The problem is that these "other implementations" only have half-baked, horribly coded improvements.
Interesting assertion. I'd like to read your extensive code review of each such "other implementation".
There isn't an extensive code review of such an implementation by myself (probably not by anyone, as I haven't seen one). Well, at least you admit when you are caught making shit up on order to influence a debate. Does that make you honest? No - it makes you a liar that has been caught in a lie. Well, no. Segwit does absolutely nothing to make larger blocks safe.
Yes, it does actually, since there's no such thing as "The SegWit Omnibus Changeset". Sure there is. You may not recognize it under that name. Hell, you may not recognize it at all. But there is certainly a difference between the feature 'Segregated Witness', and the bundled code release that includes several other features as well. Oh - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1530463.msg15417685#msg15417685 |
|
|
|
It has been tested on testnet already. Stop spreading misinformation. There's nothing dangerous about bigger blocks.
The BU testing methodology is garbage and should not be used as 'evidence' for anything. Bald assertion devoid of any supporting evidence is duly noted. The blocks aren't full of spam
You can't prove this and you know it. Prove it? You can't even define it! I highly doubt you even understand the big O notation.
Your demonstrated pride in mastering this oh-so-advanced concept </s> is simply adorable. |
|
|
|
no way is any miner ever going to support this.
You do, of course, realize that if one lonely cpu starts mining upon this chain, you will have been proven utterly wrong? Not to mention the amount of botnets that will hop onto this bandwagon.
Oh wait - self-contradiction in one neat paragraph - quite an achievement! an implementation of BitPay's adaptive block size algorithm, adjusting in the range 2MB-4MB
Unsafe without Segwit, Well, no. Segwit does absolutely nothing to make larger blocks safe. Although other changes bundled into The SegWit Omnibus Changeset do. Which of course are available for other implementations to adopt, should they so desire. |
|
|
|
The problem is that these "other implementations" only have half-baked, horribly coded improvements.
Interesting assertion. I'd like to read your extensive code review of each such "other implementation". |
|
|
|
[toknormal] trust neither. [toknormal] trust their own eyes and seeing only one side of the equation when 2 balances are involved I'm afraid doesn't "cut it".
Perhaps you are not yet ready for cryptocurrency. |
|
|
|
Are you sure that you are not a paid shill troll?
OK, let us game this out. What exactly do you propose zimmah is shilling for, and who exactly do you propose is paying zimmah for this shilling? You are assuming no progress is being made, and nothing is being done, and there is some kind of urgency in doing something.
Progress may or may not be underway. Results have not been forthcoming. The time for urgency was approximately one year ago, when persistently full blocks were imminent but not yet a reality. Core has utterly failed in addressing the problem before it became economically significant. Your various assumptions are without merit.
You are wrong. |
|
|
|
What makes you conclude that bitcoin development is slow, implying too slow?
Garzik's ECE has occurred. One we saw miles ahead. Core failed in delivering a timely solution. Ergo, development is slow. Too slow |
|
|
|
Possibly, it does not hurt to have that level of confidence in Bitfinex, and I do appreciate some of their attempts at innovation.
The only innovation they have demonstrated is in suckering rats into not fleeing a sinking ship. |
|
|
|
2.1 release 4th quarter of 2016.
We are now IN the fourth quarter of 2016, could be tomorrow, could be December, not that long really.... 1st: Jan Feb Mar 2nd: Apr May Jun 3rd: Jul Aug Sep 4th: Oct Nov Dec Looks like we're solidly in 3Q16. Though you're right, in that EOY is not long for the future. |
|
|
|
.... potential replacement for bitcoin. We all thought it was litecoin.
You all thought is was litecoin maybe. Litecoin is so much a clone of Bitcoin such that any fatal flaw in Bitcoin will also be a fatal flaw in litecoin. Litecoin is pointless. |
|
|
|
Is it not that ETC is the original chain and ETH is the fork?
Yes. how can it be called a scam chain when it was Vitalik himself who created it?
