Bitcoinminer sx: So entfernen Sie den Trojaner - CHIP

Used Malwarebytes to remove bitcoin miner trojan, PC stuck at startup repair.

I noticed I was getting ridiculously high cpu usage when I was idle, caused by svchost.. I checked around for a bit and decided to run MBAM to see if it was a virus. Lo and behold it found a bitcoin miner trojan. I had it delete the infected files. Computer is now stuck at startup repair and has been going for about an hour and a half.
Using Windows 7 Ultimate, and I don't think it matters but I'm running a Z97X mobo, i7-4790k and a 550ti.
submitted by Instincthr to techsupport [link] [comments]

Ryzen 1600x high idle temp because 3 cores are at full load

Ryzen 1600x high idle temp because 3 cores are at full load
My airflow and the cpu cooler in general are pretty good, the cpu is overclocked to 4ghz and under full cinebench r20 load it doesnt even reach 70C but at idle my cpu will sit around 56C, after opening hwinfo or hwmonitor the temp checks out (Tdie) and it shows that thread 0,2 and 6 are at full 100% load. What could be causing this. Task manager doesnt show anything unordinary going on and the usage is <5%

Computer Type: Custom dekstop
GPU: Gainward Ghost RTX 2060 6GB
CPU: 1600X 4.0GHz 1.35V
Motherboard: ASRock AB350M
RAM: Patriot Viper Steel 3400MHz 2x8GB 2nd and 4th slot. XMP set to 3200MHz
PSU: Corsair CX650M
Operating System & Version: Windows 10 Pro Version 2004
GPU Drivers: 452.06
Chipset Drivers: P5.50
Background Applications: Spotify, MSI Afterburner, Riva Statistic Tuner, NVIDIA Settings
Troubleshooting: Tried removing the cpu overclock
SOLVED: Trojan bitcoin miner deep in chrome folder
submitted by Sonny1941 to AMDHelp [link] [comments]

Good and safe exploits to use and not what to use

Here are safe exploits to use and not what to use
To use:
Synapse X (strong executor but paid $20)
Krnl (free executor, only accessed via their discord not off of wearedevs) (key system is trash tho)
Not to use:
Jjsploit (a weak executor, often crashes, data miner, bitcoin miner, deletes important files)
Dansploit (virus and wants money to remove virus via bitcoin)
Anything off of Wearedevs (creator has a trojan on computer so anything on their comes with a virus)
Anything off of YouTube that is free or unheard of (sketchy and possibly malware)
Furk OS (extremely sketchy, AdWare, potential trojan/unwanted software)
Sirhurt (it is run by child predators and is paid therefore making you support them)
Sentinel v3 (a waste of money, no difference to v2)
Fluxus (unsafe, off of WeAreDevs)
Overall summary: Buy Synapse X, if you are poor join the krnl discord and download via that, don't go to WeAreDevs don't download things off YouTube and stay safe
submitted by SullWazowski to ROBLOXExploiting [link] [comments]

TIFU by having my laptop used for bitcoin mining

FU is still in progress and I have no way of knowing when it started, which may be what is stressing me out the most right now. So come with me on a journey of regret while my fourth malware scanner of the night sits at 64% and my friends have gone to bed.
So the story, I guess, would begin back when I first started university, about five years ago. I got into art school for visual communication and planned on becoming an animator. To celebrate and to support me, my dad bought me a kick ass lenovo gaming laptop with the power of a billion suns (as you may come to guess, I am not tech savvy. Definitely not tech savvy enough to own this laptop) capable of running several adobe programs at once, with a RAM wide enough to put my mother's behind to shame, with an internal disk memory as big as the disappointment in my father's eyes. College begins, websites for illicit procuration of expensive programs exist, my naive young sunshine self doesn't even know what a VPN is, and for some reason which is is causing me an enormous amount of self-hatred right now, owning a top of the range gaming laptop with amazing everything doesn't seem like a good enough reason for me to pay for an antivirus, so I go with the free software, the ffp1 option, the least-amount-of-having-to-think-about-it choice, because I would totally NOT regret that later, perhaps five years later, at 3 AM - ironically while trying to animate for the first time ever.
I continue my happy little life with my absolute beast of a laptop but shit happens and I never actually go into animation, I go into printmaking, which is the most analog of art forms possibly ever, so between having a huge amount of studio work, thesis research and just life stuff, my laptop spends the prime of his life as a glorified facebook machine, a particularly large and lovely screen to watch parks and rec on perhaps. Or so I think...
Now I may have noticed performance issues at various points, in fact now that I think about it I moved away from using photoshop a long time ago, and when I think about it further I even got a new wacom tablet last winter, because of the unbearable lag... the shame covers me like a wet blanket. What a fucking idiot. No refrigerator-buzz noises, wheezing fans or uncomfortably hot undersides were enough to make me go "hey, perhaps my free antivirus is a piece of rubbish, and it would be worth ten minutes of my time to run a slightly deeper scan than just the automatic stuff that I even only run when it gets absolutely forced on me". No. I had to just plow on, forgetting that my computer ever ran quietly at all, or that it once harnessed the power of a billion suns, that crashes and reboots and long waiting times are not supposed to happen.
Around October 2019 I got annoyed enough to look into how to even use a split drive computer for the first time, and I moved all my bulky user folders to a different drive, and patted myself on the shoulder real good for being such a computer wizard. Hell I even cleaned my registry!
But let's get to the point... amongst many minor technological issues for which my solution is to ignore until I forget, is the fact that my phones memory is full because i am constantly photographing everything with it, but for some reason my laptop stopped recognising my phone as a device. So I started poking around yesterday, and when I tried to update windows I got an error code saying that one or more updates failed. You know that scene in Spirited Away when San pulls on a tiny string in the side of the super stinky bath house guest and a huge stream of pollution comes roaring out? Yeah. Somewhere at the horizon of my mind the thought passed by that it was weird that I hadn't been getting push notifications about windows updates. I looked for my antivirus, and lo and behold, it is gone. I googled some stupid shit like "why has my antivirus disappeared ", get some stupid first-result answer, and leave it at that.
Today as I am following my first animation course online (well done me, yay) as I stare at the endless unjustified blue loading circle next to my cursor my idle mind wanders to my nonexistent antivirus, and i figure i should download a new one. So i do, and i run a scan, and it gives me a warning for one problematic file: Win64: Malware-Gen Trojan. Eek, I think, I have only an extremely vague notion of what that is but I'm sure it's no fun. So I find a lovely step by step guide with pictures made for idiots like me which walks me through the installation of a whole parade of malware scans, and the first one finds 22 malware files, of which 5 Trojans, PUMs to disable my firewall, security centre and antivirus, and 15 PUPs including stuff that apparently had to be manually installed by the user even though I've never seen it before, and one lovely shitty cherry on top, the bitcoin miner.
After removing all those I run the next scan, it comes up with loads of new issues. Then I download and run a third scanner, still more problematic files found. And finally one in a file location that gives me some indication as when this started happening: in year 1 of college when I very briefly dipped my toes into a bunch of fancy programs and then never opened them again for not having had the time or energy.
So there we have it folks, my beast processors have been mining bitcoin for someone for what may have been five years while I watched porn and browsed reddit, and now that i actually sat down to do what this laptop was bought to do, instead i am spending entire days ridding it of a wonderful garden of malware that someone has planted and tended. Karma, bitch. And the worst thing is that I will never know exactly what they did, if they were after more than my bitcoin potential, whether they have been accessing other stuff. Tomorrow I'm changing all my passwords and pins, growing a moustache, and moving to Florida. The morale of this story is: live up to the gifts you receive.
TL;DR: I was gifted a brand new gaming laptop to become an animator. I downloaded a bunch of programs, never used them, maintained nonexistent safety practices and was an unknowing bitcoin mine for possibly five years.
submitted by Procrasturbator2000 to tifu [link] [comments]

Acer Aspire v5-574g frame drops in games and overall performance degradation.

Good day guys. So I've had this laptop for almost 3 years now (Used) and I've encountered this problem since last year before the battery died. I've since been using this laptop as a pseudo desktop (It has to be plugged in all the time) without the internal battery. The system promptly shuts down once it reaches the desktop screen when I plug the battery in so I left it off. Basically it just drops the frames to zero every second when I play CS:GO, Apex Legends, Valorant or any of the games that I play before really. Adobe premiere and after effects really struggle with timeline scrubbing as well. Before this issue, I used to get 60 fps (smoothly) on CS:GO and it was a decent video editing machine for 1080p.
So far the only modifications or repairs I've done to it are:
-Changed the included hybrid hdd to an ssd+ Added an hdd caddy on the optical drive bay. (Running two drives now)
-Replaced the thermal paste to Cooler Master's IC Value V1 (Twice now. Since I believed I applied it wrong the first time)
- Updated the BIOS (With a few tweaks I've seen on tomshardware because it wouldn't update without the battery)
I'm not sure if this is related too but I ran Malwarebytes recently and I've found a Bitcoin Miner Trojan on it. Removed it too but the problem still persists. And yes, I've already done a clean install of Windows (About 5 times since the problem started to appear).
I've tried reaching out to Acer but they haven't responded to any of my questions yet and I'm pretty sure I've voided the warranty already.
submitted by PotatoJuice69 to techsupport [link] [comments]

Bitcoin 11 Years - Achievements, Lies, and Bullshit Claims So Far - Tooootally NOT a SCAM !!!!

