seeing as you are a blockstream/altcoin fanboy. you would not get deleted. they love you.

its like trying to explain to a white person about what black racism feels like. you may have seen it, or had it brush past you lightly. but you think it overall doesnt exist because you havnt seen the worse of it yourself

the even funnier part is that im not even a classic fanboy. just someone that hates corporate control and also i love to speak frankly about the pro's and cons. without trying to wash over the negatives just to spin the positives.

blockstream are just as guilty as classic in every way. corporate control. shilling sybil attacks, etc etc.

all i simply want is a 2mb+segwit with possibility of more in the future without it just being to cover blockstreams attempts to add more data to transactions for their features(eg 250 extra bytes for confidential payment codes(CPC)). also without having to wait 2 years just for some corporate overlord to decide when he wants expansion. and only allowing it not to give more true capacity. but just to offset capacity to hide the ratio of tx:mb

EG
1mb maxblocksize+segwit+CPC = 2.85mb for 3800 transactions
2mb maxblocksize (normal tx) = 2mb for 4000 transactions.

which shows blockstreams roadmap is the doomsday for all the bloat debates.

many non blockstreamers have had temporal bans for a couple days, had posts deleted, where the content of such posts were not related to illegal activity.

moderate, is just to remove talk of illegal activity..

censoring is to delete posts/comments and ban/suspend people just because the opinion is different to what the forum staff  have when talking about something ontopic

so i agree this forum tries its best to not censor people, and does try to stick to only moderating... i do find it funny that the moderators working for this forum cant accept any opinion that differs from the blockstream rhetoric.

its also funny that those same blockstreamers cannot use statistics or numbers to rebutt. but instead resort to insults. which funnily enough is breaking their own rules and technically means they should ban themselves.

i know they are protected from self-banning and use that to poke the bear to make everything into a personal attack until the other person personally attacks them as a plausible excuse to ban the person.

in my opinion there should be no classic vs blockstream debate. and that there should HAPPILY be MANY implementations, and that no codebase should have ultimate power of the code.

but we do have blockstreamers wanting blockstream to own and control the rules.. afterall there is 55million invested. and please dont reply that the 55millionis only used for a handful of people not related to the code in any way. or that blockstream only pays a couple people with no control.

prepare for the delirious Lauda to spout his classic doomsdays to try defending why blockstream should win peoples blind faith.

hint. if he tells you classic data bloat of 2mb(4000tx potential) will be too much for the network, tell him his dream of 1mbmaxblocksize+segwit+confidential payment codes = 2.85mb for 3800 transaction potential.

hint. if he tells you it will reduce full node count. tell him his dream of people who usually download core are now prefering pruned mode, and soon no witness mode, will be by far more of a risk to the dilution of true full nodes

hint. if he tells you onchain transactions cannot compete against visa's authorization network. tell him bitcoin has 2.5mill users not 900mill(visa quotes). so does not need to be exactly like visa in the next couple years. also the stats about visa's tx/s is based on a lab test of selective 'authorization' equipment in a mock lab test. and then the results multiplied in a flawed manner to the amount of systems they have dotted around the world. also worth highlighting i said it a few times.. the stats are on the AUTHORIZATION network. not the settlement network. so it should not be used in relation to blocks.

hint if he tells you that classic is headed up by a corporations. tell him that core is too (blockstream, ergo PwC, ergo many financial firms, banks)

hint if he tells you that only a couple people are employed by blockstream. tell him to explain the finances of how the $55million is to be spend by supposedly only 2-3 people

hint. if he tells you that its just a shill game and he tries to speak latin. tell him he fails latin. jst like he fails C++, by thinking bitcoin core writes its code in java if he read the code he would know its not java. he is simply guessing and needing to be spoonfed info

he probably is a BTCC user so gets priority.

but i do love how someone has blind luck once. and then tries to use it to say EVERYONE will always have the exact same experience forever and without issue.

