Litecoin Founder Charlie Lee on Bitcoin Censorship

LitecoinTraders - Cryptocurrency Trading, Strategy, Advice, and Discussion

/LitecoinTraders exists as a refuge for both experienced and new traders; a place for people to congregate and form a friendly community through discussion and realistic speculation.
[link]

Consensus! JGarzik: "RBF would be anti-social on the network" / Charlie Lee, Coinbase : "RBF is irrational and harmful to Bitcoin" / Gavin: "RBF is a bad idea" / Adam Back: "Blowing up 0-confirm transactions is vandalism" / Hearn: RBF won't work and would be harmful for Bitcoin"

Congratulations to Peter Todd - it looks like you've achieved consensus! Everyone is against you on RBF!
Replace By Fee - A Counter-Argument, by Mike Hearn
https://medium.com/@octskyward/replace-by-fee-43edd9a1dd6d#.suzs1gu7y
Repeating past statements, it is acknowledged that Peter’s scorched earth replace-by-fee proposal is aptly named, and would be widely anti-social on the current network.
— Jeff Garzik
Coinbase fully agrees with Mike Hearn. RBF is irrational and harmful to Bitcoin.
— Charlie Lee, engineering manager at Coinbase
Replace-by-fee is a bad idea.
— Gavin Andresen
I agree with Mike & Jeff. Blowing up 0-confirm transactions is vandalism.
— Adam Back (a founder of Blockstream)
Serious question:
Why is Peter Todd allowed to merge bizarre dangerous crap like this, which nobody even asked for and which totally goes against the foundations of Bitcoin (ie, it would ENCOURAGE DOUBLE SPENDS in a protocol whose main function is to PREVENT DOUBLE SPENDS)??
Meanwhile, something that everyone wants and that was simple to implement (increased block size, hello?!?) ends up getting stalled and trolled and censored for months?
What the fuck is going on here???
After looking at Peter Todd's comments and work over the past few years, I've finally figured out the right name for what he's into - which was hinted at in the "vandalism" comment from Adam Back above.
Peter Todd is more into vandalism than programming.
Message to Peter Todd: If you want to keep insisting on trying to vandalize Bitcoin by adding weird dangerous double-spending "features" that nobody even asked for in the first place, go sabotage some alt-coin, and leave Bitcoin the fuck alone.
This is a repost for some history:
https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/3ujc4m/consensus_jgarzik_rbf_would_be_antisocial_on_the/?utm_content=title&utm_medium=front&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=btc
submitted by defconoi to btc [link] [comments]

[Twitter Poll] Charlie Lee (Director of Engineering @ Coinbase): "What's the most important feature of Bitcoin that we must not sacrifice? Decentralization, Security, Low fees, Global payments"

[Twitter Poll] Charlie Lee (Director of Engineering @ Coinbase): submitted by eragmus to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Litecoin Creator Charlie Lee: Coinbase Will Likely Choose Bitcoin Over SegWit2x

Litecoin Creator Charlie Lee: Coinbase Will Likely Choose Bitcoin Over SegWit2x submitted by Cryptoknowledge to litecoin [link] [comments]

Consensus! JGarzik: "RBF would be anti-social on the network" / Charlie Lee, Coinbase : "RBF is irrational and harmful to Bitcoin" / Gavin: "RBF is a bad idea" / Adam Back: "Blowing up 0-confirm transactions is vandalism" / Hearn: RBF won't work and would be harmful for Bitcoin"

Congratulations to Peter Todd - it looks like you've achieved consensus! Everyone is against you on RBF!
Replace By Fee - A Counter-Argument, by Mike Hearn
https://medium.com/@octskyward/replace-by-fee-43edd9a1dd6d#.suzs1gu7y
Repeating past statements, it is acknowledged that Peter’s scorched earth replace-by-fee proposal is aptly named, and would be widely anti-social on the current network.
— Jeff Garzik
Coinbase fully agrees with Mike Hearn. RBF is irrational and harmful to Bitcoin.
— Charlie Lee, engineering manager at Coinbase
Replace-by-fee is a bad idea.
— Gavin Andresen
I agree with Mike & Jeff. Blowing up 0-confirm transactions is vandalism.
— Adam Back (a founder of Blockstream)
Serious question:
Why is Peter Todd allowed to merge bizarre dangerous crap like this, which nobody even asked for and which totally goes against the foundations of Bitcoin (ie, it would ENCOURAGE DOUBLE SPENDS in a protocol whose main function is to PREVENT DOUBLE SPENDS)??
Meanwhile, something that everyone wants and that was simple to implement (increased block size, hello?!?) ends up getting stalled and trolled and censored for months?
What the fuck is going on here???
After looking at Peter Todd's comments and work over the past few years, I've finally figured out the right name for what he's into - which was hinted at in the "vandalism" comment from Adam Back above.
Peter Todd is more into vandalism than programming.
Message to Peter Todd: If you want to keep insisting on trying to vandalize Bitcoin by adding weird dangerous double-spending "features" that nobody even asked for in the first place, go sabotage some alt-coin, and leave Bitcoin the fuck alone.
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