That's right folks, it's that time again for the annual review of how Bitcoin is going: all of those claims, predictions, promises .... how many have turned out to be true, and how many are completely bogus ???
Please post / link this on Bitcoin (I am banned there for speaking the truth, so I cannot do it) ... because it'a way past time those poor clueless mushrooms were exposed to the truth.
Anyway, without further ado, I give you the Bitcoin's Achievements, Lies, and Bullshit Claims So Far ...
.
Bitcoin Achievements so far:
  1. It has spawned a cesspool of scams (2000+ shit coin scams, plus 100's of other scams, frauds, cons).
  2. Many 1,000's of hacks, thefts, losses.
  3. Illegal Use Cases: illegal drugs, illegal weapons, tax fraud, money laundering, sex trafficking, child pornography, hit men / murder-for-hire, ransomware, blackmail, extortion, and various other kinds of fraud and illicit activity.
  4. Legal Use Cases: Steam Games, Reddit, Expedia, Stripe, Starbucks, 1000's of merchants, cryptocurrency conferences, Ummm ????? The few merchants who "accept Bitcoin" immediately convert it into FIAT after the sale, or require you to sell your coins to BitPay or Coinbase for real money, and will then take that money. Some of the few who actually accept bitcoin haven't seen a customer who needed to pay with bitcoin for the last six months, and their cashiers no longer know how to handle that.
  5. Contributing significantly to Global Warming.
  6. Wastes vasts amounts of electricity on useless, do nothing work.
  7. Exponentially raises electricity prices when big miners move into regions where electricity was cheap.
  8. It’s the first "currency" that is not self-sustainable. It operates at a net loss, and requires continuous outside capital to replace the capital removed by miners to pay their costs. It’s literally a "black hole currency."
  9. It created a new way for people living too far from Vegas to gamble all their life savings away.
  10. Spawned "blockchain technology", a powerful technique that lets incompetent programmers who know almost nothing about databases, finance, programming, or blockchain scam millions out of gullible VC investors, banks, and governments.
  11. Increased China's foreign trade balance by a couple billion dollars per year.
  12. Helped the FBI and other law enforcement agents easily track down hundreds of drug traffickers and drug users.
  13. Wasted thousands if not millions of man-hours of government employees and legislators, in mostly fruitless attempts to understand, legitimize, and regulate the "phenomenon", and to investigate and prosecute its scams.
  14. Rekindled the hopes of anarcho-capitalists and libertarians for a global economic collapse, that would finally bring forth their Mad Max "utopia".
  15. Added another character to Unicode (no, no, not the "poo" 💩 character ... that was my first guess as well 🤣)
  16. Provides an easy way for malware and ransomware criminals to ply their trade and extort hospitals, schools, local councils, businesses, utilities, as well as the general population.
.
Correct Predictions:
  1. 2015-12: "1,000 dollar in 2015", u/Luka_Magnotta, aka time traveler from the future, 31-Aug-2013, https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1lfobc/i_am_a_timetraveler_from_the_future_here_to_beg/ (Technically, this prediction is WRONG because the highest price reached in 2015 was $495.56 according to CMC. Yes, Bitcoin reached $1,000 in 2013 and 2014, but that's NOT what the prediction says).
  2. 2017-12: "10,000 in 2017", u/Luka_Magnotta, aka time traveler from the future, 31-Aug-2013, https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1lfobc/i_am_a_timetraveler_from_the_future_here_to_beg/
  3. 2018-04: $10,000 (by April 2018), Mike Novogratz, link #1: https://www.bitcoinprice.com/predictions/, link #2: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-21/mike-novogratz-says-bitcoin-will-end-the-year-at-10-000
  4. 2018-12: $10,000 (by 2018), Tim Draper, link #1: https://www.bitcoinprice.com/predictions/, link #2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AW5s6QkRRY
  5. Any others ? (Please tell me).
.
Bitcoin Promises / Claims / Price Predictions that turned out to be lies and bullshit:
  1. ANONYMOUS
  2. CENSORSHIP RESISTANT
  3. FRICTIONLESS
  4. TRUSTLESS
  5. UNCENSORABLE
  6. UNTRACEABLE
  7. SAFE
  8. SECURE
  9. YOU CANNOT LOSE
  10. NOT A SCAM
  11. PERMISSIONLESS
  12. GUARANTEED PRIVACY
  13. CANNOT BE SEIZED
  14. CANNOT BE CONFISCATED
  15. Be your own bank
  16. Regulation-proof
  17. NO MIDDLEMEN
  18. DECENTRALIZED
  19. Instantaneous transactions
  20. Fast transactions
  21. Zero / No transaction fees
  22. Low transaction fees
  23. A store of value
  24. A deflationary digital asset
  25. "A deflationary digital asset that no single human being can destroy."
  26. "an asset that is equally as dual use as a car, water, or any other traditional element that has existed."
  27. "Digital gold"
  28. Easy to use
  29. Cannot be stolen
  30. Cannot be hacked
  31. Can be mined by anyone
  32. Can be mined by anyone, even with an old computer or laptop
  33. Cannot be centralized
  34. Will return power back to the people.
  35. Not a Ponzi scam
  36. Not a Pyramid scam
  37. Never pay tax again
  38. Your gains cannot be taxed
  39. A currency
  40. An amazing new class of asset
  41. An asset
  42. A means to economic freedom
  43. A store of value
  44. The best investment the word has ever seen
  45. A great investment
  46. Efficient
  47. Scalable
  48. Stable
  49. Resilient
  50. Reliable
  51. Low energy
  52. Low risk
  53. Redistribute wealth to everybody
  54. No more have's and have not's
  55. No more US and THEM
  56. No more disadvantaged people
  57. No more RICH and POOR
  58. No more poor people
  59. Uses amazing new technology
  60. Uses ingenious new technology
  61. Satishi Nakamoto invented ...
  62. Segwit will solve all of Bitcoin's woes
  63. Lightning Network will solve all of Bitcoin's woes
  64. Limited by scarcity
  65. Can only go up in value
  66. Price cannot crash
  67. Has intrinsic value
  68. Value will always be worth more than cost to mine
  69. Adoption by investors is increasing exponentially
  70. Adoption by investors is increasing
  71. Adoption by merchants is increasing exponentially
  72. Adoption by merchants is increasing
  73. You are secure if you keep your coins on an exchange
  74. You are secure if you keep your coins in a hardware wallet
  75. You are secure if you keep your coins in an air-gapped Linux PC
  76. Will change the world
  77. "the next phase in human evolution"
  78. "Blockchain is more encompassing than the internet"
  79. Blockchain can solve previously unsolvable problems.
  80. "The only regulation we need is the blockchain"
  81. "Bank the unbanked"
  82. "To abolish financial slavery and the state's toxic monopoly on money."
  83. "To have better tools in the fight against the state violence and taxation."
  84. "To stamp information on a blockchain forever so we can bypass state censorship, copyrights, patents(informational monopolies) etc."
  85. Will destroy / overthrow FIAT
  86. Will destroy / overthrow the world's governments
  87. Will destroy / overthrow the banking system
  88. Will destroy / overthrow the world economies
  89. Will free people from tyranny
  90. Will give people financial freedom
  91. Will bring world peace
  92. Never going below $19K again
  93. Never going below $18K again
  94. Never going below $17K again
  95. Never going below $16K again
  96. Never going below $15K again
  97. Never going below $14K again
  98. Never going below $13K again
  99. Never going below $12K again
  100. Never going below $11K again
  101. Never going below $10K again
  102. Never going below $9K again
  103. Never going below $8K again
  104. Never going below $7K again
  105. Never going below $6K again
  106. Never going below $5K again
  107. Never going below $4K again
  108. Is NOT a Scam
  109. Hashing Power secures the Bitcoin network
  110. Untraceable, private transactions
  111. Guaranteed privacy
  112. Not created out of thin air
  113. Not created out of thin air by unregulated, unbacked entities
  114. Totally NOT a scam
  115. Is not used primarily by crimonals, drug dealers, or money launderers.
  116. 100% secure
  117. 2010 will be the "Year of Crypto"
  118. 2011 will be the "Year of Crypto"
  119. 2012 will be the "Year of Crypto"
  120. 2013 will be the "Year of Crypto"
  121. 2014 will be the "Year of Crypto"
  122. 2015 will be the "Year of Crypto"
  123. 2016 will be the "Year of Crypto"
  124. 2017 will be the "Year of Crypto"
  125. 2018 will be the "Year of Crypto"
  126. 2019 will be the "Year of Crypto"
  127. 2010: MASS ADOPTION any day now"
  128. 2011: MASS ADOPTION aany day now"
  129. 2012: MASS ADOPTION aaany day now"
  130. 2013: MASS ADOPTION aaaany day now"
  131. 2014: MASS ADOPTION aaaaany day now"
  132. 2015: MASS ADOPTION aaaaaany day now"
  133. 2016: MASS ADOPTION aaaaaaany day now"
  134. 2017: MASS ADOPTION aaaaaaaany day now"
  135. 2018: MASS ADOPTION aaaaaaaaany day now"
  136. 2019: MASS ADOPTION aaaaaaaaany day now"
  137. "Financial Freedom, bro."
  138. no single entity, government or individual, can alter or reverse its transactions
  139. insurance against the tyranny of state
  140. Bitcoin has come to destroy all governments and bring about the libertarian utopia of my dreams.
  141. The major issues in Bicoin's network will be fixed. This is still early days, Bitcoin has only been around for 2+ years.
  142. The major issues in Bicoin's network will be fixed. This is still early days, Bitcoin has only been around for 5+ years.
  143. The major issues in Bicoin's network will be fixed. This is still early days, Bitcoin has only been around for 7+ years.
  144. The major issues in Bicoin's network will be fixed. This is still early days, Bitcoin has only been around for 9+ years.
  145. 1,000's of predictions of skyrocketing and/or never falling prices
  146. Escape the petty rivalries of warring powers and nation states by scattering control among the many. The Bitcoin Cash debacle proves that even the most cryptographically secure plans of mice and men often go awry. Ref: https://www.reddit.com/Buttcoin/comments/9zfhb6/like_theres_only_one_flaw_with_buttcoin_crash/ea8s11m
  147. People will NEVER be able to welch out of bets or deals again. Nov-2018, Ref: https://www.reddit.com/Buttcoin/comments/9zvpl2/the_guy_who_made_the_1000_bet_that_btc_wouldnt/
  148. "Everything will be better, faster, and cheaper.", Brock Pierce, EOS.io shill video.
  149. "Everything will be more connected.", Brock Pierce, EOS.io shill video.
  150. "Everything will be more trustworthy.", Brock Pierce, EOS.io shill video.
  151. "Everything will be more secure.", Brock Pierce, EOS.io shill video.
  152. "Everything that exists is no-longer going to exist in the way that it does today.", Brock Pierce, EOS.io shill video.
  153. "Everything in this world is about to get better.", Brock Pierce, EOS.io shill video.
  154. You are a slave to the bankers
  155. The bankers print money and then you pay for it
  156. Bitcoin is The Peoples Money
  157. Bitcoin will set you free
  158. Bitcoin will set you free from the slavery of the banks and the government Ref: https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/cd2q94/bitcoin_shall_set_you_free/
  159. ~~Bitcoin is "striking fear into the hearts of bankers, precisely because Bitcoin eliminates the need for banks. ~~, Mark Yusko, billionaire investor and Founder of Morgan Creek Capital, https://www.bitcoinprice.com/predictions/
  160. "When transactions are verified on a Blockchain, banks become obsolete.", Mark Yusko, billionaire investor and Founder of Morgan Creek Capital, https://www.bitcoinprice.com/predictions/
  161. SnapshillBot quotes from delusional morons:
  162. "A bitcoin miner in every device and in every hand."
  163. "All the indicators are pointing to a huge year and bigger than anything we have seen before."
  164. "Bitcoin is communism and democracy working hand in hand."
  165. "Bitcoin is freedom, and we will soon be free."
  166. "Bitcoin isn't calculated risk, you're right. It's downright and painfully obvious that it will consume global finance."
  167. "Bitcoin most disruptive technology of last 500 years"
  168. "Bitcoin: So easy, your grandma can use it!"
  169. "Creating a 4th Branch of Government - Bitcoin"
  170. "Future generations will cry laughing reading all the negativity and insanity vomited by these permabears."
  171. "Future us will thank us."
  172. "Give Bitcoin two years"
  173. "HODLING is more like being a dutiful guardian of the most powerful economic force this planet has ever seen and getting to have a say about how that force is unleashed."
  174. "Cut out the middleman"
  175. "full control of your own assets"
  176. "reduction in wealth gap"
  177. "no inflation"
  178. "cannot print money out of thin air"
  179. "Why that matters? Because blockchain not only cheaper for them, it'll be cheaper for you and everyone as well."
  180. "If you are in this to get rich in Fiat then no. But if you are in this to protect your wealth once the current monetary system collapse then you are protected and you'll be the new rich."
  181. "Theres the 1% and then theres the 99%. You want to be with the rest thats fine. Being different and brave is far more rewarding. No matter your background or education."
  182. "NO COINERS will believe anything they are fed by fake news and paid media."
  183. "I know that feeling (like people looking at you as in seeing a celebrity and then asking things they don't believe until their impressed)."
  184. "I literally walk round everyday looking at other people wondering why they even bother to live if they don't have Bitcoin in their lives."
  185. "I think bitcoin may very well be the best form of money we’ve ever seen in the history of civilization."
  186. "I think Bitcoin will do for mankind what the sun did for life on earth."
  187. "I think the constant scams and illegal activities only show the viability of bitcoin."
  188. "I think we're sitting on the verge of exponential interest in the currency."
  189. "I'm not using hyperbole when I say Satoshi found the elusive key to World Peace."
  190. "If Jesus ever comes back you know he's gonna be using Bitcoin"
  191. "If this idea was implemented with The Blockchain™, it would be completely flawless! Flawless I tell you!"
  192. "If you're the minimum wage guy type, now is a great time to skip food and go full ramadan in order to buy bitcoin instead."