Haha. That's lulzy. How many $ you think Vitalik lost in the DAO implosion? |
|
|
|
Also, I had thought that Bitfinex should implement some kind of fee free incentives, such as zero fee trading for a period of time
What possible reason would BFX* have to offer incentives to customers? They already have a vast coterie of screwed customers eagerly jumping in line for another ass-raping*. *the common link is left as an exercise for the reader It seems that you just have a tendency for narrow pessimistic thinking, and I wonder if you are that way about all things in life, to want to argue over fringe matters? Nope, not at all. Bitcoin in general, for instance, I am very optimistic on. Even Core's missteps will be unlikely to knock it too far offtrack, for the leading crypto is something that the world needs, even if most do not yet realize it. O.k. Surely, you have strong opinions that Bitfinex is corrupt,
Not so much that I am convinced they are corrupt. I am just astonished that people keep entrusting their money to such an entity. It starts with 'have no ability to slap the principals in the face with a wet fish', and extends to 'either thieves or absolutely incompetent'. If my analysis was merely 5% possibility that they were dishonest, I'd not come even close to them. With the scale of possibility somewhere about midpoint, it seems literally insane. But to return to the original point, why would they offer an incentive? With people already lining up for another ass-raping, what would an incentive accomplish? They'd just be giving back some miniscule percentage of their ill-gotten gains. |
|
|
|
Also, I had thought that Bitfinex should implement some kind of fee free incentives, such as zero fee trading for a period of time
What possible reason would BFX* have to offer incentives to customers? They already have a vast coterie of screwed customers eagerly jumping in line for another ass-raping*. *the common link is left as an exercise for the reader |
|
|
|
annnnndd its worthless.
i guess this means, its not a shares of bitfinex.
Value of zero might be perfectly priced for a leaky bucket. |
|
|
|
But thank god that you have not been thrown in to jail at least.
Thank you sir ... can I please have another!! |
|
|
|
Bitfinex should be focusing on attempts to communicate and create incentives for folks to stay and using their exchange rather than creating disincentives for account holders to leave.
Jesus Fuck... Really? I've been trying to just sit on the sidelines and merely _watch_ this shit-show, but I can no longer refrain from commenting. All y'all are some special breed of masochists. Incentives? Disincentives? Do you hear yourself typing? What more disincentive to deal with this incompetent band of "custodians" than leaving over a third of your cash at seaside? Really? SMH. Stop being so judgmental, and snap back into reality. Yeah, you want the exchange to fail, and yeah, you cannot believe that they are going to reopen, and yeah, you cannot believe that bitcoin still has a 1 mb blocksize limit, etc etc... The reality of the matter is that bitfinex had offered a service that was not offered by other exchanges, including volume. Now, my comment that you quoted has to do with their business perspective to attempt to retain customers and confidence. This is a projection regarding what they need to do in order to inspire folks to continue to use their exchange, and it does not mean that I, personally, am going to use their exchange. I personally do not yet know all of the terms upon which I will be able to withdraw my funds, even though I personally have been presented with a description from them regarding what they consider to be in my account. I will _not_ stop being so judgmental. I get it. It's your money, and you will throw it away in the manner you deem best. While it tangentially affects me in that you are enabling criminals, in the end you are gonna do what you are gonna do. But... really? You have absolutely no evidence that this scamcenter did not merely pocket your funds. 'Hey buddy - I'll hold you money for you' 'oh wait - somebody picked my pocket' 'trust me with more?' SM fucking H For all my other faults, I at least recognized that when pirate@40 fucked me up the ass, his highest calling was _not_ my best interests, and that I didn't want to deal with him any longer. |
|
|
|
Bitfinex should be focusing on attempts to communicate and create incentives for folks to stay and using their exchange rather than creating disincentives for account holders to leave.
Jesus Fuck... Really? I've been trying to just sit on the sidelines and merely _watch_ this shit-show, but I can no longer refrain from commenting. All y'all are some special breed of masochists. Incentives? Disincentives? Do you hear yourself typing? What more disincentive to deal with this incompetent band of "custodians" than leaving over a third of your cash at seaside? Really? SMH. |
|
|
|
Is there a bitfinex replacement out there that offers leveraged trading to North American customers?
When _will_ you people learn? I just gotta make back all the BTC I lost in bitfinex real quick, then I will stop, promise Textbook gambling addiction response.  |
|
|
|
Is there a bitfinex replacement out there that offers leveraged trading to North American customers?
When _will_ you people learn? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
