Can someone explain to me why there is any debate when Nakamoto himself said: --------------------- Quote from Mike Hearn: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=149668.msg1596879#msg1596879https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22Bitcoin+can+already+scale+much+larger+than+that+with+existing+hardware+for+a+fraction+of+the+cost.%22- Satoshi did plan for Bitcoin to compete with PayPal/Visa in traffic volumes.
- The block size limit was a quick safety hack that was always meant to be removed.
- In fact, in the very first email he sent me back in April 2009, he said this:
-------------------------------------------------- Email from Satoshi Nakamoto to Mike Hearn: "Hi Mike,
I'm glad to answer any questions you have. If I get time, I ought to write a FAQ to supplement the paper.
There is only one global chain.
The existing Visa credit card network processes about 15 million Internet purchases per day worldwide. Bitcoin can already scale much larger than that with existing hardware for a fraction of the cost. It never really hits a scale ceiling. If you're interested, I can go over the ways it would cope with extreme size. By Moore's Law, we can expect hardware speed to be 10 times faster in 5 years and 100 times faster in 10. Even if Bitcoin grows at crazy adoption rates, I think computer speeds will stay ahead of the number of transactions.
I don't anticipate that fees will be needed anytime soon, but if it becomes too burdensome to run a node, it is possible to run a node that only processes transactions that include a transaction fee. The owner of the node would decide the minimum fee they'll accept. Right now, such a node would get nothing, because nobody includes a fee, but if enough nodes did that, then users would get faster acceptance if they include a fee, or slower if they don't. The fee the market would settle on should be minimal. If a node requires a higher fee, that node would be passing up all transactions with lower fees. It could do more volume and probably make more money by processing as many paying transactions as it can. The transition is not controlled by some human in charge of the system though, just individuals reacting on their own to market forces.
Eventually, most nodes may be run by specialists with multiple GPU cards. For now, it's nice that anyone with a PC can play without worrying about what video card they have, and hopefully it'll stay that way for a while. More computers are shipping with fairly decent GPUs these days, so maybe later we'll transition to that."~ Satoshi Nakamoto --------------------------------------- Quote: "Satoshi said back in 2010 that he intended larger block sizes to be phased in with some simple if (height > flag_day) type logic, theymos has linked to the thread before. I think he would be really amazed at how much debate this thing has become. He never attributed much weight to it, it just didn't seem important to him. And yes, obviously, given the massive forum dramas that have resulted it'd have been nice if he had made the size limit floating from the start like he did with difficulty. However, he didn't and now we have to manage the transition." ~ Mike Hearn, on bitcointalk.org, March 07, 2013, 06:15:30 PM https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.msg15366#msg15366bit.ly/1YqiV41 ---------------------------------------- Quote from Satoshi: It can be phased in, like:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete. When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.~ Satoshi Nakamoto, on bitcointalk.org, October 04, 2010, 07:48:40 PM ---------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- So now,
If Satoshi himself "never really gave block size limit much weight" (he assumed scaling was an obvious need that would happen quickly and easily), why are a group of developers refusing to scale the protocol... while simultaneously creating a tool that will generate massive income by moving transactions off the block chain, and into their exclusive transaction processing system (Lightening Network)? Is it any wonder they were given nearly $50 million in VC funding when VC's realized they just took over Bitcoin transaction processing?
Is this not blatantly changing the design and purpose Satoshi gave to Bitcoin (to freely scale to massive sizes, to support on-chain transaction needs). This seems to be of grave concern, no?
-B----------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- The blockchain network is much more robust than the Visa Network. I see the Blockchain or Bitcoin newtork is the way forward as people are more confident in the transaction that concerns bitcoin rather than Visa and I see the bitcoin network having more reviews and upgrades to help the network scale further even in the future. In my opinion, bitcoin is much slower than a visa, but you remain anonymous. It seems to me that both bitcoin and visa should remain in the world, because they perform different functions in essence. There are different functions and there should be different ways to solve them. Nope, not anonymous at all, traceable for a reason of trust of public ledger |
|
|
|
Isn't this related case going to not help CSW? If "Not your keys; not your coins" is enshrined in US case law, then this shouldn't be true: IF you have the keys, the coins ARE yours right? Yes, this is just US case law, but a good step in the right direction reflecting what we all believe to be true. https://decrypt.co/39574/not-your-keys-not-your-coins-enshrined-in-us-case-law-says-lawyer"Not your keys; not your coins" enshrined in US case law, says lawyer Crypto lawyer Justin Wales sees Archer v. Coinbase ruling in favor of the digital asset custodian as more proof of “not your keys, not your coins.” In brief- A California court has decided that Coinbase is not obligated to pay out Bitcoin Gold generated in a 2017 Bitcoin fork.
- Plaintiff Darrell Archer sued the company after demanding Bitcoin Gold that could have been generated from his 350 Bitcoin held on Coinbase.
- Crypto lawyer Justin Wales sees the ruling as a milestone for digital asset custody case law in the US.
