Do NOT go to either of those reddit links that "tomkat" posted above, you will only get more confused if you are new.
sadly those two places are mostly fights and endless arguments that will make any newcomer more confused than helping them.
Do NOT listen to such bullshit. Use all available sources of information. You think that it's good for newcomers to read someone's bullshit on reddit ? (Not saying its all bad but most of it yes..) It's better to learn here. Bullshit is everywhere - you think it's any better here on BTT? I just think everyone should use all possible sources for collecting information. I suggested 2 of them - suggest something else which is better for newcommers in your opinion Information size for newbees should be just limited to max 1MB - other info is spam - BS! Otherwise we cannot scale decentralized....  |
|
|
|
Just to get some people on the logic case. Next poll could be, e.g. WHY there are somtimes such funny failed proofs.  |
|
|
|
And UaSF try to force themselfe into their lightning - sounds bit esotheric and helps bitcoin homeopaticaly. Some good hashpower from above might get them back to the mainchain soon, hush hush.  |
|
|
|
If only 1 % start running a decent (w)right node than the network gets 2600 new high connectors - forget your Rasp PIs , buy bitcoin instead... |
|
|
|
Even if Core buys a million new Raspberry Pi and run UASF tomorrow, they still have no game.
This may be the first thing you've said that has any grain of truth. https://medium.com/@lukedashjr/how-you-can-help-ensure-bip148-is-a-success-2fb63bf5114fRather, what matters is not that you’re running a node, but that you’re using it to receive transactions. This is what it means when people talk about economic nodes: nodes that people use for economic activity. So, if you use the wallet built-in to your Bitcoin Core+BIP148 node to receive your bitcoins, you’re doing your part to enforce BIP148. Your talk of 'critical mass' is just gibberish and shows you do not understand bitcoin. Miners have no say in these matters. Users do. We can flood you with more transactions than Bitpay ever made. Go away and learn bitcoin. Then go away again. btw, before you start, I am one of the least 'pro-Core' people on here, but I am even less of a fan of nChain, the fake satoshi Craig Wright, matonis, DCG and all your gang of scammers. Go away and learn bitcoin. Then go away again. What are miners doing all the time? Do they use bitcoin ? Do they decide what tx they pick ? Do they give us all hashpower & safety? They do use bitcoin -code and run the mining-nodes, and I'm pretty sure thy also run some storage / connection nodes. So what distinguishes them from 'the user' ? May miners hold bitcoin ? Trade them ? What do you do as a 'user' ? WTF |
|
|
|
We need to keep the nodes in the hands of the people to keep the network decentralized and safe, period.
A non-mining node doesn't decentralise the network, it only benefits you, by allowing you to confirm that you have received payment. Regular users, spending bitcoin have no need to run a full node 24/7. If you've got a high enough value transaction coming in from someone you don't trust, you can spin one up and verify the chain yourself. Running a full node is all about what its worth is to you. It has no bearing on the security of the network for anyone else. That comes from decentralised *mining*. Running a full node brings the ideal setting of security: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNk7nYxTOyQIf you can convince me that users should give up on the possibility of running nodes then go on, but you haven't achieved that yet so keep trying. What significant value a non-mining full node has for the network? all one needs to do is to only have the unspent data of blockchain and fires up hundreds of full nodes, that's only good for the time when miners are trying to change something in the code and need to have most of the nodes to validate the change, in that case having lots of full nodes just will make the miners job harder not impossible, because they can out number us by running more nodes than us. Who is 'us'? |
|
|
|
Well if only banks run full nodes, they can start to mess with it and stop transactions, as they see fit.
Then we have centralized mining in China, and centralized nodes in banks.
It isn't exactly the dream of Bitcoin that I think most of us had. It sounds very animal farm like, I look at the Bitcoin and I look at the Fiat, and I could see no difference.
Sure. ONLY banks is just a very stupid example here. You know any bank is doing this right now? I do not. Extrapolate this into future? Not much will do. There will be a nice mix of hopefully ALL bigger ones.... |
|
|
|
We need to keep the nodes in the hands of the people to keep the network decentralized and safe, period.
A non-mining node doesn't decentralise the network, it only benefits you, by allowing you to confirm that you have received payment. Regular users, spending bitcoin have no need to run a full node 24/7. If you've got a high enough value transaction coming in from someone you don't trust, you can spin one up and verify the chain yourself. Running a full node is all about what its worth is to you. It has no bearing on the security of the network for anyone else. That comes from decentralised *mining*. Running a full node brings the ideal setting of security: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNk7nYxTOyQIf you can convince me that users should give up on the possibility of running nodes then go on, but you haven't achieved that yet so keep trying. hm. Depends what kind of user you are and how much connections your node is enabeling. Hold it like Trayce Meyer says. Do not have too much Ego. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin has proven, that it is works fine, even through times of different attack modes (FUD, spam, patenting, +, XT, RV, CW etc). I don't think we have a pressure to raise the blocksize or to force the mass adaption. We don't need no SegWit to make Bitcoin great again, because it is already. Give this baby time to grow, folks.