  193. "In a world slipping more and more into chaos and uncertainty, Bitcoin seems to me like the last solid rock defeating all the attacks."
  194. "In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any filthy statist's blessing, but because I am enlightened by own intelligence."
  195. "Is Bitcoin at this point, with all the potential that opens up, the most undervalued asset ever?"
  196. "It won't be long until bitcoin is an everyday household term."
  197. "It's the USD that is volatile. Bitcoin is the real neutral currency."
  198. "Just like the early Internet!"
  199. "Just like the Trojan Horse of old, Bitcoin will reveal its full power and nature"
  200. "Ladies if your man doesnt have some bitcoin then he cant handle anything and has no danger sex appeal. He isnt edgy"
  201. "let me be the first to say if you dont have bitcoin you are a pussy and cant really purchase anything worldwide. You have no global reach"
  202. "My conclusion is that I see this a a very good thing for bitcoin and for users"
  203. "No one would do such a thing; it'd be against their self interests."
  204. "Ooh lala, good job on bashing Bitcoin. How to disrespect a great innovation."
  205. "Realistically I think Bitcoin will replace the dollar in the next 10-15 years."
  206. "Seperation of money and state -> states become obsolete -> world peace."
  207. "Some striking similarities between Bitcoin and God"
  208. "THANK YOU. Better for this child to be strangled in its crib as a true weapon for crypto-anarchists than for it to be wielded by toxic individuals who distort the technology and surrender it to government and corporate powers."
  209. "The Blockchain is more encompassing than the internet and is the next phase in human evolution. To avoid its significance is complete ignorance."
  210. "The bull run should begin any day now."
  211. "The free market doesn't permit fraud and theft."
  212. "The free market will clear away the bad actors."
  213. "The only regulation we need is the blockchain."
  214. "We are not your slaves! We are free bodies who will swallow you and puke you out in disgust. Welcome to liberty land or as that genius called it: Bitcoin."
  215. "We do not need the bankers for Satoshi is our saviour!"
  216. "We have never seen something so perfect"
  217. "We must bring freedom and crypto to the masses, to the common man who does not know how to fight for himself."
  218. "We verified that against the blockchain."
  219. "we will see a Rennaisnce over the next few decades, all thanks to Bitcoin."
  220. "Well, since 2006, there has been a infinite% increase in price, so..."
  221. "What doesn't kill cryptocurrency makes it stronger."
  222. "When Bitcoin awake in normally people (real people) ... you will have this result : No War. No Tax. No QE. No Bank."
  223. "When I see news that the price of bitcoin has tanked (and thus the market, more or less) I actually, for-real, have the gut reaction "oh that’s cool, I’ll be buying cheap this week". I never knew I could be so rational."
  224. "Where is your sense of adventure? Bitcoin is the future. Set aside your fears and leave easier at the doorstep."
  225. "Yes Bitcoin will cause the greatest redistribution of wealth this planet has ever seen. FACT from the future."
  226. "You are the true Bitcoin pioneers and with your help we have imprinted Bitcoin in the Canadian conscience."
  227. "You ever try LSD? Perhaps it would help you break free from the box of state-formed thinking you have limited yourself..."
  228. "Your phone or refrigerator might be on the blockchain one day."
  229. The banks can print money whenever they way, out of thin air, so why can't crypto do the same ???
  230. Central Banks can print money whenever they way, out of thin air, without any consequences or accounting, so why can't crypto do the same ???
  231. It's impossible to hide illegal, unsavory material on the blockchain
  232. It's impossible to hide child pornography on the blockchain
  233. Fungible
  234. All Bitccoins are the same, 100% identical, one Bitcoin cannot be distinguished from any other Bitcoin.
  235. The price of Bitcoin can only go up.
  236. "Bubbles are mathematically impossible in this new paradigm. So are corrections and all else", John McAfee, 7 Dec 2017 @ 5:09 PM,https://mobile.twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/938938539282190337
  237. Scarcity
  238. The price of Bitcoin can only go up because of scarcity / 21 million coin limit. (Bitcoin is open source, anyone can create thir own copy, and there are more than 2,000+ Bitcoin copies / clones out there already).
  239. immune to government regulation
  240. "a world-changing technology"
  241. "a long-term store of value, like gold or silver"
  242. "To Complex to Be Audited."
  243. "Old Auditing rules do not apply to Blockchain."
  244. "Old Auditing rules do not apply to Cryptocurrency."
  245. "Why Bitcoin has Value: SCARCITY.", PlanB, Coin Shill, 22-Mar-2019, https://medium.com/@100trillionUSD/modeling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-91fa0fc03e25
  246. "Bitcoin is the first scarce digital object the world has ever seen, it is scarce like silver & gold, and can be sent over the internet, radio, satellite etc.", PlanB, Coin Shill, 22-Mar-2019, https://medium.com/@100trillionUSD/modeling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-91fa0fc03e25
  247. "Surely this digital scarcity has value.", PlanB, Coin Shill, 22-Mar-2019, https://medium.com/@100trillionUSD/modeling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-91fa0fc03e25
  248. Bitcoin now at $16,600.00. Those of you in the old school who believe this is a bubble simply have not understood the new mathematics of the Blockchain, or you did not cared enough to try. Bubbles are mathematically impossible in this new paradigm. So are corrections and all else", John McAfee, 7 Dec 2017 @ 5:09 PM,https://mobile.twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/938938539282190337
  249. "May 2018 will be the last time we ever see $bitcoin under $10,000", Charlie Shrem, bitcoin advocate and convicted felon, 11:31 AM 3-May-2018, https://twitter.com/CharlieShrem/status/992109375555858433
  250. "Last dip ever.", AngeloBTC, 14 Oct 2018, https://mobile.twitter.com/AngeloBTC/status/1051710824388030464/photo/1
  251. "Bitcoin May Have Just Experienced its Final Shakeout Before a Big Rally", Joseph Young, coin shill, October 15, 2018 22:30 CET, https://www.ccn.com/bitcoin-may-have-just-experienced-its-final-shakeout-before-a-big-rally/
  252. Bitcoin would be a buy if the price fell under $5,000., Mohamed El-Erian, chief economic advisor at Allianz, 29-Jun-2018, https://www.ccn.com/bitcoin-a-buy-below-5000-says-allianz-chief-economic-adviso
  253. 2013-11-27: ""What is a Citadel?" you might wonder. Well, by the time Bitcoin became worth 1,000 dollar [27-Nov-2013], services began to emerge for the "Bitcoin rich" to protect themselves as well as their wealth. It started with expensive safes, then began to include bodyguards, and today, "earlies" (our term for early adapters), as well as those rich whose wealth survived the "transition" live in isolated gated cities called Citadels, where most work is automated. Most such Citadels are born out of the fortification used to protect places where Bitcoin mining machines are located. The company known as ASICminer to you is known to me as a city where Mr. Friedman rules as a king.", u/Luka_Magnotta, aka time traveler from the future, 31-Aug-2013, https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1lfobc/i_am_a_timetraveler_from_the_future_here_to_beg/
  254. 2018-02: Bitcoin price to hit $27,000 by February 2018, Trace Mayer, host of the Bitcoin Knowledge Podcast, and self-proclaimed entrepreneur, investor, journalist, monetary scientist and ardent defender, Link #1: https://mobile.twitter.com/TraceMayestatus/917260836070154240/photo/1, Link #2: https://www.bitcoinprice.com/predictions/
  255. 2018-06: "Bitcoin will surpass $15,000 in June [2018]." John McAfee, May 25, 2018, https://bitcoinist.com/john-mcafee-says-bitcoin-will-surpass-15000-in-june/
  256. 2018-07: Bitcoin will be $28,000 by mid-2018, Ronnie Moas, Wall Street analyst and founder of Standpoint Research, http://helpfordream.com/2018/12/23/5-bitcoin-price-predictions-gone-wrong/.
  257. 2018-12: Bitcoin to reach a price of between 40,000 and 110,000 US dollars by the end of the 2017 bull run ... sometime before 2019, Masterluc, 26-May-2017, an anonymous "legendary" Bitcoin trader, Link #1: https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/YRZvdurN-The-target-of-current-bubble-lays-between-40k-and-110k/, Link #2: https://www.bitcoinprice.com/predictions/
  258. 2018-12: "There is no reason why we couldn’t see Bitcoin pushing $50,000 by December [2018]", Thomas Glucksmann, head of APAC business at Gatecoin, Link #1: https://www.bitcoinprice.com/predictions/
  259. 2018-12: Listen up you giggling cunts... who wants some?...you? you want some?...huh? Do ya? Here's the deal you fuckin Nerds - Butts are gonna be at 30 grand or more by next Christmas [2018] - If they aren't I will publicly administer an electronic dick sucking to every shill on this site and disappear forever - Until then, no more bans or shadow bans - Do we have a deal? If Butts are over 50 grand me and Lammy get to be mods. Deal? Your ole pal - "Skully" u/10GDeathBoner, 3-Feb-2018 https://www.reddit.com/Buttcoin/comments/7ut1ut/listen_up_you_giggling_cunts_who_wants_someyou/
  260. 2018-12: 1 bitcoin = 1 Lambo. Remind me on Christmas eve [2018] u/10GDeathBoner, 3-Feb-2018, https://www.reddit.com/Buttcoin/comments/7ut1ut/listen_up_you_giggling_cunts_who_wants_someyou/dtn2pna
  261. 2018-12: Been in BTC since 2014 and experienced many "deaths" of BTC... this too shall pass... $10k end of the year. [2018] u/Exxe2502, 30-Jun-2018 https://reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/8uur27/_/e1ioi5b/?context=1
  262. 2018-12: "Yale Alumni prediction - 30 Grand by Christmas [2018] - and you my friend... you will be the one eating Mcafee's dick in 2020. :) -:", u/SirNakamoto, 15-Jun-2018, https://www.reddit.com/Buttcoin/comments/8r0tyh/fdic_agrees_to_cover_bitcoin_losses_in_event_of/e0nzxq7
  263. 2018-12: "Impossible For Bitcoin Not to Hit $10,000 by This Year (2018)", Mike Novogratz, a former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. partner, ex-hedge fund manager of the Fortress Investment Group and a longstanding advocate of cryptocurrency, 22-Sep-2018, https://www.newsbtc.com/2018/09/22/billionaire-novogratz-impossible-for-bitcoin-not-to-hit-10000-by-this-yea
  264. 2018-12: "[Bitcoin] between $13,800 and $14,800 [by end of 2018]", Fundstrat's Tom Lee, 13-Dec-2018, https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/13/wall-streets-bitcoin-bull-tom-lee-we-are-tired-of-people-asking-us-about-target-prices.html
  265. 2018-12: "Bitcoin is going to be $15k-$20k by the end of the year (2018)", Didi Taihuttu, 1-Nov-2018, https://www.wsj.com/video/series/moving-upstream/the-bitcoin-gamble/85E3A4A7-C777-4827-9A3F-B387F2AB7654
  266. 2018-12: 2018 bitcoin price prediction reduced to $15,000 [was $25,000], Fundstrat's Tom Lee, 16-Nov-2018, https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/16/wall-streets-crypto-bull-tom-lee-slashes-year-end-forecast-by-10000.html
  267. 2018-12: "I want to be clear, bitcoin is going to $25,000 by year end (2018)", Fundstrat's Tom Lee, 5-Jul-2018, https://www.cnbc.com/video/2018/07/05/tom-lee-i-want-to-be-clear-bitcoin-is-going-to-25000-by-year-end.html
  268. 2018-12: "Bitcoin could be at $40,000 by the end of 2018, it really easily could", Mike Novogratz, a former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. partner, ex-hedge fund manager of the Fortress Investment Group and a longstanding advocate of cryptocurrency, 21-Sep-2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lC1anDg2KU
  269. 2018-12: "Bitcoin will be priced around $50,000 by the end of the year (2018)", Bitcoin bull Arthur Hayes, co-founder and CEO of BitMEX, 29-Jun-2018, https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/29/bitcoin-will-reach-50000-in-2018-says-founder-of-bitcoin-exchange.html
  270. 2018-12: "Bitcoin could definitely see $50,000 in 2018", Jeet Singh, cryptocurrency portfolio manager, speaking in January 2018 at the World Economic Forum in Davos, https://www.dcforecasts.com/new-prediction-says-bitcoin-hit-50000-2018/
  271. 2018-12: "Bitcoin will hit $100,000 this year (2018)", Kay Van-Petersen, an analyst at Saxo Bank, 17-Jan-2018, https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/16/bitcoin-headed-to-100000-in-2018-analyst-who-forecast-2017-price-move.html
  272. 2018-12: "Bitcoin price to surpass the $100,000 mark by the end of 2018", Tone Vays, 21-Sep-2017, https://www.ccn.com/prominent-bitcoin-trader-price-is-heading-towards-100000-in-2018/
  273. 2018-12: "Bitcoin’s Price Will Surpass the $100,000 Mark by the End of 2018", Anonymous ("author" obviously too embarrassed to put his name to such bullshit "articles"), Oct-2018, https://investingpr.com/bitcoin-price-predictions-for-2018/
  274. 2018-12: "Our [2018] year-end bitcoin target is $7700.", James Stefurak, Founder at Monarch Research. See article: "Experts Forecast Bitcoin will rise by 2019", REF: https://hackernoon.com/experts-forecast-bitcoin-will-rise-by-2019-f4af8807036b?gi=dfea3c30d6d8
  275. 2018-12: "... we’ll see the price rally reaching its all-time of high of around $20K before the end of 2018", Khaled Khorshid, Co-Founder at Treon ICO. See article: "Experts Forecast Bitcoin will rise by 2019", REF: https://hackernoon.com/experts-forecast-bitcoin-will-rise-by-2019-f4af8807036b?gi=dfea3c30d6d8
  276. 2018-12: Bitcoin will end 2018 at the price point of $50,000, Ran Neuner, host of CNBC’s show Cryptotrader and the 28th most influential Blockchain insider according to Richtopia,https://www.bitcoinprice.com/predictions/
  277. Plus a whole host of wrong 2019 predictions (could not be included here because of post character limit issues), so please see my earlier post from 4 days ago: Ummm, remember those "Expert" Bitcoin Price Predictions for 2019 ..... ohhhhh dear ....., https://www.reddit.com/Buttcoin/comments/eiqhq3/ummm_remember_those_expert_bitcoin_price/
.
But it's NOT all bad news, some claims and promises are yet to be determined:
  1. Never going below $3K again
  2. Never going below $2K again
  3. Never going below $1K again
  4. Any others ? Please let me know.
submitted by Crypto_To_The_Core to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Crossout and the BitCoin Miner.

