

I see no reason to believe that there’s any truth to this amended claim. In fact, I’m sure we’d be here today if Hillary lost to Kasich or Cruz. They say otherwise, and it’s useless to argue one hypothetical against another. Maybe they are telling the truth. I doubt it, though, because they’ve already lied to themselves about what they’re saying, and what they’re really saying is, “Your vote only counts if you cast it for reasons we agree with.”

If you want to talk tyranny and fascism, I think we’d have a hard time finding clearer examples.