About OP discussion, no wonder here is no analysis of top big blocks shills at all, because they just worship small blocks without rational reasons behind, thus most lacking analytical skills at all.
It just shows how disconnected with reality the OP'er has become. This is a side effect of living under a censoring regime. When you only get to see one side of an argument, you start to believe that it is the only narrative. |
|
|
|
Not only, but it's mainly the disk space...
So propagation delay is now considered a minor issue? Ah, the propagation delay.... That is indeed a major issue. Thanks for bringing that up. You'd think with it being so important and all that someone might have been working on it, but... ya know... segwit, LN, rbf... Oh, is that "Relay Network" I hear you saying? External solution to a problem caused by internal smelly code? "Lets send all the transactions to a node, and then send all the same transactions to the node again as a block - just to be sure." - "But that causes a huge propagation delay if bitcoin ever succeeds and transactions increase. Cant we just fix it?" "Fix it? Are you mad!! That would take, like, a 100 lines of code. Its much easier to radically change the way bitcoin works via RBF, segwit and LN first. If they all work out in 2-3 years, we might look at your crazy reckless 100 line code change." |
|
|
|
Courtney Love has really let herself go. |
|
|
|
The problem with daytrading is, as I live in Germany (and understood it correctly), I have to pay 30% taxes with every cashout. Only when I hold longer than 1 year, then there are no taxes. And hell I don´t give them dicks $1 of taxes. I invest and risk my money and if I lose it they don´t care. But when I make profits, they want 30%. Fuck them.
You *should* be able to offset any losses incurred in the last 3 years against your gains. Its just that few people crystalise losses by cashing out on a bad trade. But if you can get it tax free after hodling for 12 months, then you are doing pretty good. Not many tax regimes in Europe are that generous.  |
|
|
|
-snip- I should have just read the tag line.  Reads quite a bit like sour grapes ... didn't get the invite to the big table? ... lost a little money on some half-baked start-up ideas? ... don't really understand the tech. as well as you thought? Don't feel bad, Open Source is a difficult minefield to navigate commercially. Open Source money is guaranteed to leave no-one unscathed coming out the other side. Now that we're focused on the messenger, any other guesses as to my motivations? This is fun. I've had a policy of trust no one in cryptoland, it's worked out quite nicely for me so far. My questions WRT the motivations of Blockstream's investors, their employees, and the "reference" client they control... are very much in keeping with this policy.   Especially those who explicitly tell you to "trust us" |
|
|
|
^ You actually paid $27 for that image?
Why? Pissed coz your Momma didnt split it with you? ps. quoting text from people you have on 'ignore'...idiot. |
|
|
|
What is there to talk about? We must yield to them no matter what occurs. Bring this up again and we'll be forced to send you away for reeducation. I love how ruling elites always find ways to abuse language to control the lower classes. Long held mantra are subtly changed as the propagandistic needs of the leadership changes. electronic cash that allows online payments to be sent directly from one party to another Becomes: We believe Bitcoin can accomplish this by providing the foundation for additional layers on top of the protocol and interfaces with other systems So the direct peer to peer network is soon to be only the foundation (carrier) for something else. |
|
|
|
Where are the bears?
bears be watchin....  |
|
|
|
|
Hold on tight to your knickers folks, this could go even wilder in the next few hours.
Chinese officials have said they will no longer stop the market after it opens in the morning.
Interesting times... ( mind you, they have lied in the past, but even so, hold on...)
|
|
|
|
Just no.  https://medium.com/@octskyward/replace-by-fee-43edd9a1dd6d#.asn8rqiexRepeating 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 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) ? Three of those guys can just stop it from happening if it's so bad. Unless Peter is remarkably good at sucking dick I don't see how this is an issue. He must be able to suck a golf ball through 10 meters of garden hose, coz this is going into 0.12 (afaict) and the rc's for 0.12 are out already. |
|
|
|
tsk tsk. No punctuation. No paragraphs.  |
|
|
|
Wall of text in the Wall Observer thread
Some feedback. I like you posting, but please make use of paragraphs. Otherwise nobody will actually bother to read, it hurts the eyes.  |
|
|
|
Why postpone the inevitable with RBP? It’s so convoluted. The authors of the LN whitepaper have said eventually it will need bigger blocks anyway.
