windfury you have no clue
Either I have no clue, or you simply believe the people who don’t agree with you “have no clue”. You have been gaslighting and spreading disinformation. Why would I agree with you, “just to have a clue”?
and when people have no clue. they throw out a rebuttal of victim carding
and get their buddy the rebuttal for them (social drama to distract topic)
Drama? Where?
you and doomad are just the replacement dramaqueen of carlton and lauda
lauda is your clone. his buzzword was adhom/. yours is gaslight but both you are playing the same ignorance game and cry victim game when you cant think of a real answer
I am the stupid one. You are doing Carlton and Lauda a disservice, ser.
your not original nor can you even grasp whats really involved in bitcoin
YOU are original, I’m merely a learner. A stupid learner.
i get it your a PR person for another network
you have gone to some extremes of trying to portray anyone that wants onchain scaling to be some other brand/group/opposition to bitcoin. while then you still promote your other network as bitcoin
No, you branded yourself for gaslighting. Plus I never branded you, but those people in your trust rating did.
your not that smart and its clear what your motivations are.
I’m the stupid one, yes.
all you and doomad care about is saying if anyone wants scaling they should offramp to an altnet or fork off to an altcoin
such idiot methodology to avoid scaling bitcoin
Why do you always post statements like that? That might have worked during 2016, but the newbies are smarter now, franky1.
and windfury.
your fantasy mission promotion of wanting more full nodes. but less utility for those full nodes to actually use bitcoin.. is a mission that wont win.. so stop fantasising about it
if you want more fullnodes. more people need access to transactions on bitcoin to monitor.. not less
(your not going to want to monitor bitcoin 24/7 if your funds are locked and wont move for 3 months)
Are you fantasizing that gigameg blocks would win?
have one independant thought not cast down on you by institutional influencers
you as a normal working man with no custodial service, no institutional level customer base..
you have been advocating you want bitcoin to be just for institutional/custodial reserve usage which means you are not then able to use bitcoin onchain anytime you like for yourself
ask yourself why are you shooting yourself in the foot being coaxed to use another network.
why are you saying you want to stop yourself from having the freedom of using onchain anytime for yourself
Why don’t YOU have one independent thought, and not thoughts cast down on you by Roger Ver, or Craig Wright. |
|
|
|
Personally? No. But there are people smarter than me who do, or maybe they believe they do believe there’s a plausible reason. LukeDashjr. He doesn’t waste his time with us plebs in the forum though.
Take this to the non-technical part of the forum @Wind_FURY where it can be discussed without the prejudices of our technical overlords, LOL. Or to the Ivory Tower. I think that was meant for discussions like these. (Not exactly development but related to the overall politics). He asked a question. I merely answered the question. And hey, you got @coblee on the thread. He is a non-pleb i suppose. Wonder if he'll chip in beyond mounting the below defense. Even well known coins like Litecoin fall directly into this category.
Charlie Lee created it so he could GPU mine, while everyone else CPU mined it, but claimed scrypt (with the low settings used) was GPU hostile ... for a year.
Kano, I expected more from you. You were around when Litecoin launched. --snip-- Try to be better next time and not throw wild accusations please. The more thought-provoking question is, what was he doing reading through this topic? Is he planning on making a proposal to activate BIP-300 in Litecoin? Charlie Lee did encourage the activation of Segwit by proving it safe through its activation in Litecoin.  |
|
|
|
|
But what is YOUR definition of “scaling”, franky1? Is it merely increasing the transaction throughput per block, but without any regard for the network if it scales out, or scales in?
I believe we cannot discuss that topic properly without a common understanding of “scaling”.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin transactions are much slower than say Litecoin (or Bitcoin Cash). One of the commonly mentioned reasons against Bitcoin having a different block size/speed is to maintain its decentralisation.
I might be nitpicking, but Bcash has the same confirmation times between blocks. It’s not “faster”. Litecoin may have faster confirmation times, but it’s about settlement assurances. One confirmation in Bitcoin is worth more in accumulated cost than Litecoin confirmations.
1) Why not change the block size/speed so that transactions are even slower than it currently is, to further improve decentralisation?
2) If the answer to 1) is that bitcoin is believed to already be sufficiently decentralised, is there any scope to tweak the block size/speed to improve transaction speed while maintaining its decentralisation?
3) I guess where I'm going with this is, are the current parameters actually optimal?
I believe no one can answer you that, but it’s better to over-shoot security than under-shoot, and with the current parameters, I believe it’s OK. But I’m the stupid one. A developer, LukeDashJr believes that blocks should be smaller to decentralize the network further. |
|
|
|
which makes me more confident about the need for a censorship-resistant money, and the network becoming a multi-generational protocol.