So a few weeks ago I found Crossout free to play and decided it looked fun. I downloaded it and played for a good couple days and then forgot about it. Fast forward to yesterday and I notice crossout is trying to launch itself...hmm. I run a malware test and see i have a Trojan.BitCoinMiner, no wonder my CPU and GPU are acting wonky. I delete all files of crossout and guess what, that solved the issue. So thanks but no thanks to anymore russian games.
submitted by Jessy_James to Crossout [link] [comments]

Sneaky Miners

Hi,
I built a PC a few months ago. My motherboard has a tiny display on it which displays CPU temperature on it. Last month I saw that the temps were high like I was playing a game but it was actually on idle. When I opened Task Manager the temps went down immediately and eventually figured out this must be a miner. I downloaded malwarebytes and instantly it caught a bitcoin miner (according to quarantine it was either of these 3: RiskWare.BitcoinMiner.COMSPECRST or Trojan.BitCoinMiner.BatBitRst or Trojan.BitCoinStealer.BatBitRst). After which the problem went away and temps were predictable and stable.
Now again the temps are high when left alone for a few minutes and immediately go down when I touch the mouse. Little do they know I have a hardwired temperature monitor which is effectively an activity level meter lol. Malwarebytes(updated) says there's nothing but I am still suspicious. I have followed the suggested reading Official Malware Removal Guide alone with HitmanPro. HitmanPro got about a hundred tracking cookies but that's it.
Has anyone had problems like these before? Thank you.
submitted by B999B to techsupport [link] [comments]

Preventing Trojan spreading through network

Hey guys,
I currently have a Trojan spreading through my network. Started from an email, picked up and removed by Webroot, but somehow still jumping between hosts. What’s the best method to combat this?
The original infected host was removed from the network and quarantined, apparently not in time. Webroot has detected and removed the same files on one of my DCs and a file server.
The Trojan appears to be a bitcoin miner.
Trojan appears to be Emotet, as indicated by webroot
MD5 1: 470B4F5BC84DB74AB1935186A3B5219F MD5 2: 66EA09330BEE7239FCB11A911F8E8EA3
Action: All machines remotely shutdown (middle of the night here) and will be started individually in the morning. Remediation steps as recommended by Webroot will be followed before each machine is reconnected connected to the network.
submitted by Ic0nic to sysadmin [link] [comments]

Help, I found a trojan bitcoin miner! Details inside

Hey guys, the other day I ran malwarebytes and it picked up a trojan bitcoin miner. It consisted of 4 threats, 3 registry which got deleted/quarantined, but 1 "file" that it said removal failed.
Picture of the scan results.
After the quarantine, when i scan with malwarebytes and windows defender it doesn't pick up anything and states that there is no threats? Am i safe?

Malwarebytes advanced results text file.
Malwarebytes

-Log Details-
Scan Date: 9/6/19
Scan Time: 4:03 PM
Log File: 87833c4a-d0b7-11e9-ae35-1c1b0de454d3.json

-Software Information-
Version: 3.8.3.2965
Components Version: 1.0.613
Update Package Version: 1.0.12355
License: Free

-System Information-
OS: Windows 10 (Build 18362.295)
CPU: x64
File System: NTFS
User: DESKTOP-2VBSDBM\Ben

-Scan Summary-
Scan Type: Threat Scan
Scan Initiated By: Manual
Result: Completed
Objects Scanned: 325218
Threats Detected: 4
Threats Quarantined: 3
Time Elapsed: 0 min, 58 sec

-Scan Options-
Memory: Enabled
Startup: Enabled
Filesystem: Enabled
Archives: Enabled
Rootkits: Disabled
Heuristics: Enabled
PUP: Detect
PUM: Detect

-Scan Details-
Process: 0
(No malicious items detected)

Module: 0
(No malicious items detected)

Registry Key: 2
Trojan.BitCoinMiner.E, HKLM\SOFTWARE\MICROSOFT\WINDOWS NT\CURRENTVERSION\IMAGE FILE EXECUTION OPTIONS\, Delete-on-Reboot, [3775], [723556],1.0.12355
Trojan.BitCoinMiner.E, HKLM\SOFTWARE\WOW6432NODE\MICROSOFT\WINDOWS NT\CURRENTVERSION\IMAGE FILE EXECUTION OPTIONS\, Delete-on-Reboot, [3775], [723556],1.0.12355

Registry Value: 1
Trojan.BitCoinMiner.E, HKLM\SYSTEM\CURRENTCONTROLSET\SERVICES\WMS\PARAMETERS|APPPARAMETERS, Quarantined, [3775], [723556],1.0.12355

Registry Data: 0
(No malicious items detected)

Data Stream: 0
(No malicious items detected)

Folder: 0
(No malicious items detected)

File: 1
Trojan.BitCoinMiner.E, , Removal Failed, [3775], [723556],1.0.12355

Physical Sector: 0
(No malicious items detected)

WMI: 0
(No malicious items detected)

(end)
submitted by Bowyi to techsupport [link] [comments]

I propose to start a 'class action' lawsuit against all the companies and individuals involved with S2X/NYA in any capacity. Hear me out:

Edit- For all the people saying that we shouldn't use the law against S2X. Thanks exab for this post Satoshi's verdict: Use laws to protect yourself and Bitcoin!
Satoshi's source code (comment) in every file he created:
// Copyright (c) 2009-2010 Satoshi Nakamoto
I trust it ends the narrative that we should not use laws to protect ourselves or Bitcoin.
We don't need to wait anymore, certainly not until they do a real damage to the Bitcoin structure or decentralization, we have now enough documented evidence of malicious intent and fraud. We will give an ultimatum and a one week grace period to give a chance to drop out before a company/individual is listed as a defendant in the lawsuit. It is time we organize properly, like they did, and defend against this ridiculous and malicious take-over attempt.
This is an actual Trojan Horse and we are welcoming in with our complacency by saying: "Bitcoin has survived all past attacks, honeybadger don't care", don't forget that 'honeybadger' is all of us, united. This attack is not like the others, this one has the backing of the most powerful companies in the space plus most of the miners.
They want to succeed were the banker's special forces led by Blythe Masters failed to infiltrate and highjack Bitcoin since she was well known by many people and could not run incognito.
Now they are doing it from the inside, including the purchase of weak-morals developers like Garzik, Hearn and Andersen, as well as entrepreneurs like Ver, Voorhees, Jihan and Pair (maybe even Armstrong).
Stop underestimating these people, they are very smart and have very deep pockets (hundreds of billions of printed to infinity fiat deep).
Here is a list of the people who should not be trusted at all and many of them will probably be listed as defendants: Gavin Andersen, Jeff Garzik, Mike Hearn, Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, John Mcaffe, Craig Wright, Barry Silbert, Larry Summers, Blythe Masters, Stephen Pair, Erik Voorhees, Vinny Lingham and Brian Armstrong.
By now, they should be considered as enemies of Bitcoin and decentralization. Their credibility, reputation, and businesses will be run into the ground by no other than their own greed, selfishness and seek for more power and control, unless they come out publicly against S2X/NYA.
We, the people/users/nodes, and the hardworking and honest Core developers are the honeybadger: WE ARE BITCOIN. This is not FUD, Bitcoin will survive, there is no way to put it back into Pandora's Box, but we need to be conscious that we can easily avoid any damage if we remain united. Let's swarm the S2X/NYA beast and show it the real power of Decentralization. Exciting times we are living... this will be fun!
Edit- Great post on btc against S2X... This attack is so blatant that even they are seeing through it now. OP is a well-known poster there (strongly anti-bitcoin and strong bcash supporter), the post is surprisingly being upvoted and even gilded:
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/743qb8/is_segwit2x_the_real_banker_takeove
DCG (digital Currency Group) is the company spearheading the Segwit2x movement. The CEO of DCG is Barry Silbert, a former investment banker, and Mastercard is an investor in DCG.
Let's have a look at the people that control DCG:
http://dcg.co/who-we-are/
Three board members are listed, and one Board "Advisor." Three of the four Members/advisors are particularly interesting:
Glenn Hutchins: Former Advisor to President Clinton. Hutchins sits on the board of The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, where he was reelected as a Class B director for a three-year term ending December 31, 2018. Yes, you read that correctly, currently sitting board member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Barry Silbert: CEO of DCG (Digital Currency Group, funded by Mastercard) who is also an Ex investment Banker at (Houlihan Lokey)
And then there's the "Board Advisor,"
Lawrence H. Summers:
"Chief Economist at the World Bank from 1991 to 1993. In 1993, Summers was appointed Undersecretary for International Affairs of the United States Department of the Treasury under the Clinton Administration. In 1995, he was promoted to Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under his long-time political mentor Robert Rubin. In 1999, he succeeded Rubin as Secretary of the Treasury. While working for the Clinton administration Summers played a leading role in the American response to the 1994 economic crisis in Mexico, the 1997 Asian financial crisis, and the Russian financial crisis. He was also influential in the American advised privatization of the economies of the post-Soviet states, and in the deregulation of the U.S financial system, including the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Summers
Seriously....The segwit2x deal is being pushed through by a Company funded by Mastercard, Whose CEO Barry Silbert is ex investment banker, and the Board Members of DCG include a currently sitting member of the Board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and the Ex chief Economist for the World Bank and a guy responsible for the removal of Glass Steagall.
It's fair to call these guys "bankers" right?
So that's the Board of DCG. They're spearheading the Segwit2x movement. As far as who is responsible for development, my research led me to "Bitgo". I checked the "Money Map" https://i.redd.it/15auzwkq3hiz.png And sure enough, DCG is an investor in Bitgo.
(BTW, make sure you take a good look take a look at the money map and bookmark it for reference later, ^ it is really helpful.)
"Currently, development is being overseen by bitcoin security startup BitGo, with help from other developers including Bloq co-founder Jeff Garzik."
https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-segwit2x-scaling-proposal-miners-offer-optimistic-outlook/
So Bitgo is overseeing development of Segwit2x with Jeff Garzick. Bitgo has a product/service that basically facilitates transactions and supposedly prevents double spending. It seems like their main selling point is that they insert themselves as middlemen to ensure Double spending doesn't happen, and if it does, they take the hit, of course for a fee, so it sounds sort of like the buyer protection paypal gives you:
"Using the above multi-signature security model, BitGo can guarantee that transactions cannot be double spent. When BitGo co-signs a BitGo Instant transaction, BitGo takes on a financial obligation and issues a cryptographically signed guarantee on the transaction. The recipient of a BitGo Instant transaction can rest assured that in any event where the transaction is not ultimately confirmed in the blockchain, and loses money as a result, they can file a claim and will be compensated in full by BitGo."
Source: https://www.bitgo.com/solutions
So basically, they insert themselves as middlemen, guarantee your transaction gets confirmed and take a fee. What do we need this for though when we have a working blockchain that confirms payments in the next block already? 0-conf is safe when blocks aren't full and one confirmation should really be good enough for almost anyone on the most POW chain. So if we have a fully functional blockchain, there isn't much of a need for this service is there? They're selling protection against "The transaction not being confirmed in the Blockchain" but why wouldn't the transaction be getting confirmed in the blockchain? Every transaction should be getting confirmed, that's how Bitcoin works. So in what situation does "protection against the transaction not being confirmed in the blockchain" have value?
Is it possible that the Central Bankers that control development of Segwit2x plan to restrict block size to benefit their business model just like our good friends over at Blockstream attempted to do, although unsuccessfully as they were not able to deliver a working L2 in time?
It looks like Blockstream was an attempted corporate takeover to restrict block size and push people onto their L2, essentially stealing business away from miners. They seem to have failed, but now it almost seems like the Segwit2x might be a culmination of a very similar problem.
So segwit2x takes power away from core, but then gives it to guess who...Mastercard and central bankers.
So, to recap:
Did we just spend so much time fighting and bickering with core that we totally missed the REAL takeover of Bitcoin, happening right before our eyes, by the likes of currently serving Federal Reserve Bank of New York Board Members?
submitted by readish to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Warning: TPB currently has a lot of unsafe, high-seeded files