I'm sure I'm missing something...
It boils down to Core wanting larger blocks - but only on their terms ( where LN is functional) Bigger blocks on anyone else terms ( the present users) is a no-no. Contentious hard fork, ddos, etc. When LN is ready, Im sure we will be told that a hard fork wont be so bad. 4 legs good, 2 legs better.... |
|
|
|
bitcoin isn't gonna down deeper unless there are some of the major bugs in bitcoin.
Wait for the first roll-out of RBF. Not bugs per se, but new, unique gaming opportunities for the clever scriptwriters. Mind you, they are in such a panic to rush this through, I'm sure there will be some fun bugs too. RBF could be the 'killer-app' that the alternative clients need to gain traction. With less than 40% on the last core update, it will be interesting to see how many bother. RBF seems to be a necessary ingredient for LN. Can anybody explain how? . LN only needs BIP68, 112, and segregated witness That is not quite accurate. RBF buys time for LN - by accelerating the development of the so-called 'fee market' (meaning higher fees) and keeping blocks as small aspossible -hoping that the 1MB limit wont be an issue until LN is in place, at which point the limit wont matter because the alternative off-chain solution tm is in place. It a business decision, not a technical one. There is a poorer business case for LN where cheaper space is available in the block. (source: here. ) |
|
|
|
bitcoin isn't gonna down deeper unless there are some of the major bugs in bitcoin.
Wait for the first roll-out of RBF. Not bugs per se, but new, unique gaming opportunities for the clever scriptwriters. Mind you, they are in such a panic to rush this through, I'm sure there will be some fun bugs too. RBF could be the 'killer-app' that the alternative clients need to gain traction. With less than 40% on the last core update, it will be interesting to see how many bother. |
|
|
|
As a non American not following American election cause I don't really give a fuck about your country (no offense though, you can't care about everything) I don't really understand your point. Could you explain?
Obama is anti-gun. Smith & Wessen is a gun manufacturer. People are scrambling to buy guys while they still can. Ah, OK. I thought Smith & Wesson might have run a chain of trailer parks, in which case the chart made sense too. |
|
|
|
all images in the posts of this bot today is not working with me, someone fix it ? bitcointalk.org image proxy: invalid image Richie has been experimenting with the script - looks like he has inadvertently used an incorrectly nested \[img\] tag in the image url |
|
|
|
Your responses to him addressed none of his arguments and mischaracterized the rest of them, as usual.
brg - the English language was on and left you a message: "Please stop torturing me!!" |
|
|
|
The idea of enabling nodes & miners to set a market block-size is quite reasonable so there is no criticism of the idea.
That seems a reasonable result. Just need to iron out the details.... In summary:
1. The use case: dynamic market set block-sizes are interesting.
2. bitcoin unlimited proposals so far seems broken as discussed by multiple people for a whole range of reasons. We didnt have a crisp definition and it seems that some things maybe undecided. That's ok - just keep working on it and make a concrete proposal later and people can analyse it from that.
I wouldn't say they are 'broken' - there is a lot of misunderstanding about it, and due to the level of censure taking place on bitcointalk its difficult to get a clear picture of what it is about on this forum. So may I respectfully point interested parties to the BU 'white paper' ( without having this post moderated/deleted as a result) here where you can digest the finer details. Additionally, the FAQ provides a higher level description of key topics. This should remove some of the guesswork which has characterised this thread. Then present your thoughts or arguments on the unmoderated /r/btc reddit or directly to bitco.in where they can be discussed. |
|
|
|
Small blockers are so edgy and cool. I bet they smoke behind the bike sheds at lunchtime too. Watch out gentlemand, Richy_T's gunning for your comedy crown. Calm, rational discussion punctuated by tourettes outbursts like that... a winning strategy for the "1MB4EVA socioeconomic majority". I thought that was a great moment - he is clearly becoming more marginalised, even by his own side. His view is no longer relevant to a lot of the core devs. In what was a fairly reasonable discussion, he just comes across as the lunatic fringe. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