^ says the guy advertising another network at every oppertunity and being buddies with censors that want to ban/ignore anyone wanting to evolve bitcoin onchain and yes LN is a separate network different currencies can use. a small nice service network for small amounts. Bitcoin will not be censorship-resistant, and not be a multi-generational protocol because many people on the community support the Lightning Network? franky1, Bcash also supports “another network” through their new sidechain. Go criticize your “real Bitcoin”.
which bitcoin should not be devolved/stagnated just to publicise this other network as a go-to service everyone should use instead
It didn’t.
and no dont cry to your buddies for backup rebuttals
Because they can see through your lies, gaslighting attempts?
and yes you saying
"i dont want coffe amounts onchain" is censorship talk of wanting certain transactions removed/not tolerated
funny thing is if you cant spend coffee amounts. how you suppose to spend coffee amounts to deposit into your other network to then buy coffee in your accepted manner
But you can use Bitcoin for coffee transactions onchain.
and please dont say the idea is to lock up 10xcoffee amount. then split it over 4 routes. because then you will not get to buy 10 complete coffees
You don’t want to use LN? Use onchain. |
|
|
|
Ah the folly of creating a p2p electronic cash system that can be used by the entire world. I bet nobody wants that.
There’s no folly in that, but the folly is in the design-decisions made by some of these fork-of-a-fork forked-shitcoin “developers”, that makes the network scale in instead of out, and claim that it’s “scaling”. Good luck developing your GIGA-MEG block network. Plus newbies are currently more educated about Bitcoin today, good luck convincing them. Sorry my edit coincided with your reply. Newbies are influenced heavily by what is on social media. This is awash with a kind of groupthink that matches what is on bitcointalk, r/bitcoin etc which everyone knows is heavily moderated. No, I used to believe “bigger blocks = better for higher transaction throughput”, without truly understanding how the network works, and believing it was as simple as increasing the block size. I was conned, and I learned the HARD WAY. Newbies must learn too, either the easy way or the hard way.
When you look at nullc's history at wikipedia it all paints a very clear picture.
Its also antithetical to Bitcoin, which is about maintaining a single ledger that can be trusted, and verified by anyone.
I will say nullc is a fraud, if you say Craig Wright is a fraud. Craig is Satoshi. nullc knows this and there is nothing he can do it about, OK, then maybe Gregory Maxwell is Satoshi, and there is nothing Craig Wright can do about it. Obviously, gmaxwell is the better coder, and Computer Scientist.
however much he might try with his army of reddit warriors and his taxi r/bsv hate sub to try and denigrate him and BSV. It's laughably childish and entirely consistent with his past behaviours of astroturfing & sock puppetry.
That sounds like “someone else” would do.
Meanwhile back in the world of grown ups the COPA case coming up. It is interesting how CSW name is mud, alleged a fraud by all, and yet no-one has actually taken him down. You'd think that would be easy if it was so obvious.
McCormack backing out of the truth defense was awkward. A "crazy amount of evidence he is satoshi" but still nobody gives him any credit for his deep knowledge of Bitcoin due to him having invented it!. Meanwhile its the rock stars like Tether, Coinbase, Binance that the regulators are getting twitchy about, all while twitter laser eyes extoll their virtues about how legit everything all is and the Aussie man is bad.
Nothing in that post proves Craig Wright is Satoshi. But yeah you were conned alright, way before CSW came along. The poisoning of the well with regards scaling and block size started probably 2013, which then evolved through 2015 into social media attacks, censoring anyone that dared question block size limits, attacking Gavin and Hearne to kill Bitcoin XT, the coupe de grace was SegWitx2 and UASF - quite an incredible piece of public manipulation. "Hats off" so to speak  The debate was technical, not political. XT would have been an unsafe risk if everyone came to consensus around it, and if the network actually forked to it. That would be the end, then we would have Satoshi spinning on his computer chair, in his mom’s basement.
It's also interesting how I hear "simply increasing the block size" said a lot, like BSV is just some repo-fork that tweaked a parameter lol. Increasing the block size was far from simple, given the amount of damage done by core hacking in workarounds for a 1MB capacity - they fundamentally broke Bitcoin in ways that you folks still don't even comprehend. Probably not because you aren't capable but because you refuse to beleive that maybe, just maybe, you have made a miscalculation. In that situation it is absolutely vital you don't expose yourself to anything that might exascerbate the problem.
Then show everyone, and argue for the improvements made in BSV.
The work that Shadders and team did was phenomenal and this was just to get the BSV client into the ~1gb range to buy some time for what comes next.