Mixing up custody duties imo Wild wild west still |
|
|
|
Lol. Bloomy news soo expensive Best quote. Maybe an unexpected sell off?  |
|
|
|
Add only proof of panic, like true big blogger. |
|
|
|
In the last week I have read a lot, a lot of articles regarding this block-size issue.
I have read very good arguments from the yes side and the no side. One hour I thought "good, they saved bitcoin decentralization" and the next hour I thought "damn, this greedy group has destroyed Satoshi's vision".
There are the original words of Satoshi that clearly indicate that the block size limit was just a temporary fix and that he wanted bitcoin to perform better than visa.
Now I am sick of this topic and I hope I can remove it from my head.
If Satoshi is still alive as I think he is and reads this I tell him this: this issue has created a very big and ugly division in the bitcoin world, you should address it. Move a few coins from your wallet and sign a message in which you yourself declare what has to be done regarding the block size. Only that would stop this conflict.
You can do it safely and effectively, so do it.
N-N-N-Necropost! Blocksize debate is done. If you like 1MB you stick with BTC if you like no limit then you go with BSV. There's nothing to debate any more! Satoshi has explained exactly what should happen, but "proof of satoshi" requires a lot more than moving coins. All that proves is that someone with the keys for those coins, moved the coins. Correct. Nothing to add |
|
|
|
|
No need for doing sth except see what is defined by the Satoshi White Paper, the only true definition of BitCoin as Physics define what gold is
B S V
Segwit makes btc to sth different
|
|
|
|
Und überhaupt, was hat das hier zu tun?
mich wundert eher die so geringe postingfrequenz hier ,)
mal sehen wann das wieder ansteigt, dann steigt der Kurs vermutlich auch wieder
Ich sag mal, bei 100.000 USD sehen wir hier auch das hunderttausendste posting  irgendwie müssen wir doch die 100.000 posts vollbekommen Bitcoin kann das alles. Der RestCoinKrempel macht nur wenige andere reich und die meisten arm. Der DeFi Bums ist der letzte Auswuchs in der Bubble https://twitter.com/brucefenton/status/1293959332510470145?s=20 |
|
|
|
A little clarification. You can see what is in public record, IE tax returns, deeds, the car registry, etc. Anything given to any authority, and it has been like that since 1766. It's called offentlighetsprincipen (kind of like the freedom of information act but just a lot wider). So yes, you can see your neighboors, or anybodys, income, and you can see what he paid for his house, current value would have to be a estimation of course. But you can not see the things he owns, that is of course not on public record. The background for this is the incredible corruption in Sweden back then. By making everything public you couldn't hide behind the secrecy stamp and corruption was curbed. It's still in effect today for the same reason. Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_public_access_to_official_recordshttps://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96ffentlichkeitsprinzip_(Schweden) Ffs, German link doesn't work. Here's the text from Wikipedia "Offentlighetsprincipen (das Öffentlichkeitsprinzip) ist in Schweden das Recht, bei Behörden und Ämtern in alle Akten und Dokumente Einsicht nehmen zu können. Dieses Recht ist seit 1766 in der Verfassung verankert und wird von vielen Schweden als unersetzlich für die Demokratie angesehen. In Schweden soll die gesamte staatliche und kommunale Tätigkeit im Lichte der Öffentlichkeit erfolgen. Die Bestimmungen zu diesem sehr alten Grundsatz der Öffentlichkeit stehen auch heute in der Verfassung, d. h. im Gesetz über die Pressefreiheit (Tryckfrihetsförordningen). Der Grundsatz der Öffentlichkeit soll eine allgemeine Einsichtnahme durch die Mitbürger gewährleisten. Dies bedeutet, dass alle in einer Behörde vorhandenen Akten und Dokumente – einschließlich Bandaufnahmen und in Computer gespeicherte Daten – für die Allgemeinheit zugänglich sind. Offenheit ist hierbei die Grundregel, Geheimhaltung die Ausnahme. Es muss demnach immer eine gesetzliche Begründung vorliegen, wenn die Herausgabe von Informationen oder Unterlagen durch eine Behörde verweigert wird. Auch ist es den Behörden untersagt, Nachforschungen über die Identität des anfragenden Bürgers anzustellen oder nach Gründen für die Einsichtnahme zu fragen. Ausgenommen davon sind Dokumente, die teilweiser Geheimhaltung unterliegen und bei denen die Gründe für eine Prüfung des Rechts der Einsichtnahme entscheidend sind. Es gibt auch Dokumente, die prinzipiell der Geheimhaltung unterliegen; dazu gehören z. B. Krankenakten." Sounds you already run the open ledger - the Sweden-Blockchain for many years now  Not a big change than Viel Spass! |
|
|
|
Nur mal naiv nachgefragt:
"Big Blocker" = BCash?
oder gar SV?