seriously. the OP might as well say that Wonka bars are the best chocolate ever and everyone gets a free tour of a chocolate factory.. simply because he might be one of the lucky 5 that get a golden ticket.


seriously. the OP might as well say that playing the lottery is guaranteed to make everyone a millionaire by paying just $2.. because thats how much he paid for a winning ticket.

i really do love how core fanboys use the rare positive examples and pretend its normal. and then pretend the negative stuff doesnt exist.

yes devote blockstreamer your doomsday scenario's are just bad attempts at manipulating people away from real bitcoin transactions.

segwit proposes to turn cars into motocycles to fit more road users onto the road.. right.. as a better analogy..
 the problem is that blockstream then turns the motorcycle into a trike by adding the flags and other opcodes for LN and sidechains. and then adds a 10foot trailer to the trike in the form of confidential payment codes.

meaning that by the time blockstream have rebloated a transaction the eventual maxblocksize wont really help because it would be used to cushion the impact of blockstreams bloated transactions.

simply put
1mb traditional tx's average 2000 transaction capacity(for 1mb data store)
1mb+segwit proposes 3800.(for 1.8mb data store)

2mb traditional proposes 4000 transactions.(for 2mb data store)
but by the time blockstream are ready

2mb+segwit+CPC does not offer 7600 transactions for 4.6mb
but instead 7600 transactions for 5.7mb

yet 4mb traditional transactions proposes 8000 transactions for 4mb..

so it made me laugh, when using lauda's own magical numbers of segwit offering 180% capacity increase and payment codes adding 250bytes per tx. to actaully see that the corporation he defends is actually causing more bloat then just staying with the traditional transactions and just increasing capacity properly.

segwit is not a cure for capacity. it is just a temporal measure.. even the blockstreamers try not to claim it to be a cure, but call it a positive side effect. yet lauda wants to PR spin it as the cure for cancer

and lastly i am still laughing because Lauda thinks bitcoin-core is programmed in java. there there ticked the box to say that lauda has not personal knowledge of bitcoin and is just a mouthpiece for someone else spoonfeeding him.

if he atleast used the actual numbers he splurts out.. he to would realise the truth..

lauda's defense to not inccrease the blocksize is to keep contention alive by not letting core increase the maxblocksize for 16 months.. purely on the bases that it should be deemed as a strike against miners who are lucky enough to solve a block before they validated the competitors previous solution..

basically hold miners to ransom by not increasing the size until they stop making "empty blocks".
to me that is just the most lame excuse he has came up with yet. trying to infer that REAL blocks are not nearly full just because the empty blocks are pulling down the average..

seriously.. thats like saying the red signal on traffic lights doesnt need to change to green.. ever.. because if you include people walking as 'traffic' then the road is always on the move so there must not be a traffic problem by leaving the lights on red.
(cars are real blocks of data, walkers are empty blocks)

you can try to criminalize the sidewalk as much as you like.. but even on highways you will still get hitchhikers walking passed.. so how about looking just at the traffic jam and stop using averages that include pointless blocks

as for bruce not being helpful. well he could be more transparent and just scan all the documents and bitcoin addresses and make it public for the whole community to view. but then there is a chance that people will say documents are being hidden or its not original documents and other conspiracies.. so its better to be independently done by an outsider, so i can "kind of" see why bruce is trying to keep an arms length.

i still beleive its worth utilizing blockstream to get an audit done via their partners networked through PwC. im pretty sure with the amounts invested they would like to clear up a few matters pro-bono..

then maybe worth the bitcoin foundation themselves concentrating on what was their roadmap for the last 3-4 years.
maybe blockstream can also use their partners in PR to start making the bitcoin foundation be a repository of knowledge and utility.
again that 55million blockstream has can be put to good use.. especially if we should ignorantly believe that only 2 coders are employed by blockstream, so they have plenty of spare funds to use

i personally see no point in throwing more money to work out where the old money went. its obvious alot was syphoned off during a few of the conventions aswell as funny that it disappeared during the very short leadership of well many know who

but i think blockstream have deep enough pockets and can call in a favour with their pals to get an audit done

google:

bitcoin "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"

it was wrote in the genesis block of bitcoin.