I almost laughed, but sorry. More details should be necessary. Node count, how many gigemeg blocks it handled consecutively.
The throughput in teranode represents an entire architectural shift away from monolithic nodes to horizontally scalable node farms that split up work. It's beyond core's wildest dreams. I don't suppose anyone I paying attention though. All asleep at the wheel as usual.
OK, why don’t you explain teranodes, and BSV’s architecture. There’s nothing there in your post, but this and that, and it will be “insanely great” like you’re Steve Jobs. Surely I am the one learning a hard lesson for dumping all my BTC?  Perhaps all my time is taken learning other things such that I haven't had time for that particular lesson. Surely. In the end of everything the participants speak truly through the market. |
|
|
|
Nobody gives a crap about Elon Musk and Tesla anymore. He has lost all his credibility, bitcoin price didn't move at all despite some people trying to hype things up over the past 12 hours; the shitcoins he advertises are also no longer showing any reaction to his pump attempts.
Did you watch his talk in the B-Word with Jack Dorsey? I believe he expressed his real viewpoint about Bitcoin, and it was OK for me. He has the same viewpoint like many of us in the community. https://www.thebword.org/c/track-2-Bitcoin-As-A-Tool-For-Economic-EmpowermentHe acknowledged LN as an improvement, but he is also open to bigger blocks to scale onchain, which he is obviously in his own journey of learning. He has said all positive things about Bitcoin, no trolling. There’s a video posted, and he said,
"Tesla's bank balances in Europe have negative interest rate..it is quite annoying to see your bank balance drop in real time..this is insane..we definitely move that into #bitcoin"
https://twitter.com/therationalroot/status/1417928935090925573 |
|
|
|
The “mini-crash” caused you to sell your Bitcoins to the billionares? Look at this pattern. The markets are cyclical. There are currently new players in the market who might be from the stock market. They might be moving money from cryptocurrencies to stocks, then might be going back to cryptocurrencies again.  Great, can I share this macro picture with my friends, i mean some of my personal media. I'm learning how to run a hedge fund and move it around properly. So we can either advance to 92k or to another square cycle that outperforms at the top. Sometimes, we need to believe in well-founded predictions. thank man! It’s not mine. I forgot to mention, credit to Twitter account @CryptoKaleo for that chart. But I believe yes, you can share it, but always give the credit to the creator. You can also see the link of the chart directly linked to his Twitter post. Plus you can also share your own charts and analysis in the thread! |
|
|
|
I believe the Chinese Bitcoin community should do the same project to troll the government. It would be interesting to see this. But I think the government will introduce some kind of punishment for such actions. But if the leaflets are about the digital yuan, CBDC, then this is a completely different matter.  The Chinese government cannot punish the operators/people if they can’t see them do the operation in action. Hahaha. Plus, I believe a Bitcoin leaflet campaign made in China would be one of the best strategies to cause an effective psychological response from the government. |
|
|
|
The “mini-crash” caused you to sell your Bitcoins to the billionares? Look at this pattern. The markets are cyclical. There are currently new players in the market who might be from the stock market. They might be moving money from cryptocurrencies to stocks, then might be going back to cryptocurrencies again. |
|
|
|
Does he? I believe his influence on the price has faded as fast as his popularity among Bitcoiners, or coiners in general. He’s a troll, and an “enemy” of Bitcoin like Roger Ver and Jihan Wu before him. John McAfee is respected than Elon Musk.
Its not the people who are die hard fans of Bitcoin that he influences, he influences those that are new or treating it as an investment opportunity. So, yeah he definitely still has as much influence as he did when he Tesla made the statement around a month or two ago. I believe the “fire” caused by China, with Elon Musk throwing more gasoline, has caused the weak hands to sell mere weeks ago. It’s the billionaires and the strong hands left.
Also, I think its pushing it to claim Mcafee is more respected that Elon Musk. Just because Elon Musk is considered enemy number one to most users on this forum, doesn't automatically make him the worst person in the world.
In the Bitcoin community, not just this forum. Although, I believe he can redeem himself. Elon Musk and Jack Dorsey agree to talk about bitcoin at an event in July... Seems like these two might have a plan for Bitcoins future. What direction are they taking? Can their power combined control the sway of Bitcoins future? When will be the event to happen ? Only just over a week to go until this now. It is a little concerning that anything negative Elon says seems to result in weak hands selling. Maybe having Jack there & able to counter the FUD will help though.