Yes, I know the torrent website has unsafe files. But this is different. Searching "windows 10 activatoactivation" returns a bunch of extremely high seeded torrents from the users "mhemed" and "alexhawkemayer." These files are viruses that install a bunch of adware, trojans, spyware, bitcoin miners, and the works. I downloaded one today and used misguided judgement even though I thought they were suspicious - don't make that mistake! They not only have their viruses disguised as windows 10 activators, but for many other files if you take a look at what other files they have uploaded.
Noticing suspicious files:
The torrents from these users were all uploaded today in mass, try to pass off as safe by being high seeded, have many different torrents that claim to be various versions of the activator, and can differ in file sizes. Usually their descriptions are the copy/pasted for the torrents but might have some variations. Even though a lot of people here may know there isn't a keygen service for windows 10, they uploaded a lot today across the whole website. Their viruses are very hard to remove and might contain rootkits (I am currently trying to fix my computer and am unsure if there is a rootkit, will update later to let you know). Be careful!
Edit: No rootkit. But it downloads a program that has edited the registry files to silence its uninstall feature and you need to use Revo Uninstaller. annoying
submitted by RuggedCalculator to TPB [link] [comments]

Apparently my pc has a miner (brocoiner)

So for the past 5 days, Windows Defender has been finding this and sending it to quarantine at least once a day.
It's called Trojan:HTML/Brocoiner!rfn, and here's what microsoft has to say about it.
My problem is that it keeps coming back! Here's everything that happened:
First day: Defender found it on Opera's cache folder.
Second day: on Steam's cache folder twice.
Third day: twice in Opera's cache again. Up until this day I thought it was fine, since Microsoft said the trojan doesn't install anything and Defender was stopping it. But since it kept happening I decided to do something about it.
I followed this thread's Malware Remediation Steps, but nothing was found. I also stopped using Opera and started using Firefox.
Fourth day: Miner found twice on Steam cache.
Fifth day: Miner found one (so far) on Firefox's Cache.
Up until the third day I was checking the browser history at the time of each detection, so I could find any pattern (like, access a certain website and a couple of minutes later defender detects the miner) but there were none, except for big, well established websites like reddit or youtube.
Maybe it only mines when the pc is idle? Like with this user? He says RKill solved the issue for him, but it didn't do anything for me...
I'm not sure what to do, can anybody help?
submitted by nicoseger to techsupport [link] [comments]

Windows Defender keeps finding and removing a miner, Malwarebytes can't detect it. Please help.

So for the past 6 days, Windows Defender has been finding this and sending it to quarantine at least once a day.
It's called Trojan:HTML/Brocoiner!rfn, and here's what microsoft has to say about it.
My problem is that it keeps coming back! Here's everything that happened:
First day: Defender found it on Opera's cache folder.
Second day: on Steam's cache folder twice.
Third day: twice in Opera's cache again. Up until this day I thought it was fine, since Microsoft said the trojan doesn't install anything and Defender was stopping it. But since it kept happening I decided to do something about it.
I followed this thread's Malware Remediation Steps, but nothing was found. I also stopped using Opera and started using Firefox.
Fourth day: Miner found twice on Steam cache.
Fifth day: Miner found once on Firefox's Cache.
Sixth day: Miner found once (so far) on Steam Cache.
Up until the third day I was checking the browser history at the time of each detection, so I could find any pattern (like, access a certain website and a couple of minutes later defender detects the miner) but there were none, except for big, well established websites like reddit or youtube.
I also didn't download anything shady before this started happening.
I suspect it only mines when the pc is idle, like with this user, but he says RKill solved the issue for him, but it didn't do anything for me...
I've been running scans with Defender and Malwarebytes since the first day, but they never found anything, aside from the stuff Defender sent straight to quarantine, that it found by itself and not through my scans.
I use Ublock Origin on Opera and on Firefox. I don't use Steam's browser at all.
I'm not sure what to do, can anybody help?
submitted by nicoseger to techsupport [link] [comments]

At my wit's end with virus removal

So I have at least one virus on my computer. The one I know of is some sort of bitcoin miner, I know this because my gpu usage is constantly at 100% and the fan goes crazy as well as hitmanpro categorizing files with names like bitcoinminer.
I have managed to remove every suspicious file I could find and ran antivirus and antimalware until they couldn't detect anything else but the virus keeps coming back.
The main places I think the virus is focused around are the ~C:\Users\Tony\AppData\Local\Temp~ and ~C:\Users\Tony\AppData\Local\WinSXS~ folders.
I have booted into safe mode, deleted everything in the temp folder, and gave myself permission to delete the WinSXS folder. Every time I boot normally the WinSXS folder just comes back. I know something is up with this folder because rkill always terminates it as well as the other antimalware not liking it.
When I normally boot there is a folder in the temp folder with a name that's just random strings of numbers and letters that I can't delete. It says it's open in another program. I searched the folder name is the resource monitor cpu tab and it was associated with svchost.exe and a couple other things. I'm wondering is the virus is somehow tied to svchost.
So here's a rundown of the steps I've been taking (repeatedly) to try to take care of this.
  1. Boot into safe mode (by switching my psu off then on to get to the boot menu)
  2. Show hidden files and folders
  3. Delete everything from the local\temp folder
  4. Delete unknown files from C:\\ProgramData and C:\Users\User\AppData\Roaming
  5. Remove any weird keys from HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
  6. Empty Recycle Bin
  7. Run rkill
  8. Run adwcleaner
  9. Run malwarebytes (with rootkit checker)
  10. Run Hitmanpro
  11. Run combofix
  12. Run the trojan remover from https://www.simplysup.com/
  13. Reboot computer normally
  14. Run malwarebytes, watch as it finds the same walwares as a million times before
  15. Listen to my fan speed fluctuate like crazy
  16. Run rkill, it kills a WinSXS process, which does nothing
  17. Cry uncontrollably
So uh, what the hell should I do?
OS: Windows 7
submitted by Froggyfrogger to techsupport [link] [comments]

Initially, I liked SegWit. But then I learned SegWit-as-a-SOFT-fork is dangerous (making transactions "anyone-can-spend"??) & centrally planned (1.7MB blocksize??). Instead, Bitcoin Unlimited is simple & safe, with MARKET-BASED BLOCKSIZE. This is why more & more people have decided to REJECT SEGWIT.