in short bitcoins creation was inspired to be the opposite of the banking system.
many people in 2009-2010 liked it mostly due to the code and potential of a uncontrolled system
many people in 2011-2013 liked it due to the premiss of an open money system without control
many people in 2014-2016 started to see different businesses try gaining control of bitcoin. everything from mining farms to corporations like blockstream and classic.

fees are not an essential income stream for miners for years/decades. so please dont think its critical to raise the price any time soon, the negative repercussions of that outweigh the misconceived benefit

some of the "donations" were to possibly pay an auditor to atleast prove what we already suspect. that scammers raided the piggybank and fled.

if there was to be money pumped in, it should be used for the future helpfulness of bitcoin, rather then wasted for a 15minute report that tells us what we may already know. that said. there is nothing against PwC who are heavily invested in bitcoin to ask their partners to audit TBF pro-bono.. should the community really desire an audit of the past

if you think thats the only ways to earn. then you have already failed.
 your 5 listings are:
1&2 the penny grabber methods, (low income for alot of labour)
3 okish with enough investment and only when using trusted exchanges
4&5 risky and more chance of loss..

remember bitcoin is just a currency there are millions of ways of earning it. getting a job that gets paid in bitcoin. starting a business, freelancing your skills.

think beyond the small stuff that promises free money and think realistically about the bigger picture. then you will see there is far more opportunity then the risky time wasting stuff

a few of the nasty people of 2014-2015 raided the accounts of TBF and then moved to england. leaving TBF empty and to fester.. not caring if it should survive or go into bankruptcy.

those thrown into the board members chairs of late 2015 to replace the thieves that left, are left holding a bag of dust and have not yet decided what to do with it.

TBF could have been a knowledge power house allowing for a repository of all knowledge related to bitcoin. everything from well commented and pseudo-code included projects to help people get started. aswell as a repository of business listings and skills and jobs boards..

but it seems its just left to fester with no niche or purpose. kind of a shame..

the problem is fee's cure NOTHING

if there are 3000 people wanting to transact every 10 minutes but a block only has a capacity average of 2000 transactions, then:

even if all 3000 people paid $0.40 a transaction. its still only 66% chance of getting accepted in the first 10 minutes.
even if all 3000 people paid $4.00 a transaction. its still only 66% chance of getting accepted in the first 10 minutes.
even if all 3000 people paid $400 a transaction. its still only 66% chance of getting accepted in the first 10 minutes.

fees promise nothing and guarantee even less

increasing the fee does not allow more users to use bitcoin independently... nor does it promise prompt confirmations.
instead. if a transaction needs $1+ people will start using centralized services which would combine 100 inputs to make it cost the user only 1 cent by sharing the transaction(combining input-outputs). which results in only allowing 200 of these larger bloated transactions.

which funnily enough the blockstreamers scream about the processing time of validating large transactions.

secondly if miners want $1 a tx.. (making $2k for independant traditional transactions) by using ofchain solutions to save users money. ends up with 200 or less transactions ($200 or less per block). thus making the fee rise and rise and rise... making it less and less cheap to independantly send a transaction

so increasing the fee causes more centralized services such as coinbase being used as a store of bitcoin where people become part of a large transaction that requires more validation time.

the whole validation time the blockstreamers cry about are not about traditional independent transactions on a higher blocksize. but instead their assumption that by increasing the fee and keeping the blocksize low people are inclined to use offchain solutions that settle eventually onchain.. forcing bloated transactions that cause more validation time. they fully know that they want people to move offchain. and increasing the fee is helping them achieve this. within a decade, no one will want to send a transaction independently due to costs. forced by offchain solutions

even things like LN is going to make less transactions, but each transaction have hundreds of inputs and outputs.