Charlie Lee (Coinbase): "It scares me what the Bitcoin community is turning into. Any opinion that's not the party line is being stamped out."

Charlie Lee (Coinbase): submitted by Gobitcoin to btc [link] [comments]

"It's Bitcoins fault for being big!", "Coinbase fucked us!", "Charlie Lee knew something!" - Y'all are funny

submitted by Kooriki to btc [link] [comments]

Bitcoin from $2.5K to $333K? Is Charlie lee right? Coinbase going crazy over altcoins... has it lost its integrity? | Cryptocurrency News | Chepicap

Bitcoin from $2.5K to $333K? Is Charlie lee right? Coinbase going crazy over altcoins... has it lost its integrity? | Cryptocurrency News | Chepicap submitted by Findingthecure to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

Should I liquidate my GDAX/Coinbase bitcoins, since there is a chance that Charlie Lee wants to stay on the Core fork?

submitted by drogean3 to btc [link] [comments]

Consensus! JGarzik: "RBF would be anti-social on the network" / Charlie Lee, Coinbase : "RBF is irrational and harmful to Bitcoin" / Gavin: "RBF is a bad idea" / Adam Back: "Blowing up 0-confirm transactions is vandalism" / Hearn: RBF won't work and would be harmful for Bitcoin"

Congratulations to Peter Todd - it looks like you've achieved consensus! Everyone is against you on RBF!
Replace By Fee - A Counter-Argument, by Mike Hearn
https://medium.com/@octskyward/replace-by-fee-43edd9a1dd6d#.suzs1gu7y
Repeating past statements, it is acknowledged that Peter’s scorched earth replace-by-fee proposal is aptly named, and would be widely anti-social on the current network.
— Jeff Garzik
Coinbase fully agrees with Mike Hearn. RBF is irrational and harmful to Bitcoin.
— Charlie Lee, engineering manager at Coinbase
Replace-by-fee is a bad idea.
— Gavin Andresen
I agree with Mike & Jeff. Blowing up 0-confirm transactions is vandalism.
— Adam Back (a founder of Blockstream)
Serious question:
Why is Peter Todd allowed to merge bizarre dangerous crap like this, which nobody even asked for and which totally goes against the foundations of Bitcoin (ie, it would ENCOURAGE DOUBLE SPENDS in a protocol whose main function is to PREVENT DOUBLE SPENDS)??
Meanwhile, something that everyone wants and that was simple to implement (increased block size, hello?!?) ends up getting stalled and trolled and censored for months?
What the fuck is going on here???
After looking at Peter Todd's comments and work over the past few years, I've finally figured out the right name for what he's into - which was hinted at in the "vandalism" comment from Adam Back above.
Peter Todd is more into vandalism than programming.
Message to Peter Todd: If you want to keep insisting on trying to vandalize Bitcoin by adding weird dangerous double-spending "features" that nobody even asked for in the first place, go sabotage some alt-coin, and leave Bitcoin the fuck alone.
submitted by ydtm to bitcoinxt [link] [comments]

Litecoin creator Charlie Lee talks about Litecoin, Bitcoin & Coinbase. 15 min video, 2 years ago.

Litecoin creator Charlie Lee talks about Litecoin, Bitcoin & Coinbase. 15 min video, 2 years ago. submitted by edelig to litecoin [link] [comments]

I believe what Coinbase is saying is that if the community really thinks B2X is Bitcoin, it will be reflected in the marketcap and hashrate. - Charlie Lee

I believe what Coinbase is saying is that if the community really thinks B2X is Bitcoin, it will be reflected in the marketcap and hashrate. - Charlie Lee submitted by virtuexru to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[uncensored-r/Bitcoin] Charlie Lee: How Coinbase and other exchanges will handle the Segwit2x hardfork