Initially, I liked SegWit. But then I learned SegWit-as-a-SOFT-fork is dangerous (making transactions "anyone-can-spend"??) & centrally planned (1.7MB blocksize??). Instead, Bitcoin Unlimited is simple & safe, with MARKET-BASED BLOCKSIZE. This is why more & more people have decided to REJECT SEGWIT.
Summary
Like many people, I initially loved SegWit - until I found out more about it.
I'm proud of my open-mindedness and my initial - albeit short-lived - support of SegWit - because this shows that I judge software on its merits, instead of being some kind of knee-jerk "hater".
SegWit's idea of "refactoring" the code to separate out the validation stuff made sense, and the phrase "soft fork" sounded cool - for a while.
But then we all learned that:
And we also got much better solutions: such as market-based blocksize with Bitcoin Unlimited - way better than SegWit's arbitrary, random centrally-planned, too-little-too-late 1.7MB "max blocksize".
This is why more and more people are rejecting SegWit - and instead installing Bitcoin Unlimited.
In my case, as I gradually learned about the disastrous consequences which SegWit-as-a-soft-fork-hack would have, my intial single OP in December 2015 expressing outspoken support for SegWit soon turned to an avalanche of outspoken opposition to SegWit.
Details
Core / Blockstream lost my support on SegWit - and it's all their fault.
How did Core / Blockstream turn me from an outspoken SegWit supporter to an outspoken SegWit opponent?
It was simple: They made the totally unnecessary (and dangerous) decision to program SegWit as a messy and dangerous soft-fork which would:
  • create a massive new threat vector by making all transactions "anyone-can-spend";
  • force yet-another random / arbitrary / centrally planned "max blocksize" on everyone (previously 1 MB, now 1.7MB - still pathetically small and hard-coded!).
Meanwhile, new, independent dev teams which are smaller and much better than the corrupt, fiat-financed Core / Blockstream are offering simpler and safer solutions which are much better than SegWit:
  • For blocksize governance, we now have market-based blocksize based on emergent consensus, provided by Bitcoin Unlimited.
  • For malleability and quadratic hashing time (plus a future-proof, tag-based language similar to JSON or XML supporting much cleaner upgrades long-term), we now have Flexible Transactions (FlexTrans).
This is why We Reject SegWit because "SegWit is the most radical and irresponsible protocol upgrade Bitcoin has faced in its history".
My rapid evolution on SegWit - as I discovered its dangers (and as we got much better alternatives, like Bitcoin Unlimited + FlexTrans):
Initially, I was one of the most outspoken supporters of SegWit - raving about it in the following OP which I posted (on Monday, December 7, 2015) immediately after seeing a presentation about it on YouTube by Pieter Wuille at one of the early Bitcoin scaling stalling conferences:
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3vt1ov/pieter_wuilles_segregated_witness_and_fraud/
Pieter Wuille's Segregated Witness and Fraud Proofs (via Soft-Fork!) is a major improvement for scaling and security (and upgrading!)
I am very proud of that initial pro-SegWit post of mine - because it shows that I have always been totally unbiased and impartial and objective about the ideas behind SegWit - and I have always evaluated it purely on its merits (and demerits).
So, I was one of the first people to recognize the positive impact which the ideas behind SegWit could have had (ie, "segregating" the signature information from the sender / receiver / amount information) - if SegWit had been implemented by an honest dev team that supports the interests of the Bitcoin community.
However, we've learned a lot since December 2015. Now we know that Core / Blockstream is actively working against the interests of the Bitcoin community, by:
  • trying to force their political and economic viewpoints onto everyone else by "hard-coding" / "bundling" some random / arbitrary / centrally-planned 1.7MB "max blocksize" (?!?) into our code;
  • trying to take away our right to vote via a clean and safe "hard fork";
  • trying to cripple our code with dangerous "technical debt" - eg their radical and irresponsible proposal to make all transactions "anyone-can-spend".
This is the mess of SegWit - which we all learned about over the past year.
So, Core / Blockstream blew it - bigtime - losing my support for SegWit, and the support of many others in the community.
We might have continued to support SegWit if Core / Blockstream had not implemented it as a dangerous and dirty soft fork.
But Core / Blockstream lost our support - by attempting to implement SegWit as a dangerous, anti-democratic soft fork.
The lesson here for Core/Blockstream is clear:
Bitcoin users are not stupid.
Many of us are programmers ourselves, and we know the difference between a simple & safe hard fork and a messy & dangerous soft fork.
And we also don't like it when Core / Blockstream attempts to take away our right to vote.
And finally, we don't like it when Core / Blockstream attempts to steal functionality away from nodes while using misleading terminology - as u/chinawat has repeatedly been pointing out lately.
We know a messy, dangerous, centrally planned hack when we see it - and SegWit is a messy, dangerous, centrally planned hack.
If Core/Blockstream attempts to foce messy and dangerous code like SegWit-as-a-soft-fork on the community, we can and should and we will reject SegWit - to protect our billions of dollars of investment in Bitcoin (which could turn into trillions of dollars someday - if we continue to protect our code from poison pills and trojans like SegWit).
Too bad you lost my support (and the support of many, many other Bitcoin users), Core / Blockstream! But it's your own fault for releasing shitty code.
Below are some earlier comments from me showing how I quickly turned from one of the most outspoken supporters of Segwit (in that single OP I wrote the day I saw Pieter Wuille's presentation on YouTube) - into one of most outspoken opponents of SegWit:
I also think Pieter Wuille is a great programmer and I was one of the first people to support SegWit after it was announced at a congress a few months ago.
But then Blockstream went and distorted SegWit to fit it into their corporate interests (maintaining their position as the dominant centralized dev team - which requires avoiding hard-forks). And Blockstream's corporate interests don't always align with Bitcoin's interests.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/57zbkp/if_blockstream_were_truly_conservative_and_wanted/
As noted in the link in the section title above, I myself was an outspoken supporter championing SegWit on the day when I first the YouTube of Pieter Wuille explaining it at one of the early "Scaling Bitcoin" conferences.
Then I found out that doing it as a soft fork would add unnecessary "spaghetti code" - and I became one of the most outspoken opponents of SegWit.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ejmin/coreblockstream_is_living_in_a_fantasy_world_in/
Pieter Wuille's SegWit would be a great refactoring and clean-up of the code (if we don't let Luke-Jr poison it by packaging it as a soft-fork)
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4kxtq4/i_think_the_berlin_wall_principle_will_end_up/
Probably the only prominent Core/Blockstream dev who does understand this kind of stuff like the Robustness Principle or its equivalent reformulation in terms of covariant and contravariant types is someone like Pieter Wuille – since he’s a guy who’s done a lot of work in functional languages like Haskell – instead of being a myopic C-tard like most of the rest of the Core/Blockstream devs. He’s a smart guy, and his work on SegWit is really important stuff (but too bad that, yet again, it’s being misdelivered as a “soft-fork,” again due to the cluelessness of someone like Luke-Jr, whose grasp of syntax and semantics – not to mention society – is so glaringly lacking that he should have been recognized for the toxic influence that he is and shunned long ago).
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4k6tke/the_tragedy_of/
The damage which would be caused by SegWit (at the financial, software, and governance level) would be massive:
  • Millions of lines of other Bitcoin code would have to be rewritten (in wallets, on exchanges, at businesses) in order to become compatible with all the messy non-standard kludges and workarounds which Blockstream was forced into adding to the code (the famous "technical debt") in order to get SegWit to work as a soft fork.
  • SegWit was originally sold to us as a "code clean-up". Heck, even I intially fell for it when I saw an early presentation by Pieter Wuille on YouTube from one of Blockstream's many, censored Bitcoin scaling stalling conferences)
  • But as we all later all discovered, SegWit is just a messy hack.
  • Probably the most dangerous aspect of SegWit is that it changes all transactions into "ANYONE-CAN-SPEND" without SegWit - all because of the messy workarounds necessary to do SegWit as a soft-fork. The kludges and workarounds involving SegWit's "ANYONE-CAN-SPEND" semantics would only work as long as SegWit is still installed.
  • This means that it would be impossible to roll-back SegWit - because all SegWit transactions that get recorded on the blockchain would now be interpreted as "ANYONE-CAN-SPEND" - so, SegWit's dangerous and messy "kludges and workarounds and hacks" would have to be made permanent - otherwise, anyone could spend those "ANYONE-CAN-SPEND" SegWit coins!
Segwit cannot be rolled back because to non-upgraded clients, ANYONE can spend Segwit txn outputs. If Segwit is rolled back, all funds locked in Segwit outputs can be taken by anyone. As more funds gets locked up in segwit outputs, incentive for miners to collude to claim them grows.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ge1ks/segwit_cannot_be_rolled_back_because_to/
https://np.reddit.com/btc/search?q=segwit+anyone+can+spend&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5r9cu7/the_real_question_is_how_fast_do_bugs_get_fixed/
Why are more and more people (including me!) rejecting SegWit?
(1) SegWit is the most radical and irresponsible change ever proposed for Bitcoin:
"SegWit encumbers Bitcoin with irreversible technical debt. Miners should reject SWSF. SW is the most radical and irresponsible protocol upgrade Bitcoin has faced in its history. The scale of the code changes are far from trivial - nearly every part of the codebase is affected by SW" Jaqen Hash’ghar
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rdl1j/segwit_encumbers_bitcoin_with_irreversible/
3 excellent articles highlighting some of the major problems with SegWit: (1) "Core Segwit – Thinking of upgrading? You need to read this!" by WallStreetTechnologist (2) "SegWit is not great" by Deadalnix (3) "How Software Gets Bloated: From Telephony to Bitcoin" by Emin Gün Sirer
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rfh4i/3_excellent_articles_highlighting_some_of_the/
"The scaling argument was ridiculous at first, and now it's sinister. Core wants to take transactions away from miners to give to their banking buddies - crippling Bitcoin to only be able to do settlements. They are destroying Satoshi's vision. SegwitCoin is Bankcoin, not Bitcoin" ~ u/ZeroFucksG1v3n
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rbug3/the_scaling_argument_was_ridiculous_at_first_and/
u/Uptrenda on SegWit: "Core is forcing every Bitcoin startup to abandon their entire code base for a Rube Goldberg machine making their products so slow, inconvenient, and confusing that even if they do manage to 'migrate' to this cluster-fuck of technical debt it will kill their businesses anyway."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5e86fg/uuptrenda_on_segwit_core_is_forcing_every_bitcoin/
"SegWit [would] bring unnecessary complexity to the bitcoin blockchain. Huge changes it introduces into the client are a veritable minefield of issues, [with] huge changes needed for all wallets, exchanges, remittance, and virtually all bitcoin software that will use it." ~ u/Bitcoinopoly
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5jqgpz/segwit_would_bring_unnecessary_complexity_to_the/
Just because something is a "soft fork" doesn't mean it isn't a massive change. SegWit is an alt-coin. It would introduce radical and unpredictable changes in Bitcoin's economic parameters and incentives. Just read this thread. Nobody has any idea how the mainnet will react to SegWit in real life.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5fc1ii/just_because_something_is_a_soft_fork_doesnt_mean/
Core/Blockstream & their supporters keep saying that "SegWit has been tested". But this is false. Other software used by miners, exchanges, Bitcoin hardware manufacturers, non-Core software developers/companies, and Bitcoin enthusiasts would all need to be rewritten, to be compatible with SegWit
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5dlyz7/coreblockstream_their_supporters_keep_saying_that/
SegWit-as-a-softfork is a hack. Flexible-Transactions-as-a-hard-fork is simpler, safer and more future-proof than SegWit-as-a-soft-fork - trivially solving malleability, while adding a "tag-based" binary data format (like JSON, XML or HTML) for easier, safer future upgrades with less technical debt
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5a7husegwitasasoftfork_is_a_hack/
(2) Better solutions than SegWit are now available (Bitcoin Unlimited, FlexTrans):
ViABTC: "Why I support BU: We should give the question of block size to the free market to decide. It will naturally adjust to ever-improving network & technological constraints. Bitcoin Unlimited guarantees that block size will follow what the Bitcoin network is capable of handling safely."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/574g5l/viabtc_why_i_support_bu_we_should_give_the/
"Why is Flexible Transactions more future-proof than SegWit?" by u/ThomasZander
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rbv1j/why_is_flexible_transactions_more_futureproof/
Bitcoin's specification (eg: Excess Blocksize (EB) & Acceptance Depth (AD), configurable via Bitcoin Unlimited) can, should & always WILL be decided by ALL the miners & users - not by a single FIAT-FUNDED, CENSORSHIP-SUPPORTED dev team (Core/Blockstream) & miner (BitFury) pushing SegWit 1.7MB blocks
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5u1r2d/bitcoins_specification_eg_excess_blocksize_eb/
The Blockstream/SegWit/LN fork will be worth LESS: SegWit uses 4MB storage/bandwidth to provide a one-time bump to 1.7MB blocksize; messy, less-safe as softfork; LN=vaporware. The BU fork will be worth MORE: single clean safe hardfork solving blocksize forever; on-chain; fix malleability separately.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/57zjnk/the_blockstreamsegwitln_fork_will_be_worth_less/
(3) Very few miners actually support SegWit. In fact, over half of SegWit signaling comes from just two fiat-funded miners associated with Core / Blockstream: BitFury and BTCC:
Brock Pierce's BLOCKCHAIN CAPITAL is part-owner of Bitcoin's biggest, private, fiat-funded private dev team (Blockstream) & biggest, private, fiat-funded private mining operation (BitFury). Both are pushing SegWit - with its "centrally planned blocksize" & dangerous "anyone-can-spend kludge".
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5sndsz/brock_pierces_blockchain_capital_is_partowner_of/
(4) Hard forks are simpler and safer than soft forks. Hard forks preserve your "right to vote" - so Core / Blockstream is afraid of hard forks a/k/a "full node refendums" - because they know their code would be rejected:
The real reason why Core / Blockstream always favors soft-forks over hard-forks (even though hard-forks are actually safer because hard-forks are explicit) is because soft-forks allow the "incumbent" code to quietly remain incumbent forever (and in this case, the "incumbent" code is Core)
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4080mw/the_real_reason_why_core_blockstream_always/
Reminder: Previous posts showing that Blockstream's opposition to hard-forks is dangerous, obstructionist, selfish FUD. As many of us already know, the reason that Blockstream is against hard forks is simple: Hard forks are good for Bitcoin, but bad for the private company Blockstream.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4ttmk3/reminder_previous_posts_showing_that_blockstreams/
"They [Core/Blockstream] fear a hard fork will remove them from their dominant position." ... "Hard forks are 'dangerous' because they put the market in charge, and the market might vote against '[the] experts' [at Core/Blockstream]" - ForkiusMaximus
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/43h4cq/they_coreblockstream_fear_a_hard_fork_will_remove/
The proper terminology for a "hard fork" should be a "FULL NODE REFERENDUM" - an open, transparent EXPLICIT process where everyone has the right to vote FOR or AGAINST an upgrade. The proper terminology for a "soft fork" should be a "SNEAKY TROJAN HORSE" - because IT TAKES AWAY YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5e4e7d/the_proper_terminology_for_a_hard_fork_should_be/
If Blockstream were truly "conservative" and wanted to "protect Bitcoin" then they would deploy SegWit AS A HARD FORK. Insisting on deploying SegWit as a soft fork (overly complicated so more dangerous for Bitcoin) exposes that they are LYING about being "conservative" and "protecting Bitcoin".
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/57zbkp/if_blockstream_were_truly_conservative_and_wanted/
"We had our arms twisted to accept 2MB hardfork + SegWit. We then got a bait and switch 1MB + SegWit with no hardfork, and accounting tricks to make P2SH transactions cheaper (for sidechains and Lightning, which is all Blockstream wants because they can use it to control Bitcoin)." ~ u/URGOVERNMENT
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ju5r8/we_had_our_arms_twisted_to_accept_2mb_hardfork/
u/Luke-Jr invented SegWit's dangerous "anyone-can-spend" soft-fork kludge. Now he helped kill Bitcoin trading at Circle. He thinks Bitcoin should only hard-fork TO DEAL WITH QUANTUM COMPUTING. Luke-Jr will continue to kill Bitcoin if we continue to let him. To prosper, BITCOIN MUST IGNORE LUKE-JR.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5h0yf0/ulukejr_invented_segwits_dangerous_anyonecanspend/
Normal users understand that SegWit-as-a-softfork is dangerous, because it deceives non-upgraded nodes into thinking transactions are valid when actually they're not - turning those nodes into "zombie nodes". Greg Maxwell and Blockstream are jeopardizing Bitcoin - in order to stay in power.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mnpxx/normal_users_understand_that_segwitasasoftfork_is/
"Negotiations have failed. BS/Core will never HF - except to fire the miners and create an altcoin. Malleability & quadratic verification time should be fixed - but not via SWSF political/economic trojan horse. CHANGES TO BITCOIN ECONOMICS MUST BE THRU FULL NODE REFERENDUM OF A HF." ~ u/TunaMelt
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5e410j/negotiations_have_failed_bscore_will_never_hf/
"Anything controversial ... is the perfect time for a hard fork. ... Hard forks are the market speaking. Soft forks on any issues where there is controversy are an attempt to smother the market in its sleep. Core's approach is fundamentally anti-market" ~ u/ForkiusMaximus
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5f4zaa/anything_controversial_is_the_perfect_time_for_a/
As Core / Blockstream collapses and Classic gains momentum, the CEO of Blockstream, Austin Hill, gets caught spreading FUD about the safety of "hard forks", falsely claiming that: "A hard-fork forced-upgrade flag day ... disenfranchises everyone who doesn't upgrade ... causes them to lose funds"
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/41c8n5/as_core_blockstream_collapses_and_classic_gains/
Core/Blockstream is living in a fantasy world. In the real world everyone knows (1) our hardware can support 4-8 MB (even with the Great Firewall), and (2) hard forks are cleaner than soft forks. Core/Blockstream refuses to offer either of these things. Other implementations (eg: BU) can offer both.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ejmin/coreblockstream_is_living_in_a_fantasy_world_in/
Blockstream is "just another shitty startup. A 30-second review of their business plan makes it obvious that LN was never going to happen. Due to elasticity of demand, users either go to another coin, or don't use crypto at all. There is no demand for degraded 'off-chain' services." ~ u/jeanduluoz
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/59hcvblockstream_is_just_another_shitty_startup_a/
(5) Core / Blockstream's latest propaganda "talking point" proclaims that "SegWit is a blocksize increase". But we don't want "a" random, arbitrary centrally planned blocksize increase (to a tiny 1.7MB) - we want _market-based blocksizes - now and into the future:_
The debate is not "SHOULD THE BLOCKSIZE BE 1MB VERSUS 1.7MB?". The debate is: "WHO SHOULD DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE?" (1) Should an obsolete temporary anti-spam hack freeze blocks at 1MB? (2) Should a centralized dev team soft-fork the blocksize to 1.7MB? (3) OR SHOULD THE MARKET DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5pcpec/the_debate_is_not_should_the_blocksize_be_1mb/
The Bitcoin community is talking. Why isn't Core/Blockstream listening? "Yes, [SegWit] increases the blocksize but BU wants a literal blocksize increase." ~ u/lurker_derp ... "It's pretty clear that they [BU-ers] want Bitcoin, not a BTC fork, to have a bigger blocksize." ~ u/WellSpentTime
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5fjh6l/the_bitcoin_community_is_talking_why_isnt/
"The MAJORITY of the community sentiment (be it miners or users / hodlers) is in favour of the manner in which BU handles the scaling conundrum (only a conundrum due to the junta at Core) and SegWit as a hard and not a soft fork." ~ u/pekatete
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/593voi/the_majority_of_the_community_sentiment_be_it/
(6) Core / Blockstream want to radically change Bitcoin to centrally planned 1.7MB blocksize, and dangerous "anyone-can-spend" semantics. The market wants to go to the moon - with Bitcoin's original security model, and Bitcoin's original market-based (miner-decided) blocksize.
Bitcoin Unlimited is the real Bitcoin, in line with Satoshi's vision. Meanwhile, BlockstreamCoin+RBF+SegWitAsASoftFork+LightningCentralizedHub-OfflineIOUCoin is some kind of weird unrecognizable double-spendable non-consensus-driven fiat-financed offline centralized settlement-only non-P2P "altcoin"
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/57brcb/bitcoin_unlimited_is_the_real_bitcoin_in_line/
The number of blocks being mined by Bitcoin Unlimited is now getting very close to surpassing the number of blocks being mined by SegWit! More and more people are supporting BU's MARKET-BASED BLOCKSIZE - because BU avoids needless transaction delays and ultimately increases Bitcoin adoption & price!
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rdhzh/the_number_of_blocks_being_mined_by_bitcoin/
I have just been banned for from /Bitcoin for posting evidence that there is a moderate/strong inverse correlation between the amount of Bitcoin Core Blocks mined and the Bitcoin Price (meaning that as Core loses market share, Price goes up).
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5v10zw/i_have_just_been_banned_for_from_rbitcoin_fo
Flipping the Script: It is Core who is proposing a change to Bitcoin, and BU/Classic that is maintaining the status quo.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5v36jy/flipping_the_script_it_is_core_who_is_proposing_a/
The main difference between Bitcoin core and BU client is BU developers dont bundle their economic and political opinions with their code
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5v3rt2/the_main_difference_between_bitcoin_core_and_bu/
TL;DR:
You wanted people like me to support you and install your code, Core / Blockstream?
Then you shouldn't have a released messy, dangerous, centrally planned hack like SegWit-as-a-soft-fork - with its random, arbitrary, centrally planned, ridiculously tiny 1.7MB blocksize - and its dangerous "anyone-can-spend" soft-fork semantics.
Now it's too late. The market will reject SegWit - and it's all Core / Blockstream's fault.
The market prefers simpler, safer, future-proof, market-based solutions such as Bitcoin Unlimited.
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

Trojans on public trackers?

It's usual for the some key generators for programs found in trackers like tpb to have the antivirus program detect a trojan. The instructions usually mention this and say it's normal and not an actual trojan. I'm sure trojans and virus are common on these trackers, but this happens also in torrents that have the "trusted" icon.
So, is there a chance that these torrents are actually clean and the antivirus is getting a false positive?
submitted by Ender_n to trackers [link] [comments]

Why is Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc trying to pretend AXA isn't one of the top 5 "companies that control the world"? AXA relies on debt & derivatives to pretend it's not bankrupt. Million-dollar Bitcoin would destroy AXA's phony balance sheet. How much is AXA paying Greg to cripple Bitcoin?

