[
Miners will do their best to follow the economic majority and pick the chain they believe will be worth something. They don't exactly decide which one that will be.
If Core gets its way, then this point is moot. Its only a possibility ( to choose and follow) where miners are actually given the choice. Its Core's consuming fear that, if given the choice, miners will vote to go with bigger blocks, without the need of the extra baggage of ln, elements, sw, rbf, etc. Thats why everything on Core's so-called "Roadmap" involves zero choice. |
|
|
|
Miners switched to working on the shorter, old version chain because of a previously undiscovered database incompatibility. It was the decision most aligned with their long term economic interest which is connected to the overall health of the network... Bizarrely, it doesn't seem to be an argument against anything you quoted.
That's a bizarre misrepresentation of what happened. What? In what way? Please cite from here what is a 'bizarre misrepresentation'. |
|
|
|
Your suggestion indicates a more trivial understanding than you are letting on.
Nodes can gradually come online and slowly but surely prune low-bandwidth nodes first and continue to increase support for larger blocks, all while creating a false appearance of organic growth. I mean this is basic stuff and you can choose to ignore it but it pretty much makes the idea doa. No, its just stupid. Why waste your time gaming block size when you can profit by gaming non-FSS RBF with guaranteed results? |
|
|
|
In effect, it does no such thing. It does the exact opposite. It strives to return an equilibrium among all stakeholders.
It does. It pretends to use signalling from nodes to create your pretended equilibrium but this is easily skewed by a sybil attack. Miners are then left to pick a number while unable to discern between legitimate nodes and the sybil attacker. Yeah, thats a really valid vector: miner a: Hey, looks like we got 8000 extra nodes on line! miner b: Wow That looks legit. How long have they been online? miner a: About 8 minutes. And they are all voting for 16 Exabyte blocks. miner b: And whats the average for the last 1000 blocks? miner a: 1.42Mb miner b: Yup, sounds like 16 Exabytes it is then.... Your suggestion indicates a more trivial understanding than you are letting on. |
|
|
|
Interestingly, both that thread and this one independently went bat-shit-crazy over the last 48 hours. Are we all really that bored with the market?
Different threads, different scales on the bat-shit-crazy-o-meter.  |
|
|
|
This is a false representation of what Bitcoin Unlimited actually does which is to hand over all of the power to mining nodes.
No it is not. It does not hand over all the power to mining nodes. Please stop being so stupid - we know you are smarter than that.
In effect, BU removes any power the individual, independent users might've had.
In effect, it does no such thing. It does the exact opposite. It strives to return an equilibrium among all stakeholders. I can see how you are getting things arse-over-tit these days. Look at your segwit BIP X for example - previously BIPs were a way to formalise ideas and discuss them. However, you yourself admitted, that the segwit was coded first ( ready for implementation) and BIP'ped afterwards. Thats exactly the opposite to how things are normally done in Open Source. |
|
|
|
You're a Marxist-collectivist and use the normal leftist tactic of trying to force your ideology onto everyone then claiming they're a "bad person", "racist", "sexist", blah blah if they don't want to join your collectivist nightmare that's already resulted in the deaths of millions from your last Bolshevik revolution.
Nobody wants to join your SJW bullshit that demonizes males, anyone who isn't poor, white people, etc, the usual common targets. You have a mental disorder called far leftism where you were dumped into too many trashcans by stronger kids while growing up, so now you can only relate to people deemed underdogs by society and shun anything considered strong or normal. It's a mental disorder plain and simple. Stop trying to pretend you're normal and people should adhere to your disorder.
I find it heart warming that, despite its issues, Bitcoin continues to display an almost infinite capacity to draw loonies of every flavour and colour to its bosom. Welcome, dear friend, welcome to the madness....  |
|
|
|
Irrelevant given that we have SW coming.
Dont be an idiot. Of course we dont. As you are fond of saying - its vaporware..... it's actually all in code, waiting to get on testnet by end of the month and to be merged soon enough  Yeah, its all in code, ready for deployment. Sure thing, dreamer. The most fundamental change to the way bitcoin works, and you are ready to deploy before you even have a bip number assigned? People are still arguing about the length of the checksum in the address, and where it goes. But its all coded and ready to go, eh? |
|
|
|
Did he wrong you? Go talk to Aztec. You could start a club write a book.
ftfy |
|
|
|
Only 3 days so!! Wahoo!!  |
|
|
|
Irrelevant given that we have SW coming.