The following post by coblee is being replicated because some comments within the post(but not the post itself) have been silently removed.
The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link:
np.reddit.com/ Bitcoin/comments/73v4nm
The original post's content was as follows:
I’ve been asked multiple times how I think Coinbase (and other exchanges) will handle the Segwit2x hardfork in November. For background, although I’m no longer working at Coinbase, I was previously Director of Engineer at Coinbase and led the GDAX team, and I still give Coinbase advice. This is how I think this 2x hardfork will play out…
With the ETC and BCH hardforks, it was clear that those 2 coins will be the minority fork, so it was safe to use a wait-and-see approach. So Coinbase didn’t support those forks initially. And only if there was traction on those forks, would Coinbase spend the time and resources to support those forks and let people access their coins on the minority chain. That is what Coinbase did with both ETC and BCH hard forks.
For the 2x hardfork, things are a bit more tricky. 2x is supposed to be an upgrade to the Bitcoin protocol. What that means is that ideally everyone should upgrade to the 2x code before the hardfork and the hardfork will just happen and everyone would just switch to the new chain and no one would be on the old chain. This only works if everyone did this. Because this is a hardfork, if not everyone upgrades, then there will be 2 chains. The supporters of 2x and the NYA agreement believe that if all the mining hashrate switches over to the 2x chain, the original chain will be dead and no one would use it. But how is that different than fiat currency, where miners decide (by fiat) that your old bills are no longer valid? Thankfully, Bitcoin doesn’t work this way. It’s the people who use the coin that gives it value, and miners will mine the coin that makes them the most money. And right now, pretty much all the Bitcoin Core developers and a large part of the community including a lot of prominent figures in this space have come out against this hardfork.
Because this 2x hardfork is so contentious, Coinbase cannot handle it the same way they handled the ETC and BCH hardfork. In other words, they can’t just choose one fork and ignore the other fork. Choosing to support only one fork (whichever that is) would cause a lot of confusion for users and open them up to lawsuits. So Coinbase is forced to support both forks at the time of the hardfork and need to let the market decide which is the real Bitcoin. Now the question is which fork will retain the “BTC” and “Bitcoin” moniker and which will be listed as something separate. Although Coinbase signed the NYA agreement, I do not believe that this agreement binds them in any way with respect to how to name the separate forks. For practical reasons, the BTC symbol belongs to the incumbent, which is the original chain. This is because there will be no disruption to people who are running Bitcoin Core software and depositing/withdrawing BTC to/from Coinbase and GDAX. And only if you trade the coin on the 2x fork, would you need to download and run the BTC1 Segwit2x client.
If the market really supports this Segwit2x upgrade, that coin will trade at a higher price. And then we will all agree which is Bitcoin and which is a minority fork. There will be no contention at that point.
This is the advice I have given to Coinbase and I expect Coinbase and other exchanges to handle this Segwit2x hardfork in this way.
submitted by censorship_notifier to noncensored_bitcoin [link] [comments]

I'm Charlie Lee, creator of Litecoin & Director of Engineering at Coinbase. Ask me anything! (at Bitcoin.com)

I'm Charlie Lee, creator of Litecoin & Director of Engineering at Coinbase. Ask me anything! (at Bitcoin.com) submitted by MemoryDealers to btc [link] [comments]

Charlie Lee (Coinbase): "It scares me what the Bitcoin community is turning into. Any opinion that's not the party line is being stamped out."

Charlie Lee (Coinbase): submitted by asymmetric_bet to litecoin [link] [comments]

Be careful of the Twitter @btc folks. It looks like a scam account - pinned Tweet is a disguised Coinbase Referral URL and it retweets Charlie "Scammer" Lee. Scam alert level = 10. Please follow well-known accounts for Bitcoin info such as @bitcoin /r/btc

Be careful of the Twitter @btc folks. It looks like a scam account - pinned Tweet is a disguised Coinbase Referral URL and it retweets Charlie submitted by HiIAMCaptainObvious to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash y Coinbase y un comentario acerca de Charlie Lee!

submitted by tekvx to ArgenBitcoin [link] [comments]

Charlie Lee: How Coinbase and other exchanges will handle the Segwit2x hardfork /r/Bitcoin

Charlie Lee: How Coinbase and other exchanges will handle the Segwit2x hardfork /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Charlie Lee (Coinbase, Litecoin) speaks at Bitcoin Miami 1/25/2014

Charlie Lee (Coinbase, Litecoin) speaks at Bitcoin Miami 1/25/2014 submitted by relganz to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Ethereum $1000 Korea, Bitcoin Cash Coinbase Scam, Charlie Lee Sells LTC, and Monaco News