Here was an interesting brief exchange between Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc and u/BitAlien about AXA:
https://np.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/62d2yq/why_bitcoin_is_under_attack/dfm6jt?context=3
The "non-nullc" side of the conversation has already been censored by r\bitcoin - but I had previously archived it here :)
https://archive.fo/yWnWh#selection-2613.0-2615.1
u/BitAlien says to u/nullc :
Blockstream is funded by big banks, for example, AXA.
https://blockstream.com/2016/02/02/blockstream-new-investors-55-million-series-a.html
u/nullc says to u/BitAlien :
is funded by big banks, for example, AXA
AXA is a French multinational insurance firm.
But I guess we shouldn't expect much from someone who thinks miners unilatterally control bitcoin.
Typical semantics games and hair-splitting and bullshitting from Greg.
But I guess we shouldn't expect too much honesty or even understanding from someone like Greg who thinks that miners don't control Bitcoin.
AXA-owned Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc doesn't understand how Bitcoin mining works
Mining is how you vote for rule changes. Greg's comments on BU revealed he has no idea how Bitcoin works. He thought "honest" meant "plays by Core rules." [But] there is no "honesty" involved. There is only the assumption that the majority of miners are INTELLIGENTLY PROFIT-SEEKING. - ForkiusMaximus
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5zxl2l/mining_is_how_you_vote_for_rule_changes_gregs/
AXA-owned Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc is economically illiterate
Adam Back & Greg Maxwell are experts in mathematics and engineering, but not in markets and economics. They should not be in charge of "central planning" for things like "max blocksize". They're desperately attempting to prevent the market from deciding on this. But it will, despite their efforts.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/46052e/adam_back_greg_maxwell_are_experts_in_mathematics/)
AXA-owned Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc doesn't understand how fiat works
Gregory Maxwell nullc has evidently never heard of terms like "the 1%", "TPTB", "oligarchy", or "plutocracy", revealing a childlike naïveté when he says: "‘Majority sets the rules regardless of what some minority thinks’ is the governing principle behind the fiats of major democracies."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/44qr31/gregory_maxwell_unullc_has_evidently_never_heard/
AXA-owned Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc is toxic to Bitcoin
People are starting to realize how toxic Gregory Maxwell is to Bitcoin, saying there are plenty of other coders who could do crypto and networking, and "he drives away more talent than he can attract." Plus, he has a 10-year record of damaging open-source projects, going back to Wikipedia in 2006.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4klqtg/people_are_starting_to_realize_how_toxic_gregory/
So here we have Greg this week, desperately engaging in his usual little "semantics" games - claiming that AXA isn't technically a bank - when the real point is that:
AXA is clearly one of the most powerful fiat finance firms in the world.
Maybe when he's talking about the hairball of C++ spaghetti code that him and his fellow devs at Core/Blockstream are slowing turning their version of Bitcoin's codebase into... in that arcane (and increasingly irrelevant :) area maybe he still can dazzle some people with his usual meaningless technically correct but essentially erroneous bullshit.
But when it comes to finance and economics, Greg is in way over his head - and in those areas, he can't bullshit anyone. In fact, pretty much everything Greg ever says about finance or economics or banks is simply wrong.
He thinks he's proved some point by claiming that AXA isn't technically a bank.
But AXA is far worse than a mere "bank" or a mere "French multinational insurance company".
AXA is one of the top-five "companies that control the world" - and now (some people think) AXA is in charge of paying for Bitcoin "development".
A recent infographic published in the German Magazine "Die Zeit" showed that AXA is indeed the second-most-connected finance company in the world - right at the rotten "core" of the "fantasy fiat" financial system that runs our world today.
Who owns the world? (1) Barclays, (2) AXA, (3) State Street Bank. (Infographic in German - but you can understand it without knowing much German: "Wem gehört die Welt?" = "Who owns the world?") AXA is the #2 company with the most economic poweconnections in the world. And AXA owns Blockstream.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5btu02/who_owns_the_world_1_barclays_2_axa_3_state/
The link to the PDF at Die Zeit in the above OP is gone now - but there's other copies online:
https://www.konsumentenschutz.ch/sks/content/uploads/2014/03/Wem-geh%C3%B6rt-die-Welt.pdfother
http://www.zeit.de/2012/23/IG-Capitalist-Network
https://archive.fo/o/EzRea/https://www.konsumentenschutz.ch/sks/content/uploads/2014/03/Wem-geh%C3%B6rt-die-Welt.pdf
Plus there's lots of other research and articles at sites like the financial magazine Forbes, or the scientific publishing site plos.org, with articles which say the same thing - all the tables and graphs show that:
AXA is consistently among the top five "companies that control everything"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2011/10/22/the-147-companies-that-control-everything/#56b72685105b
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0025995
http://www98.griffith.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/handle/10072/37499/64037_1.pdf;sequence=1
https://www.outsiderclub.com/report/who-really-controls-the-world/1032
AXA is right at the rotten "core" of the world financial system. Their last CEO was even the head of the friggin' Bilderberg Group.
Blockstream is now controlled by the Bilderberg Group - seriously! AXA Strategic Ventures, co-lead investor for Blockstream's $55 million financing round, is the investment arm of French insurance giant AXA Group - whose CEO Henri de Castries has been chairman of the Bilderberg Group since 2012.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/47zfzt/blockstream_is_now_controlled_by_the_bilderberg/
So, let's get a few things straight here.
"AXA" might not be a household name to many people.
And Greg was "technically right" when he denied that AXA is a "bank" (which is basically the only kind of "right" that Greg ever is these days: "technically" :-)
But AXA is one of the most powerful finance companies in the world.
AXA was started as a French insurance company.
And now it's a French multinational insurance company.
But if you study up a bit on AXA, you'll see that they're not just any old "insurance" company.
AXA has their fingers in just about everything around the world - including a certain team of toxic Bitcoin devs who are radically trying to change Bitcoin:
And ever since AXA started throwing tens of millions of dollars in filthy fantasy fiat at a certain toxic dev named Gregory Maxwell, CTO of Blockstream, suddenly he started saying that we can't have nice things like the gradually increasing blocksizes (and gradually increasing Bitcoin prices - which fortunately tend to increase proportional to the square of the blocksize because of Metcalfe's law :-) which were some of the main reasons most of us invested in Bitcoin in the first place.
My, my, my - how some people have changed!
Greg Maxwell used to have intelligent, nuanced opinions about "max blocksize", until he started getting paid by AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group - the legacy financial elite which Bitcoin aims to disintermediate. Greg always refuses to address this massive conflict of interest. Why?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mlo0z/greg_maxwell_used_to_have_intelligent_nuanced/
Previously, Greg Maxwell u/nullc (CTO of Blockstream), Adam Back u/adam3us (CEO of Blockstream), and u/theymos (owner of r\bitcoin) all said that bigger blocks would be fine. Now they prefer to risk splitting the community & the network, instead of upgrading to bigger blocks. What happened to them?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5dtfld/previously_greg_maxwell_unullc_cto_of_blockstream/
"Even a year ago I said I though we could probably survive 2MB" - nullc
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/43mond/even_a_year_ago_i_said_i_though_we_could_probably/
Core/Blockstream supporters like to tiptoe around the facts a lot - hoping we won't pay attention to the fact that they're getting paid by a company like AXA, or hoping we'll get confused if Greg says that AXA isn't a bank but rather an insurance firm.
But the facts are the facts, whether AXA is an insurance giant or a bank:
  • AXA would be exposed as bankrupt in a world dominated by a "counterparty-free" asset class like Bitcoin.
  • AXA pays Greg's salary - and Greg is one of the major forces who has been actively attempting to block Bitcoin's on-chain scaling - and there's no way getting around the fact that artificially small blocksizes do lead to artificially low prices.
AXA kinda reminds me of AIG
If anyone here was paying attention when the cracks first started showing in the world fiat finance system around 2008, you may recall the name of another mega-insurance company, that was also one of the most connected finance companies in the world: AIG.
Falling Giant: A Case Study Of AIG
What was once the unthinkable occurred on September 16, 2008. On that date, the federal government gave the American International Group - better known as AIG (NYSE:AIG) - a bailout of $85 billion. In exchange, the U.S. government received nearly 80% of the firm's equity. For decades, AIG was the world's biggest insurer, a company known around the world for providing protection for individuals, companies and others. But in September, the company would have gone under if it were not for government assistance.
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/american-investment-group-aig-bailout.asp
Why the Fed saved AIG and not Lehman
Bernanke did say he believed an AIG failure would be "catastrophic," and that the heavy use of derivatives made the AIG problem potentially more explosive.
An AIG failure, thanks to the firm's size and its vast web of trading partners, "would have triggered an intensification of the general run on international banking institutions," Bernanke said.
http://fortune.com/2010/09/02/why-the-fed-saved-aig-and-not-lehman/
Just like AIG, AXA is a "systemically important" finance company - one of the biggest insurance companies in the world.
And (like all major banks and insurance firms), AXA is drowning in worthless debt and bets (derivatives).
Most of AXA's balance sheet would go up in a puff of smoke if they actually did "mark-to-market" (ie, if they actually factored in the probability of the counterparties of their debts and bets actually coming through and paying AXA the full amount it says on the pretty little spreadsheets on everyone's computer screens).
In other words: Like most giant banks and insurers, AXA has mainly debt and bets. They rely on counterparties to pay them - maybe, someday, if the whole system doesn't go tits-up by then.
In other words: Like most giant banks and insurers, AXA does not hold the "private keys" to their so-called wealth :-)
So, like most giant multinational banks and insurers who spend all their time playing with debts and bets, AXA has been teetering on the edge of the abyss since 2008 - held together by chewing gum and paper clips and the miracle of Quantitative Easing - and also by all the clever accounting tricks that instantly become possible when money can go from being a gleam in a banker's eye to a pixel on a screen with just a few keystrokes - that wonderful world of "fantasy fiat" where central bankers ninja-mine billions of dollars in worthless paper and pixels into existence every month - and then for some reason every other month they have to hold a special "emergency central bankers meeting" to deal with the latest financial crisis du jour which "nobody could have seen coming".
AIG back in 2008 - much like AXA today - was another "systemically important" worldwide mega-insurance giant - with most of its net worth merely a pure fantasy on a spreadsheet and in a four-color annual report - glossing over the ugly reality that it's all based on toxic debts and derivatives which will never ever be paid off.
Mega-banks Mega-insurers like AXA are addicted to the never-ending "fantasy fiat" being injected into the casino of musical chairs involving bets upon bets upon bets upon bets upon bets - counterparty against counterparty against counterparty against counterparty - going 'round and 'round on the big beautiful carroussel where everyone is waiting on the next guy to pay up - and meanwhile everyone's cooking their books and sweeping their losses "under the rug", offshore or onto the taxpayers or into special-purpose vehicles - while the central banks keep printing up a trillion more here and a trillion more there in worthless debt-backed paper and pixels - while entire nations slowly sink into the toxic financial sludge of ever-increasing upayable debt and lower productivity and higher inflation, dragging down everyone's economies, enslaving everyone to increasing worktime and decreasing paychecks and unaffordable healthcare and education, corrupting our institutions and our leaders, distorting our investment and "capital allocation" decisions, inflating housing and healthcare and education beyond everyone's reach - and sending people off to die in endless wars to prop up the deadly failing Saudi-American oil-for-arms Petrodollar ninja-mined currency cartel.
In 2008, when the multinational insurance company AIG (along with their fellow gambling buddies at the multinational investment banks Bear Stearns and Lehmans) almost went down the drain due to all their toxic gambling debts, they also almost took the rest of the world with them.
And that's when the "core" dev team working for the miners central banks (the Fed, ECB, BoE, BoJ - who all report to the "central bank of central banks" BIS in Basel) - started cranking up their mining rigs printing presses and keyboards and pixels to the max, unilaterally manipulating the "issuance schedule" of their shitcoins and flooding the world with tens of trillions in their worthless phoney fiat to save their sorry asses after all their toxic debts and bad bets.
AXA is at the very rotten "core" of this system - like AIG, a "systemically important" (ie, "too big to fail") mega-gigantic multinational insurance company - a fantasy fiat finance firm quietly sitting at the rotten core of our current corrupt financial system, basically impacting everything and everybody on this planet.
The "masters of the universe" from AXA are the people who go to Davos every year wining and dining on lobster and champagne - part of that elite circle that prints up endless money which they hand out to their friends while they continue to enslave everyone else - and then of course they always turn around and tell us we can't have nice things like roads and schools and healthcare because "austerity". (But somehow we always can have plenty of wars and prisons and climate change and terrorism because for some weird reason our "leaders" seem to love creating disasters.)
The smart people at AXA are probably all having nightmares - and the smart people at all the other companies in that circle of "too-big-to-fail" "fantasy fiat finance firms" are probably also having nightmares - about the following very possible scenario:
If Bitcoin succeeds, debt-and-derivatives-dependent financial "giants" like AXA will probably be exposed as having been bankrupt this entire time.
All their debts and bets will be exposed as not being worth the paper and pixels they were printed on - and at that point, in a cryptocurrency world, the only real money in the world will be "counterparty-free" assets ie cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin - where all you need to hold is your own private keys - and you're not dependent on the next deadbeat debt-ridden fiat slave down the line coughing up to pay you.
Some of those people at AXA and the rest of that mafia are probably quietly buying - sad that they missed out when Bitcoin was only $10 or $100 - but happy they can still get it for $1000 while Blockstream continues to suppress the price - and who knows, what the hell, they might as well throw some of that juicy "banker's bonus" into Bitcoin now just in case it really does go to $1 million a coin someday - which it could easily do with just 32MB blocks, and no modifications to the code (ie, no SegWit, no BU, no nuthin', just a slowly growing blocksize supporting a price growing roughly proportional to the square of the blocksize - like Bitcoin always actually did before the economically illiterate devs at Blockstream imposed their centrally planned blocksize on our previously decentralized system).
Meanwhile, other people at AXA and other major finance firms might be taking a different tack: happy to see all the disinfo and discord being sown among the Bitcoin community like they've been doing since they were founded in late 2014 - buying out all the devs, dumbing down the community to the point where now even the CTO of Blockstream Greg Mawxell gets the whitepaper totally backwards.
Maybe Core/Blockstream's failure-to-scale is a feature not a bug - for companies like AXA.
After all, AXA - like most of the major banks in the Europe and the US - are now basically totally dependent on debt and derivatives to pretend they're not already bankrupt.
Maybe Blockstream's dead-end road-map (written up by none other than Greg Maxwell), which has been slowly strangling Bitcoin for over two years now - and which could ultimately destroy Bitcoin via the poison pill of Core/Blockstream's SegWit trojan horse - maybe all this never-ending history of obstrution and foot-dragging and lying and failure from Blockstream is actually a feature and not a bug, as far as AXA and their banking buddies are concerned.
The insurance company with the biggest exposure to the 1.2 quadrillion dollar (ie, 1200 TRILLION dollar) derivatives casino is AXA. Yeah, that AXA, the company whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group, and whose "venture capital" arm bought out Bitcoin development by "investing" in Blockstream.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4k1r7v/the_insurance_company_with_the_biggest_exposure/
If Bitcoin becomes a major currency, then tens of trillions of dollars on the "legacy ledger of fantasy fiat" will evaporate, destroying AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderbergers. This is the real reason why AXA bought Blockstream: to artificially suppress Bitcoin volume and price with 1MB blocks.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4r2pw5/if_bitcoin_becomes_a_major_currency_then_tens_of/
AXA has even invented some kind of "climate catastrophe" derivative - a bet where if the global warming destroys an entire region of the world, the "winner" gets paid.
Of course, derivatives would be something attractive to an insurance company - since basically most of their business is about making and taking bets.
So who knows - maybe AXA is "betting against" Bitcoin - and their little investment in the loser devs at Core/Blockstream is part of their strategy for "winning" that bet.
This trader's price & volume graph / model predicted that we should be over $10,000 USD/BTC by now. The model broke in late 2014 - when AXA-funded Blockstream was founded, and started spreading propaganda and crippleware, centrally imposing artificially tiny blocksize to suppress the volume & price.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5obe2m/this_traders_price_volume_graph_model_predicted/
"I'm angry about AXA scraping some counterfeit money out of their fraudulent empire to pay autistic lunatics millions of dollars to stall the biggest sociotechnological phenomenon since the internet and then blame me and people like me for being upset about it." ~ u/dresden_k
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5xjkof/im_angry_about_axa_scraping_some_counterfeit/
Bitcoin can go to 10,000 USD with 4 MB blocks, so it will go to 10,000 USD with 4 MB blocks. All the censorship & shilling on r\bitcoin & fantasy fiat from AXA can't stop that. BitcoinCORE might STALL at 1,000 USD and 1 MB blocks, but BITCOIN will SCALE to 10,000 USD and 4 MB blocks - and beyond
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5jgkxv/bitcoin_can_go_to_10000_usd_with_4_mb_blocks_so/
AXA/Blockstream are suppressing Bitcoin price at 1000 bits = 1 USD. If 1 bit = 1 USD, then Bitcoin's market cap would be 15 trillion USD - close to the 82 trillion USD of "money" in the world. With Bitcoin Unlimited, we can get to 1 bit = 1 USD on-chain with 32MB blocksize ("Million-Dollar Bitcoin")
https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/5u72va/axablockstream_are_suppressing_bitcoin_price_at/
Anyways, people are noticing that it's a little... odd... the way Greg Maxwell seems to go to such lengths, in order to cover up the fact that bigger blocks have always correlated to higher price.
He seems to get very... uncomfortable... when people start pointing out that:
It sure looks like AXA is paying Greg Maxwell to suppress the Bitcoin price.
Greg Maxwell has now publicly confessed that he is engaging in deliberate market manipulation to artificially suppress Bitcoin adoption and price. He could be doing this so that he and his associates can continue to accumulate while the price is still low (1 BTC = $570, ie 1 USD can buy 1750 "bits")
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4wgq48/greg_maxwell_has_now_publicly_confessed_that_he/
Why did Blockstream CTO u/nullc Greg Maxwell risk being exposed as a fraud, by lying about basic math? He tried to convince people that Bitcoin does not obey Metcalfe's Law (claiming that Bitcoin price & volume are not correlated, when they obviously are). Why is this lie so precious to him?
https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/57dsgz/why_did_blockstream_cto_unullc_greg_maxwell_risk/
I don't know how a so-called Bitcoin dev can sleep at night knowing he's getting paid by fucking AXA - a company that would probably go bankrupt if Bitcoin becomes a major world currency.
Greg must have to go through some pretty complicated mental gymastics to justify in his mind what everyone else can see: he is a fucking sellout to one of the biggest fiat finance firms in the world - he's getting paid by (and defending) a company which would probably go bankrupt if Bitcoin ever achieved multi-trillion dollar market cap.
Greg is literally getting paid by the second-most-connected "systemically important" (ie, "too big to fail") finance firm in the world - which will probably go bankrupt if Bitcoin were ever to assume its rightful place as a major currency with total market cap measured in the tens of trillions of dollars, destroying most of the toxic sludge of debt and derivatives keeping a bank financial giant like AXA afloat.
And it may at first sound batshit crazy (until You Do The Math), but Bitcoin actually really could go to one-million-dollars-a-coin in the next 8 years or so - without SegWit or BU or anything else - simply by continuing with Satoshi's original 32MB built-in blocksize limit and continuing to let miners keep blocks as small as possible to satisfy demand while avoiding orphans - a power which they've had this whole friggin' time and which they've been managing very well thank you.
Bitcoin Original: Reinstate Satoshi's original 32MB max blocksize. If actual blocks grow 54% per year (and price grows 1.542 = 2.37x per year - Metcalfe's Law), then in 8 years we'd have 32MB blocks, 100 txns/sec, 1 BTC = 1 million USD - 100% on-chain P2P cash, without SegWit/Lightning or Unlimited
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5uljaf/bitcoin_original_reinstate_satoshis_original_32mb/
Meanwhile Greg continues to work for Blockstream which is getting tens of millions of dollars from a company which would go bankrupt if Bitcoin were to actually scale on-chain to 32MB blocks and 1 million dollars per coin without all of Greg's meddling.
So Greg continues to get paid by AXA, spreading his ignorance about economics and his lies about Bitcoin on these forums.
In the end, who knows what Greg's motivations are, or AXA's motivations are.
But one thing we do know is this:
Satoshi didn't put Greg Maxwell or AXA in charge of deciding the blocksize.
The tricky part to understand about "one CPU, one vote" is that it does not mean there is some "pre-existing set of rules" which the miners somehow "enforce" (despite all the times when you hear some Core idiot using words like "consensus layer" or "enforcing the rules").
The tricky part about really understanding Bitcoin is this:
Hashpower doesn't just enforce the rules - hashpower makes the rules.
And if you think about it, this makes sense.
It's the only way Bitcoin actually could be decentralized.
It's kinda subtle - and it might be hard for someone to understand if they've been a slave to centralized authorities their whole life - but when we say that Bitcoin is "decentralized" then what it means is:
We all make the rules.
Because if hashpower doesn't make the rules - then you'd be right back where you started from, with some idiot like Greg Maxwell "making the rules" - or some corrupt too-big-to-fail bank debt-and-derivative-backed "fantasy fiat financial firm" like AXA making the rules - by buying out a dev team and telling us that that dev team "makes the rules".
But fortunately, Greg's opinions and ignorance and lies don't matter anymore.
Miners are waking up to the fact that they've always controlled the blocksize - and they always will control the blocksize - and there isn't a single goddamn thing Greg Maxwell or Blockstream or AXA can do to stop them from changing it - whether the miners end up using BU or Classic or BitcoinEC or they patch the code themselves.
The debate is not "SHOULD THE BLOCKSIZE BE 1MB VERSUS 1.7MB?". The debate is: "WHO SHOULD DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE?" (1) Should an obsolete temporary anti-spam hack freeze blocks at 1MB? (2) Should a centralized dev team soft-fork the blocksize to 1.7MB? (3) OR SHOULD THE MARKET DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5pcpec/the_debate_is_not_should_the_blocksize_be_1mb/
Core/Blockstream are now in the Kübler-Ross "Bargaining" phase - talking about "compromise". Sorry, but markets don't do "compromise". Markets do COMPETITION. Markets do winner-takes-all. The whitepaper doesn't talk about "compromise" - it says that 51% of the hashpower determines WHAT IS BITCOIN.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5y9qtg/coreblockstream_are_now_in_the_k%C3%BCblerross/
Clearing up Some Widespread Confusions about BU
Core deliberately provides software with a blocksize policy pre-baked in.
The ONLY thing BU-style software changes is that baking in. It refuses to bundle controversial blocksize policy in with the rest of the code it is offering. It unties the blocksize settings from the dev teams, so that you don't have to shop for both as a packaged unit.
The idea is that you can now have Core software security without having to submit to Core blocksize policy.
Running Core is like buying a Sony TV that only lets you watch Fox, because the other channels are locked away and you have to know how to solder a circuit board to see them. To change the channel, you as a layman would have to switch to a different TV made by some other manufacturer, who you may not think makes as reliable of TVs.
This is because Sony believes people should only ever watch Fox "because there are dangerous channels out there" or "because since everyone needs to watch the same channel, it is our job to decide what that channel is."
So the community is stuck with either watching Fox on their nice, reliable Sony TVs, or switching to all watching ABC on some more questionable TVs made by some new maker (like, in 2015 the XT team was the new maker and BIP101 was ABC).
BU (and now Classic and BitcoinEC) shatters that whole bizarre paradigm. BU is a TV that lets you tune to any channel you want, at your own risk.
The community is free to converge on any channel it wants to, and since everyone in this analogy wants to watch the same channel they will coordinate to find one.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/602vsy/clearing_up_some_widespread_confusions_about_bu/
Adjustable blocksize cap (ABC) is dangerous? The blocksize cap has always been user-adjustable. Core just has a really shitty inferface for it.
What does it tell you that Core and its supporters are up in arms about a change that merely makes something more convenient for users and couldn't be prevented from happening anyway? Attacking the adjustable blocksize feature in BU and Classic as "dangerous" is a kind of trap, as it is an implicit admission that Bitcoin was being protected only by a small barrier of inconvenience, and a completely temporary one at that. If this was such a "danger" or such a vector for an "attack," how come we never heard about it before?
Even if we accept the improbable premise that inconvenience is the great bastion holding Bitcoin together and the paternalistic premise that stakeholders need to be fed consensus using a spoon of inconvenience, we still must ask, who shall do the spoonfeeding?
Core accepts these two amazing premises and further declares that Core alone shall be allowed to do the spoonfeeding. Or rather, if you really want to you can be spoonfed by other implementation clients like libbitcoin and btcd as long as they are all feeding you the same stances on controversial consensus settings as Core does.
It is high time the community see central planning and abuse of power for what it is, and reject both:
  • Throw off central planning by removing petty "inconvenience walls" (such as baked-in, dev-recommended blocksize caps) that interfere with stakeholders coordinating choices amongst themselves on controversial matters ...
  • Make such abuse of power impossible by encouraging many competing implementations to grow and blossom
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/617gf9/adjustable_blocksize_cap_abc_is_dangerous_the/
So it's time for Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc to get over his delusions of grandeur - and to admit he's just another dev, with just another opinion.
He also needs to look in the mirror and search his soul and confront the sad reality that he's basically turned into a sellout working for a shitty startup getting paid by the 5th (or 4th or 2nd) "most connected", "systemically important", "too-big-to-fail", debt-and-derivative-dependent multinational bank mega-insurance giant in the world AXA - a major fiat firm firm which is terrified of going bankrupt just like that other mega-insurnace firm AIG already almost did before the Fed rescued them in 2008 - a fiat finance firm which is probably very conflicted about Bitcoin, at the very least.
Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell is getting paid by the most systemically important bank mega-insurance giant in the world, sitting at the rotten "core" of the our civilization's corrupt, dying fiat cartel.
Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell is getting paid by a mega-bank mega-insurance company that will probably go bankrupt if and when Bitcoin ever gets a multi-trillion dollar market cap, which it can easily do with just 32MB blocks and no code changes at all from clueless meddling devs like him.
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