I think the event had already done according to your post here mate. Any news what does happen to the meeting? Answered in the website’s FAQ. https://www.thebword.org/c/faqWhere can I watch? You can watch all presentations on www.thebword.org on July 21 starting at 9am PDT/12pm EDT. Each presentation is scheduled to drop on www.thebword.org at a designated time. You can find the event agenda here. Will The ₿ Word be live? This is a virtual event consisting primarily of pre-recorded presentations. There will be one live session starting at 11am PDT/2pm EDT. Featuring Cathie Wood, Jack Dorsey, and Elon Musk, Steve Lee will moderate this live panel discussion on Bitcoin as a Tool for Economic Empowerment. |
|
|
|
Will the debate/talk be sfreamed live later somewhere? Please share the links! Only just over a week to go until this now. It is a little concerning that anything negative Elon says seems to result in weak hands selling.
That's what I thought. Even if many of us don't care what Musk does or doesn't do, as has been discussed in the thread, there is no doubt that he still has the ability to influence the price, especially in weak hands. The event may add volatility to the price. Does he? I believe his influence on the price has faded as fast as his popularity among Bitcoiners, or coiners in general. He’s a troll, and an “enemy” of Bitcoin like Roger Ver and Jihan Wu before him. John McAfee is respected than Elon Musk. |
|
|
|
The idea behind the project is great but it seems like your're trying to bring people into sect.
Sect? Are you saying the Moscow Project is bringing people into a cult? Hahaha.
No need to push on pepole. Most of them will throw this paper in trash.
It’s not pushing people, no one is forcing anyone to buy Bitcoin. Plus anyone is free to do what they want. They can make paper airplanes out of the flyers, it would be OK. I believe the Chinese Bitcoin community should do the same project to troll the government. |
|
|
|
Good job, OP. Discovering TradingView, learning Pine Script, and back-testing were what I missed during my newbie years in trading. Cryptocurrencies was my first time to be exposed in investing/trading. If I discovered TradingView from the first day, I would have learned more and might not have lost my initial investment. BUT, I would not have discovered HODL-type + DCA investing too. |
|
|
|
Ah the folly of creating a p2p electronic cash system that can be used by the entire world. I bet nobody wants that.
There’s no folly in that, but the folly is in the design-decisions made by some of these fork-of-a-fork forked-shitcoin “developers”, that makes the network scale in instead of out, and claim that it’s “scaling”. Good luck developing your GIGA-MEG block network. Plus newbies are currently more educated about Bitcoin today, good luck convincing them. Sorry my edit coincided with your reply. Newbies are influenced heavily by what is on social media. This is awash with a kind of groupthink that matches what is on bitcointalk, r/bitcoin etc which everyone knows is heavily moderated. No, I used to believe “bigger blocks = better for higher transaction throughput”, without truly understanding how the network works, and believing it was as simple as increasing the block size. I was conned, and I learned the HARD WAY. Newbies must learn too, either the easy way or the hard way.
When you look at nullc's history at wikipedia it all paints a very clear picture.
Its also antithetical to Bitcoin, which is about maintaining a single ledger that can be trusted, and verified by anyone.
I will say nullc is a fraud, if you say Craig Wright is a fraud. |
|
|
|
Ah the folly of creating a p2p electronic cash system that can be used by the entire world. I bet nobody wants that.
There’s no folly in that, but the folly is in the design-decisions made by some of these fork-of-a-fork forked-shitcoin “developers”, that makes the network scale in instead of out, and claim that it’s “scaling”. Good luck developing your GIGA-MEG block network. Plus newbies are currently more educated about Bitcoin today, good luck convincing them. |
|
|
|
I believe in that 2 years, they’ll discover the truth for themselves. That there’s nothing that they can do to put the genie back in the bottle. The invention of Bitcoin has opened a Pandora’s Box with new possibilities. It definitely WILL BE harder for the central bankers to control the monetary system, but they did that to themselves.
That is the most logical course that things should take. Though it takes one back to the same question. How far will nation-states go in their pursuit to suppress bitcoin and stop it from loosening their grip on power? VERY FAR. That’s why it’s to the utmost importance that Bitcoin is given the ability to scale out in order to decentralize further, and over-shoot security. Then what design-decisions should the Core developers make? Smaller blocks, layered protocol. |
|
|
|
With other countries seriously considering this direction, the EU has finally start its Digital Euro (CBDC) project. It will take them 2 years to explore the potential of such a currency,
I believe in that 2 years, they’ll discover the truth for themselves. That there’s nothing that they can do to put the genie back in the bottle. The invention of Bitcoin has opened a Pandora’s Box with new possibilities. It definitely WILL BE harder for the central bankers to control the monetary system, but they did that to themselves. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