Ethereum $1000 Korea, Bitcoin Cash Coinbase Scam, Charlie Lee Sells LTC, and Monaco News submitted by NEOCryptoMeister to litecoin [link] [comments]

Litecoin Creator Charlie Lee: Coinbase Will Likely Choose Bitcoin Over SegWit2x

Litecoin Creator Charlie Lee: Coinbase Will Likely Choose Bitcoin Over SegWit2x submitted by Cryptoknowledge to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Consensus! JGarzik: "RBF would be anti-social on the network" / Charlie Lee, Coinbase : "RBF is irrational and harmful to Bitcoin" / Gavin: "RBF is a bad idea" / Adam Back: "Blowing up 0-confirm transactions is vandalism" / Hearn: RBF won't work and would be harmful for Bitcoin" /r/btc

Consensus! JGarzik: submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

12-20 04:12 - 'Coinbase says no BCH trading, just withdrawals, if change we announce. 3 doritos after: Coinbase says BCH is real Bitcoin and suprise add for trading, only insiders like Charlie Lee wins' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/caterpillar498 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 0-10min

'''
[link]1
'''
Coinbase says no BCH trading, just withdrawals, if change we announce. 3 doritos after: Coinbase says BCH is real Bitcoin and suprise add for trading, only insiders like Charlie Lee wins
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: caterpillar498
1: https://twitter.com/Smaulgld/status/943307093376937984
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

The Road to a $1trillion Bitcoin market cap- Charlie Lee talks Litecoin, crypto-dividends, more! Charlie Lee, Creator Litecoin #futurebitcoin Litecoin Coinbase Partnership LTC CEO Charlie Lee about ... Litecoin Coinbase Partnership LTC CEO Charlie Lee about ... Charlie Lee: All Things Litecoin (#MimbleWimble, #Privacy, #Atari, ++)

If you treat it like money in the bank, then you will buy Bitcoin from an exchange like Coinbase and leave your money there. A second thing is that Bitcoin is a new system, a new way of doing things. 3 comments on “ Litecoin Founder Charlie Lee on Bitcoin Censorship Resistance and Dragon Ball ” Bubba. June 16, 2020. Charlie Lee is the creator of Litecoin, and currently works as the Director of Engineering at Coinbase. Experience. Lee created Litecoin while working at Google, where he served as a Software Engineer. He worked on YouTube, Chrome, and Play Games. Litecoin. Although Lee was immediately excited by cryptocurrency, he was unhappy with the early View Charlie Lee’s profile on LinkedIn, the world's largest professional community. Charlie has 5 jobs listed on their profile. See the complete profile on LinkedIn and discover Charlie’s Coinbase launched its Bitcoin debit card to much adoration by crypto-currency enthusiasts. Shift Payments, a fintech company, will issue the card, which enables Coinbase users in 24 US states to spend bitcoins online and offline at more than 38 million merchants across the globe. I noticed that Charlie Lee (Director of Engineering at Coinbase) is quite biased and vocal lately regarding Bitcoin scaling. IMO, regularly crossing the boundaries of professionalism with his tweets to push SegWit for Litecoin at all costs.

[index] [19885] [23904] [8961] [9029] [15094] [18872] [24216] [21988] [4217] [12893]

The Road to a $1trillion Bitcoin market cap- Charlie Lee talks Litecoin, crypto-dividends, more!

Litecoin & Coinbase Charlie Lee LTC Giveaway! ... #tezos #eos #blockone #binancecoin #token #tokenization #xvia #altcoins #airdrop #bitstamp #binancedex #coinbase #coil #joelkatz #btc #bitcoin # ... Charlie Lee, Creator Litecoin, the most popular alternative currency to Bitcoin. He was previously Director of Engineering at Coinbase, the most popular crypto-currency wallet and exchange. Prior... Litecoin creator Charlie Lee Talks About Litecoin Bitcoin And Coinbase - Duration: 15:36. ... Charlie Lee talks Bitcoin, Litecoin, Bgold, crypto-dividends, and much more! *COINBASE: GET $10 FREE BITCOIN **Buy bitcoin, litecoin, ethereum, and/or bitcoin cash on Coinbase. Purchase $100 or more and we both get $10 worth of bitcoin FREE. Also, be sure to check out ... Charlie Lee is definitely an important figure in the crypto space and I feel like he should be respected for his hard work in the community. ... Coinbase adding Bitcoin Cash without warning and ...

Flag Counter