Oder wäre SV "VERY Big Blocker" (Motherfucking Big Blocker)
Schubladen-Denken ( z.B. auf Ticker Basis) is nicht meins (Internet) Protokolle - inbes globale wannabies müssen erstmal lange Zeit stabil (nachvollziehbar) und politisch neutral (transparent = auch regulations neutral...) sein, damit sie breit - weltweit verwendet werden können. Simple Kapazitäts - Parameter gehören absolut nicht in den Konsens-Teil eines Protokolls - das ist totaler murx feddich - selber denken Der Börsenkurs macht eh was er will, aber die Masse der Welt auch - und noch nicht mit Aus Deinen anderen Posts - die weniger nach Dada-Gedicht klingen - entnehme ich dass Du SV gut findest. Wie man da an der peinlichen Galleonsfigur vorbeischauen kann wundert mich aber schon (mich wundert aber auch, wie man Amerika mit Trump "great again" machen möchte... ) Da is sicher was dran, aber wenn man ganz tief guggt, sieht man, dass ich schon weit vor CSW laut wurde, selbst auf vieles gekommen bin, was dann BSV heute ist - es gibt eine ganze Reihe 'leise' Denker, die weg sind aus seg-weg - BCH ist auch keine Option -> spltt, fork splitt, fork aktuell gut zu sehen> alles Unsinn (insbes Soft-Fork ...) -> Protokoll = White-Paper = rechtlich bindende Spezifikation - Devs dürfen keine powers haben (bug fix ausgeschlossen) feddich  Achja - Trump hat zum vgl : Kein Plan - und scheint nix zu kapieren - hat auch keine Patente usw |
|
|
|
|
Sometimes ppl beleive only what they see in big memes
The truth is behind
and do not invest in things you don t understand - best rule ever
|
|
|
|
There can be only ONE - to rule them all There is only ONE true gold 79 - originally defined and stable by isotopic design of Rules of Nature There is only ONE BitCoin - originally .... Rules of Nakamoto think for your own |
|
|
|
Misinfo from annonymous idiots Why? You should tell us what's the real "info"? Plus the panel that Bitcoinbelle organized was the panel that franky1 said is where Nick Szabo introduced Craig as Satoshi. Lies. Watching memes cannot help here The info is not coming into brains for low PoW - dig it out, connect the dots - and still ensure critical thinkeng all the time not to be trapped ( in a meme )  |
|
|
|
Nur mal naiv nachgefragt:
"Big Blocker" = BCash?
oder gar SV?
Oder wäre SV "VERY Big Blocker" (Motherfucking Big Blocker)
Schubladen-Denken ( z.B. auf Ticker Basis) is nicht meins (Internet) Protokolle - inbes globale wannabies müssen erstmal lange Zeit stabil (nachvollziehbar) und politisch neutral (transparent = auch regulations neutral...) sein, damit sie breit - weltweit verwendet werden können. Simple Kapazitäts - Parameter gehören absolut nicht in den Konsens-Teil eines Protokolls - das ist totaler murx feddich - selber denken Der Börsenkurs macht eh was er will, aber die Masse der Welt auch - und noch nicht mit |
|
|
|
First sign of madness. Talking to one's self All these newbees are -- > you ? |
|
|
|
wenn hier im thread (= deutschsprachiger WO schwesterthread) wenig los ist, dann schaut doch einfach rüber zum original WO und bringt euch dort ein. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.541260die können frisches Blut gut brauchen und elrippo, Gyrsur, hv_, outofMemory, JLO, goldkingcoiner u.a. können euch sicher bestätigen, dass man dort nicht gefressen wird. Haha, ja besten Dank, aber als eingefleischter BIG BLOCKER / Protokoll-minimalist - original Maximalist bin ich bei den eingefleischten BIG BLOGGERN nicht so beliebt / das Drama um den Gründer des threads Adam ist hoffentlich noch bekannt Bitcoin ist mehr als nur ein Tickerle holy.... da hast du recht, als big blocker hat man dort wenig freunde. ist das hier anders? (duck weg  ) Bitcoin wird seinen Weg machen, mit oder ohne mich Ticker und TA war nicht der Anfang, aber es half seit 2011 - 17 sag ich mal so Nun muss der Markt entscheiden Think BIG |
|
|
|
wenn hier im thread (= deutschsprachiger WO schwesterthread) wenig los ist, dann schaut doch einfach rüber zum original WO und bringt euch dort ein. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.541260die können frisches Blut gut brauchen und elrippo, Gyrsur, hv_, outofMemory, JLO, goldkingcoiner u.a. können euch sicher bestätigen, dass man dort nicht gefressen wird. Haha, ja besten Dank, aber als eingefleischter BIG BLOCKER / Protokoll-minimalist - original Maximalist bin ich bei den eingefleischten BIG BLOGGERN nicht so beliebt / das Drama um den Gründer des threads Adam ist hoffentlich noch bekannt Bitcoin ist mehr als nur ein Tickerle |
|
|
|
Hello can you tell me how many transactions per second Bitcoin Satoshi Vision can accomplish? Can you tell me where to find the updated roadmap?
There is no artificial cap, no consensus crappy magic number in the protocol, that throttle the capacity Economics / miners and network boundaries decide We saw some 10k txs per sec already, still ppl work to make things also more parallel |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