because if people are storing their coins in LN or a sidechain or a service like coinbase to utilise lower fee's.. then they are less inclined to run a full node because they have no need to store or use their own private key independantly

the cure to maintain decentralization and promote node distribution while also keeping validation times of txs low.. is actually to increase capacity to allow more people to transact independently. not the fee.

bitcoin can work on a raspberry pi. and even a basic home desktop computer you can buy in 2016 for under $400 is atleast 4 times faster in every way. so the whole "datacentre" doomsday is wrong on many fronts, yet the offchain 'solutions' is a bigger threat to node distribution and also increasing validation time increases, along with forcing the fee's to be astonishingly high in the next decade (long before they are actually needed as a main miner income)

children pick up new things quickly. as long as the words used are simple.

EG if you say
"bitcoin is decentralized crypto currency ledger units"
they would have no clue

but if u say
"its limited supply money that is not stored in a bank but on a password that no one can access without that password"
they would understand.

then you can explain in more detail using simple words.

so it is possible to teach kids of any age as long as the language and examples are simplified into words that can be understood.

now then, as for a "toy". i dont think that in 2016 a kid is that interested in a teddybear that sings about bitcoin, they would see it as not entertaining or fun. but these days even 3 year olds can play games on an ipad or computer. so making an app that is a simple fun game can easily explain bitcoin without the kids even realizing it.

good in basic theory. but in practice, some have alrady tried this. here are some issues found
some people thought about sing bluetooth to connect to people locally. the issue is that with mobile phones. people walk around. meaning it will keep dropping every time people using the network move more then 100 metres apart.

another proposal was people setting up their own cell antennas. this issue is with the eventual solo-owners(thousands of people independent).. would start to become a pool. where only a few people own many masts.. much like the mobile network today

if everyone spoke to their local shops and demonstrated how easy it was to accept bitcoin. things would move faster.
but a TV promotion aim at making it more popular to USERS. would be a waste because within 30 seconds of seeing the advert most people wont see a use for it.

but like i said if there was maybe 5 people in a town and they helped get it usable in local shops. then the rest of the population of the town would later think it is usable in a later TV advert.. but not until bitcoins usefulness is set first

no this is my free time. my job has nothing to do with being a blockstream shill or a classic shill. my job is completely separate but allows me much freedom to have a nice leisurely work/life balance.
id never do a job that forces me to spend 40-50 hours a week acting like a slave.

surprisingly bitcoin was meant to free people from corporate control and allow monetary freedom. but it seems your own shilling proves you prefer the corporate controls blockstream puts on you

anyway back to the topic of the OP

advertising on TV to 'users' wont work straight off the bat because average people have 4 main questions

1. can i pay my rent/mortgage with it. (does my landlord accept bitcoin)
2. can i buy toilet roll, eggs, bacon and baked beans with it at the local store.
3. if not for real world stuff, can i use it to pay for amazon prime/netflix subscriptions seeing as its advertised as internet money
4. does my employer have the ability to pay me a wage in bitcoin
5. can i buy some using cash from anywhere thats trusted. like a pawn broker, credit union or atm

in most cases all 4 questions are no. and only a few small areas around the world would question 2 and 5  be a yes. so until people really push retailer acceptance its not really worth wasting millions on user based TV adverts because there is still limited usage in the retail market.

at the moment bitcoin needs to push the retail market to make it usable. even the remittance market is not primed for bitcoin because of the barrier of entry. which some numpties think there isnt one. but compared to changing a $20 into 2x $10 bills..
bitcoin is not that simple. you have to find strangers online by going to localbitcoins.com or you need to register your life story to use coinbase or circle.
and so would the person at the other end of the transaction to convert back to their native currency

bitcoin still has a long way to go and will not be 900million users in the next couple years like most blockerstreamers spout out about as being the doomsday thing to worry about

got a real job thanks. but maybe its time you turn some of your own opinions and questions onto yourself about your mindset and how you spend your time.