The only acceptable "compromise" is SegWit NEVER, bigger blocks NOW. SegWit-as-a-soft-fork involves an "anyone-can-spend" hack - which would give Core/Blockstream/AXA a MONOPOLY on Bitcoin development FOREVER. The goal of SegWit is NOT to help Bitcoin. It is to HURT Bitcoin and HELP Blockstream/AXA.

TL;DR: Adding a poison pill like SegWit to Bitcoin would not be a "compromise" - it would be suicide, because SegWit's dangerous "anyone-can-spend" hack would give a permanent monopoly on Bitcoin development to the corrupt, incompetent, toxic dev team of Core/Blockstream/AXA, who are only interested in staying in power and helping themselves at all costs - even if they end up hurting Bitcoin.
Most of this post will probably not be new information for many people.
It is being provided mainly as a reminder, to counteract the constant flood of lies and propaganda coming from Core/Blocsktream/AXA in their attempt to force this unwanted SegWit poison pill into Bitcoin - in particular, their latest desperate lie: that there could somehow be some kind of "compromise" involving SegWit.
But adding a poison pill / trojan horse like SegWit to our code would not be some kind of "compromise". It would be simply be suicide.
SegWit-as-a-soft-fork is an existential threat to Bitcoin development - because SegWit's dangerous "anyone-can-spend" hack would give a permanent monopoly on Bitcoin development to the corrupt / incompetent centralized dev team of Core/Blockstream/AXA who are directly to blame for the current mess of Bitcoin's crippled, clogged network and drastically falling market cap.
Furthermore, markets don't even do "compromise". They do "winner-takes-all". Any coin adopting SegWit is going to lose, simply because SegWit is such shitty code:
"Compromise is not part of Honey Badger's vocabulary. Such notions are alien to Bitcoin, as it is a creature of the market with no central levers to compromise over. Bitcoin unhampered by hardcoding a 1MB cap is free to optimize itself perfectly to defeat all competition." ~ u/ForkiusMaximus
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5y7vsi/compromise_is_not_part_of_honey_badgers/
SegWit-as-a-soft-fork is a poison-pill / trojan horse for Bitcoin
SegWit is brought to you by the anti-Bitcoin central bankers at AXA and the economically ignorant, central blocksize planners at Blockstream whose dead-end "road map" for Bitcoin is:
AXA is trying to sabotage Bitcoin by paying the most ignorant, anti-market devs in Bitcoin: Core/Blockstream
This is the direction that Bitcoin has been heading in since late 2014 when Blockstream started spreading their censorship and propaganda and started bribing and corrupting the "Core" devs using $76 million in fiat provided by corrupt, anti-Bitcoin "fantasy fiat" finance firms like the debt-backed, derivatives-addicted insurance mega-giant AXA.
Remember: The real goals of Core/Blocsktream/AXA with SegWit are to:
  • permanently supress Bitcoin's price / adoption / network capacity / market cap / growth - via SegWit's too-little, too-late centrally planned 1.7MB blocksize;
  • permanently control Bitcoin development - via SegWit's deadly "anyone-can-spend" hack.
In order to see this, all you need to do is judge Core/Blocsktream/AXA by their actions (and the results of their actions - and by their shitty code):
Purely coincidental... ~ u/ForkiusMaximus
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/6a72vm/purely_coincidental/
Do not judge Core/Blocsktream/AXA by their words.
As we have seen, their words have been just an endless stream of lies and propaganda involving changing explanations and shifting goalposts and insane nonsense - including this latest outrageous concept of SegWit as some kind of "compromise" which some people may be "falling for":
Latest Segwit Trickery involves prominent support for "SW Now 2MB Later" which will lead to only half of the deal being honored. Barry Silbert front and center. Of course.
~ u/SouperNerd
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/6btm5u/latest_segwit_trickery_involves_prominent_support/
The people we are dealing with are the WORST type of manipulators and liars.
There is absolutely NO reason why they should not deliver a 2 MB block size at the same time as SegWit.
This is like a dealer saying "hey gimme that $200 now, I just gotta run home and get your weed, I promise I'll be right back".
~ u/BitAlien
Barry Silbert's "proposal" is just another bait and switch
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/6btl26/barry_silberts_proposal_is_just_another_bait_and/
Right, so the wording is:
I agree to immediately support the activation of Segregated Witness and commit to effectuate a block size increase to 2MB within 12 months
[Based] on [their] previous performance [in the Hong Kong agreement - which they already broke], they're going to say, "Segregated Witness was a block size increase, to a total of 4MB, so we have delivered our side of the compromise."
~ u/edmundedgar
Barry is an investor in Blockstream. What else needs to be said?
~ u/coinlock
Nothing involving SegWit is a "compromise".
SegWit would basically hijack Bitcoin development forever - giving a permanent monopoly to the centralized, corrupt dev team of Core/Blockstream/AXA.
  • SegWit would impose a centrally planned blocksize of 1.7MB right now - too little and too late.
  • Segwit would permanently "cement" Core/Blockstream/AXA as the only people controlling Bitcoin development - forever.
If you are sick and tired of these attempts by Core/Blockstream/AXA to sabotage Bitcoin - then the last thing you should support is SegWit in any way, shape or form - even as some kind of so-called "compromise".
This is because SegWit is not primarily a "malleability fix" or a "capacity increase".
SegWit is a poison pill / trojan horse which would put the idiots and traitors at Core/Blockstream/AXA permanently and exclusively in control of Bitcoin development - forever and ever.
Here are the real problems with SegWit (which Core/Blockstream/AXA is not telling you about):
Initially, I liked SegWit. But then I learned SegWit-as-a-SOFT-fork is dangerous (making transactions "anyone-can-spend"??) & centrally planned (1.7MB blocksize??). Instead, Bitcoin Unlimited is simple & safe, with MARKET-BASED BLOCKSIZE. This is why more & more people have decided to REJECT SEGWIT.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5vbofp/initially_i_liked_segwit_but_then_i_learned/
Segwit cannot be rolled back because to non-upgraded clients, ANYONE can spend Segwit txn outputs. If Segwit is rolled back, all funds locked in Segwit outputs can be taken by anyone. As more funds gets locked up in segwit outputs, incentive for miners to collude to claim them grows.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ge1ks/segwit_cannot_be_rolled_back_because_to/
"So, Core wants us to trust miners not to steal Segwit's anyone-can-spends, but will not let them have a say on block size. Weird."~Cornell U Professor and bitcoin researcher Emin Gün Sirer.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/60ac4q/so_core_wants_us_to_trust_miners_not_to_steal/
Brock Pierce's BLOCKCHAIN CAPITAL is part-owner of Bitcoin's biggest, private, fiat-funded private dev team (Blockstream) & biggest, private, fiat-funded private mining operation (BitFury). Both are pushing SegWit - with its "centrally planned blocksize" & dangerous "anyone-can-spend kludge".
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5sndsz/brock_pierces_blockchain_capital_is_partowner_of/
u/Luke-Jr invented SegWit's dangerous "anyone-can-spend" soft-fork kludge. Now he helped kill Bitcoin trading at Circle. He thinks Bitcoin should only hard-fork TO DEAL WITH QUANTUM COMPUTING. Luke-Jr will continue to kill Bitcoin if we continue to let him. To prosper, BITCOIN MUST IGNORE LUKE-JR.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5h0yf0/ulukejr_invented_segwits_dangerous_anyonecanspend/
"SegWit encumbers Bitcoin with irreversible technical debt. Miners should reject SWSF. SW is the most radical and irresponsible protocol upgrade Bitcoin has faced in its history. The scale of the code changes are far from trivial - nearly every part of the codebase is affected by SW" Jaqen Hash’ghar
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rdl1j/segwit_encumbers_bitcoin_with_irreversible/
"We had our arms twisted to accept 2MB hardfork + SegWit. We then got a bait and switch 1MB + SegWit with no hardfork, and accounting tricks to make P2SH transactions cheaper (for sidechains and Lightning, which is all Blockstream wants because they can use it to control Bitcoin)." ~ u/URGOVERNMENT
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ju5r8/we_had_our_arms_twisted_to_accept_2mb_hardfork/
Here is a list (on medium.com) of 13 articles that explain why SegWit would be bad for Bitcoin.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/646kmv/here_is_a_list_on_mediumcom_of_13_articles_that/
"Why is Flexible Transactions more future-proof than SegWit?" by u/ThomasZander
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rbv1j/why_is_flexible_transactions_more_futureproof/
Core/Blockstream & their supporters keep saying that "SegWit has been tested". But this is false. Other software used by miners, exchanges, Bitcoin hardware manufacturers, non-Core software developers/companies, and Bitcoin enthusiasts would all need to be rewritten, to be compatible with SegWit
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5dlyz7/coreblockstream_their_supporters_keep_saying_that/
"SegWit [would] bring unnecessary complexity to the bitcoin blockchain. Huge changes it introduces into the client are a veritable minefield of issues, [with] huge changes needed for all wallets, exchanges, remittance, and virtually all bitcoin software that will use it." ~ u/Bitcoinopoly (self.btc)
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5jqgpz/segwit_would_bring_unnecessary_complexity_to_the/
3 excellent articles highlighting some of the major problems with SegWit: (1) "Core Segwit – Thinking of upgrading? You need to read this!" by WallStreetTechnologist (2) "SegWit is not great" by Deadalnix (3) "How Software Gets Bloated: From Telephony to Bitcoin" by Emin Gün Sirer
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5rfh4i/3_excellent_articles_highlighting_some_of_the/
Normal users understand that SegWit-as-a-softfork is dangerous, because it deceives non-upgraded nodes into thinking transactions are valid when actually they're not - turning those nodes into "zombie nodes". Greg Maxwell and Blockstream are jeopardizing Bitcoin - in order to stay in power.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mnpxx/normal_users_understand_that_segwitasasoftfork_is/
As Benjamin Frankline once said: "Given a choice between Liberty (with a few Bugs), and Slavery (with no Bugs), a Free People will choose Liberty every time." Bitcoin Unlimited is liberty: market-based blocksizes. SegWit is slavery: centrally planned 1.7MB blocksize & "anyone-can-spend" transactions
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5zievg/as_benjamin_frankline_once_said_given_a_choice/
u/Uptrenda on SegWit: "Core is forcing every Bitcoin startup to abandon their entire code base for a Rube Goldberg machine making their products so slow, inconvenient, and confusing that even if they do manage to 'migrate' to this cluster-fuck of technical debt it will kill their businesses anyway."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5e86fg/uuptrenda_on_segwit_core_is_forcing_every_bitcoin/
Just because something is a "soft fork" doesn't mean it isn't a massive change. SegWit is an alt-coin. It would introduce radical and unpredictable changes in Bitcoin's economic parameters and incentives. Just read this thread. Nobody has any idea how the mainnet will react to SegWit in real life.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5fc1ii/just_because_something_is_a_soft_fork_doesnt_mean/
Here are the real reasons why Core/Blockstream/AXA is terrified of hard forks:
"They [Core/Blockstream] fear a hard fork will remove them from their dominant position." ... "Hard forks are 'dangerous' because they put the market in charge, and the market might vote against '[the] experts' [at Core/Blockstream]" - ForkiusMaximus
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/43h4cq/they_coreblockstream_fear_a_hard_fork_will_remove/
The real reason why Core / Blockstream always favors soft-forks over hard-forks (even though hard-forks are actually safer because hard-forks are explicit) is because soft-forks allow the "incumbent" code to quietly remain incumbent forever (and in this case, the "incumbent" code is Core)
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4080mw/the_real_reason_why_core_blockstream_always/
Reminder: Previous posts showing that Blockstream's opposition to hard-forks is dangerous, obstructionist, selfish FUD. As many of us already know, the reason that Blockstream is against hard forks is simple: Hard forks are good for Bitcoin, but bad for the private company Blockstream.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4ttmk3/reminder_previous_posts_showing_that_blockstreams/
Core/Blockstream is living in a fantasy world. In the real world everyone knows (1) our hardware can support 4-8 MB (even with the Great Firewall), and (2) hard forks are cleaner than soft forks. Core/Blockstream refuses to offer either of these things. Other implementations (eg: BU) can offer both.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ejmin/coreblockstream_is_living_in_a_fantasy_world_in/
If Blockstream were truly "conservative" and wanted to "protect Bitcoin" then they would deploy SegWit AS A HARD FORK. Insisting on deploying SegWit as a soft fork (overly complicated so more dangerous for Bitcoin) exposes that they are LYING about being "conservative" and "protecting Bitcoin".
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/57zbkp/if_blockstream_were_truly_conservative_and_wanted/
If some bozo dev team proposed what Core/Blockstream is proposing (Let's deploy a malleability fix as a "soft" fork that dangerously overcomplicates the code and breaks non-upgraded nodes so it's de facto HARD! Let's freeze capacity at 1 MB during a capacity crisis!), they'd be ridiculed and ignored
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5944j6/if_some_bozo_dev_team_proposed_what/
"Negotiations have failed. BS/Core will never HF - except to fire the miners and create an altcoin. Malleability & quadratic verification time should be fixed - but not via SWSF political/economic trojan horse. CHANGES TO BITCOIN ECONOMICS MUST BE THRU FULL NODE REFERENDUM OF A HF." ~ u/TunaMelt
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5e410j/negotiations_have_failed_bscore_will_never_hf/
The proper terminology for a "hard fork" should be a "FULL NODE REFERENDUM" - an open, transparent EXPLICIT process where everyone has the right to vote FOR or AGAINST an upgrade. The proper terminology for a "soft fork" should be a "SNEAKY TROJAN HORSE" - because IT TAKES AWAY YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5e4e7d/the_proper_terminology_for_a_hard_fork_should_be/
Here are the real reasons why Core/Blockstream/AXA has been trying to choke the Bitcoin network and suppress Bitcoin's price & adoption. (Hint: Blockstream is controlled by central bankers who hate Bitcoin - because they will go bankrupt if Bitcoin succeeds as a major world currency).
Blockstream is now controlled by the Bilderberg Group - seriously! AXA Strategic Ventures, co-lead investor for Blockstream's $55 million financing round, is the investment arm of French insurance giant AXA Group - whose CEO Henri de Castries has been chairman of the Bilderberg Group since 2012.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/47zfzt/blockstream_is_now_controlled_by_the_bilderberg/
If Bitcoin becomes a major currency, then tens of trillions of dollars on the "legacy ledger of fantasy fiat" will evaporate, destroying AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderbergers. This is the real reason why AXA bought Blockstream: to artificially suppress Bitcoin volume and price with 1MB blocks.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4r2pw5/if_bitcoin_becomes_a_major_currency_then_tens_of/
Who owns the world? (1) Barclays, (2) AXA, (3) State Street Bank. (Infographic in German - but you can understand it without knowing much German: "Wem gehört die Welt?" = "Who owns the world?") AXA is the #2 company with the most economic poweconnections in the world. And AXA owns Blockstream.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5btu02/who_owns_the_world_1_barclays_2_axa_3_state/
Double standards: The other sub would go ballistic if Unlimited was funded by AXA. But they are just fine when AXA funds BS-core.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/62ykv1/double_standards_the_other_sub_would_go_ballistic/
The insurance company with the biggest exposure to the 1.2 quadrillion dollar (ie, 1200 TRILLION dollar) derivatives casino is AXA. Yeah, that AXA, the company whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group, and whose "venture capital" arm bought out Bitcoin development by "investing" in Blockstream.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4k1r7v/the_insurance_company_with_the_biggest_exposure/
Bilderberg Group -> AXA Strategic Ventures -> funds Blockstream -> Blockstream Core Devs. (The chairman of Bilderberg is Henri de Castries. The CEO of AXA Henri de Castries.)
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/576ac9/bilderberg_group_axa_strategic_ventures_funds/
Why is Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc trying to pretend AXA isn't one of the top 5 "companies that control the world"? AXA relies on debt & derivatives to pretend it's not bankrupt. Million-dollar Bitcoin would destroy AXA's phony balance sheet. How much is AXA paying Greg to cripple Bitcoin?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/62htv0/why_is_blockstream_cto_greg_maxwell_unullc_trying/
Core/AXA/Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell, CEO Adam Back, attack dog Luke-Jr and censor Theymos are sabotaging Bitcoin - but they lack the social skills to even feel guilty for this. Anyone who attempts to overrule the market and limit or hard-code Bitcoin's blocksize must be rejected by the community.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/689y1e/coreaxablockstream_cto_greg_maxwell_ceo_adam_back/
"I'm angry about AXA scraping some counterfeit money out of their fraudulent empire to pay autistic lunatics millions of dollars to stall the biggest sociotechnological phenomenon since the internet and then blame me and people like me for being upset about it." ~ u/dresden_k
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5xjkof/im_angry_about_axa_scraping_some_counterfeit/
Greg Maxwell used to have intelligent, nuanced opinions about "max blocksize", until he started getting paid by AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group - the legacy financial elite which Bitcoin aims to disintermediate. Greg always refuses to address this massive conflict of interest. Why?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mlo0z/greg_maxwell_used_to_have_intelligent_nuanced/
This trader's price & volume graph / model predicted that we should be over $10,000 USD/BTC by now. The model broke in late 2014 - when AXA-funded Blockstream was founded, and started spreading propaganda and crippleware, centrally imposing artificially tiny blocksize to suppress the volume & price.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5obe2m/this_traders_price_volume_graph_model_predicted/
Just as a reminder: The main funder of Blockstream is Henri de Castries, chairman of French insurance company AXA, and chairman of the Bilderberg Group!
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5uw6cc/just_as_a_reminder_the_main_funder_of_blockstream/
AXA/Blockstream are suppressing Bitcoin price at 1000 bits = 1 USD. If 1 bit = 1 USD, then Bitcoin's market cap would be 15 trillion USD - close to the 82 trillion USD of "money" in the world. With Bitcoin Unlimited, we can get to 1 bit = 1 USD on-chain with 32MB blocksize ("Million-Dollar Bitcoin")
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5u72va/axablockstream_are_suppressing_bitcoin_price_at/
Bitcoin can go to 10,000 USD with 4 MB blocks, so it will go to 10,000 USD with 4 MB blocks. All the censorship & shilling on r\bitcoin & fantasy fiat from AXA can't stop that. BitcoinCORE might STALL at 1,000 USD and 1 MB blocks, but BITCOIN will SCALE to 10,000 USD and 4 MB blocks - and beyond
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5jgkxv/bitcoin_can_go_to_10000_usd_with_4_mb_blocks_so/
And finally, here's one easy way that Bitcoin can massively succeed without SegWit - and even without the need for any other major or controversial changes to the code:
Bitcoin Original: Reinstate Satoshi's original 32MB max blocksize. If actual blocks grow 54% per year (and price grows 1.542 = 2.37x per year - Metcalfe's Law), then in 8 years we'd have 32MB blocks, 100 txns/sec, 1 BTC = 1 million USD - 100% on-chain P2P cash, without SegWit/Lightning or Unlimited
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5uljaf/bitcoin_original_reinstate_satoshis_original_32mb/
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

Como Remover CoinMiner do PC How to Remove a Trojan/Virus/Miner (Windows) March 2020 ... How to Remove Trojan:Win32/CoinMiner Virus Manually ... How to Remove BitcoinMiner Bitcoin Miner Malware  Incredibly Stealthy! - YouTube

BitCoin Miner / Btc Miner / BitCoin-Virus: Art: Kryptowährung Miner, Trojan, Spyware: kurze Beschreibung: Infiltriert und infiziert Computersysteme heimlich mit dem Ziel, ihre CPU zu nutzen, GPU und andere Ressourcen für Kryptowährungen. Symptome: Erhöhtes CPU und GPU-Nutzung und Überhitzung. Das Opfer PC kann, wenn dieser Virus Minen für ... Remove Trojan.BitCoinMiner.BatBitRst virus (removal tutorial) There are a simple guide below that will help you to delete Trojan.BitCoinMiner.BatBitRst from your Windows computer. The most effective method to get rid of this virus is to follow the manual steps and then run Zemana Free, MalwareBytes or HitmanPro automatic tools (all are free). The manual steps will help to weaken this virus and ... Trojan.BitcoinMiner Removal Guide. All tools used in our Trojan.BitcoinMiner Removal Guide are completely free to use and should remove any trace of malware from your computer. Please be aware that removing Malware is not so simple, and we strongly recommend to backup your personal files and folders before you start the malware removal process. Findet sich auf Ihrem Rechner der Trojaner bitcoinminer.sx, sollten Sie ihn entfernen. Wahrscheinlich haben Sie ihn als Teil eines Bundles mit einem anderen Tool aus dem Internet geladen. Der Virus kann Ihre Browsersuche umleiten und persönliche Daten sammeln. The Bitcoin miner malware primarily infects your machine through the browser. So, if you feel that your browser has been infected with this malware, one of the best ways to get rid of it is by resetting the device to its original settings. Unlike reinstalling, resetting will help you retain all personal tweaks like your passwords, open tabs and bookmarks. Although different browsers come with ...

[index] [34160] [5936] [36177] [38181] [37354] [11014] [39377] [45324] [17507] [7563]

Como Remover CoinMiner do PC

This video aims to show you how to remove the following types of malware step-by-step: -Trojans. -Viruses. -Miners. -Spyware. -Rootkits. -Wipers. -Most malwa... How to Mine Bitcoins Using Your Own Computer - Duration: 3:36. 99Bitcoins Recommended for you. 3:36. How to diagnose and remove a bitcoin miner trojan - Duration: 4:57. EZOVERDOSE 191,913 views. 4 ... How to diagnose and remove a bitcoin miner trojan - Duration: 4:57. EZOVERDOSE 195,574 views. 4:57. Retirar vírus do navegador da internet completo por William Azarado. Bitcoin Miners can tax your CPU and use up your system resources without you even knowing. When you open task manger to investigate, the malware process stea... 👍 Watch how to remove a hidden Bitcoin mining virus from your computer. If you noticed that your computer – while you’re not using it - still behaves as if i...

#