I understand this - you're mostly right (SW part esp.). But in a world of competition and crypto-boom you cannot just 'stay' - you need upgrades, minimum levels are keep track with security. E.g. hacker's don't sleep! But think bigger: How would you attract the world to accept bitcoin ? With those fees and limited txs space < 1MB? - No way! If you cannot attract the world in this run you see - byebye - others take over (LTC?) . BTW: What do you estimate, how much of the BTC price is a future spread? How much money is paid because of the prospect to be worlds best asset ever? Sure nobody can tell you exact, but I say it's huge. Who should pay this future premium if no prospect of growth exists? - > plummmmm |
|
|
|
we should review this 'trust' and differentiate to distinct terms like I full trust in core - keeping the network up and running. They have done a great job here over many years in monitoring and fixing bugs. They know how to MAINTAIN. I full trust in core's technical expertise and coding capabilities - they know their job. I partially trust that they can sort out and filter all the ideas coming up and to them all day. I less trust that they oversee all the economic impacts on these decisions they still are in charge. I.o. to relief core's burden a bit - we need multiple clients here - market / economical decisions no single entity is able to define in FRONT and predictions here are normally wrong and we all are personal victims of prediction errors. I'm happy if we have business here like blockstream and other comps concentrating on their 'duties' posted in their naming (and transparent agendas). Blockstream should be only responsible for streaming correctly the blocks - not more |
|
|
|
In any case, there will eventually be a node that will win and then Bitcoin will become a centralized network.
Hu ? No - if Bitcoin is centralized the value is 0. NOT possible. You have game theory aligned here and repulsive forces in place. |
|
|
|
|
Competition is GOOD for Bitcoin
We just are all unified witness of a competitor of core having found flaws in core and we had the other way around with BU weeks before.
Outcome ? - Good
We all allow competition with Fiat - Good
Miners against other miners - Good
Altcoin devs against Bitcoin - Shit - but hopefully GOOD
Business against others - GOOD
Ideas against others - GOOD
Allow real on-Chain scaling - GOOD
Allow 2nd layer stuff - GOOD
Allow open markets - GOOD
Allow transparency - GOOD
So finally get ready that core devs NEED competition to get better and we really need all devs HERE in Bitcoin.
First step in ALLOWING competition is STOP deleting 'wrong' posts (Ok - that might be also some part of competition of forums - but that's very childish...)
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs: Bitcoin Will Plunge Again Before Surging To $4,000
I really don't think that bitcoin is their area of expertise. Though I do think that the plunge they are talking about is going to happen. Probably just before the soft fork is activated at 1st August, because there will be a lot of people panicking and not being able to hold onto their coins and tempted to sell them. They have released no proof of their analysis, it could be possible that they are holding bitcoin right now and trying to get a quick buck or two out of it by releasing some sort of encouraging information for bitcoin investors to buy into. I'd be much more believing if they just showed evidence of research on bitcoin charts instead of mentioning someone's name whom no one has known before this. Goldman is THE biggest and most opportunistic player in the banking and finance and NEVER EVER will tell you the truth - it's all about tactics and hard to discover what they are really about. |
|
|
|
Although I'm not an expert, I can not understand everything, but in part, I see the danger when we all choose segwit. I used to support segwit, because I thought it was superior. However, I never doubted Core. Currently, I really feel confused about this issue.
Mike Hearns rage quit was a wake up call to look into 'core'. They are undermined... |
|
|
|
|
Op has the issue with NOT understanding what was meant in context and pics out a phrase and changes the meaning into FUD.
Guess what? BScore Fanboys use this to brainwash all and trick us into unsafer on chain scaling 'solutions' that are clearly altcoin like + private 2 nd business on top.
Wake up and take your brain back!
|
|
|
|
That gives us all a 'strong' confidence into SW and testing that a long KNOWN issue is not fixed. What about the iceberg ones? Sorry I stop here for now....  |
|
|
|
Bitcoin, Forks, SegWit, DASH, Litecoin & What's Exciting in Crypto - Adam Meister: https://youtu.be/yBBgQ3IwYqoThe Dash Digital Cash does not need a SegWit, a true cryptocurrency does not need a SegWit! Hahaaha, thats a good one. dash is a mesh and bitcoin is the best crypto and surely does not need SW at all. But some hijackers did a lot of technobubble and overnegineerings and might pay the price for now. |
|
|
|
https://bitcrust.org/blog-incentive-shift-segwit.htmlAlthough I have been generally enthusiastic about the SegWit2X compromise, Peter Rizun has pointed out a flaw in SegWit (earlier discussed by Peter Todd) that makes it unacceptably dangerous. As I fear the extent of the problem is not yet completely understood by the community, allow me to explain from a different angle. Thx. ..where I've this seen before ... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