Dont be an idiot. Of course we dont. As you are fond of saying - its vaporware..... it's actually all in code, waiting to get on testnet by end of the month and to be merged soon enough So your new altcoin is ready to go then? Ha! Ha!  |
|
|
|
Irrelevant given that we have SW coming.
Dont be an idiot. Of course we dont. As you are fond of saying - its vaporware..... |
|
|
|
haha coindesk.. lmao you fuck-mainstream-wit wannabe.
Romanian gypsy turds have returned from their circle jerk hereYou derps sure gotta derp - you ain't wrong. |
|
|
|
January 4th we'll start moving up again. You will all see.
Chinese return to buying spree after new years holidays? Have you not been reading the news? The Chinese economy is a basket case. They don't have money to buy anything. Oh yes they do. The Chinese are rich. They are not really. The vast majority stitch nike runners and assemble iphones for minimum wage. |
|
|
|
You mean about the decred, bitcoin unlimited, Bitcoin XT? and we don't know nothing more yet. This is going to hurt the price again, expect 300 $ in not so much time.
I think 'opt-out' RBF as opposed to FSS-RBF in 0.12 could be the next f*ck up, since its no longer optional. Since most upgrade with the default options set, I feel that could be the next popcorn moment. The blocksize debate wont cause any change in price on its own, its been rumbling on this long without any changes. However, that could change if, god forbid, we see increased adoption and fuller blocks. |
|
|
|
Good thing. I see now that price is not drop anymore (2 days ago support of 410$ was reached) Any prevision about the next days? I've been shouting about a huge cup & handle for quite some time, but none of the TA people seem to agree. It looks artificial, but that normally doesn't seem to matter to TA nerds. Christmas profits for October to December have been taken - expect it to bounce along in the 405-430 for a few weeks until the the next messiah/scandal event hits. |
|
|
|
As a matter of fact, it does depend on block sizes as of now.
Not to mention the physical network environment. On the other hand, I believe that will not necessarily be this way in the future.
Of course, if your future includes a radical change to the way bitcoin works, and by artificially controlling blocksize and RBF, then this is true. But if bitcoin were allowed to grow in a more organic manner, what factors will actually change that will affect block propagation? Several proposals can make it possible to transmit blocks in constant-time manner between cooperative counterparties. Moreover, miners are naturally inventivized to use these proposed protocols to limit their orphan rates.
By 'several' proposals, I assume you are talking about Matts Relay? Miners are already incentivised to reduce orphan rates - what makes you think they aren't and need to be? There are indeed some inherent costs to tx inclusion, but I highly doubt they necessarily should scale linearly with block sizes.
Why? At what point would they become non-linear? Give me a rough scenario where you feel the cost of adding an extra tx would start to become logarithmic. (assuming you are not talking about miners in a swamp in Florida, USA, on a 56K modem with a 500mb per month limit... ) |
|
|
|
I don't have massively strong feelings about XT or Coinbase but the github thread regarding removing Coinbase from bitcoin.org makes for truly loathsome reading. 'We definitely need to coerce Coinbase into switching back to Bitcoin Core' and proposing making their fees 4x higher. Nice 'consensus' you pathetic little shits.
enough with the whining gimmick. bitcoin will not adapt to your retard lifestyle. you choose to use bitcoin... or you dont. see? you have a choice! Worst. Troll. Ever. MP is really scraping the bottom of the barrel with you. You make iCBREAKER seem like Kofi Annan by comparion. |
|
|
|
how old are you srlsy?
Such cool. Much slang. So few vowels. why are you still hanging around with us old ph0rkers? |
|
|
|
Hearn Cypherdoc and his pussy posse Anarchystar & The Bitcoin Phoundation DeathAndTaxes Roger Ver JStolfi Lambie I know I'm missing a whole lot here.  Ah, poor forker brg444. When you run out of ideas, just play the ad hominem card... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
