 In true cypherpunk fashion Peter Wuille just hammered the final nails into Bitcoin bloaters coffin, with code. As predicted: They'll be forced to present proposals that raise their beloved limit. It's the market, stupid! The business model to destroy transactions with the intended artificial fee market is now officially #REKT |
|
|
|
maybe not in June but at the end of 2016 it will be hopefully 2MB or better 4 MB
Spring 12 - Spring 13 (halving between) saw a 10fold txs increase. Now we are in a situation where zero increase is possible. That's developer stupidity in perfection. |
|
|
|
But please do not try to highjack Satoshi as pro XT when we have no idea what his position would be.
I didn't get the impression that he was trying to paint satoshi as pro XT. The quotes showing satoshi as "anti 1MB4EVA" are plain for anyone to see, but pro XT?... not so much. Exactly, and the complete opposite of that settlement fantasies that the small blockers celebrate. Micropayments. "Go through the old Bitcointalk threads from 2012 and 2013 sometime and look at how many of the anti-large block concern trolls also posted in the altcoin section." justusranvier https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/3vfsxz/zane_tackett_the_director_of_community_and/Some of those trolls even present their altcoins in their user signature. |
|
|
|
Alot of people are wishing they would of bought more in the $200 range. There is going to be alot more people wishing they would of bought in the $300 range after the halving boom. Believe me, its coming.
correct. Yes, if they will raise the limit. If they refuse, a boom won't be possible. |
|
|
|
Agreed. One of the most regrettable things about this block-size snafu in my view is this characterization of 800% or 2000% increases as "modest" or a _doubling_ as being too small to consider.
It is very modest, compared to a completely removed cap, which has been set as a temporary anti-spam measure. come back whenever the spam stops. We'll be back. 2016 is the year of at least the remove of your beloved 1MB cap. Forget the fee market that blockstream core wants to enforce with this cap. It won't happen, because it won't be accepted by the market. Whom are you talking with?
We'll be back. 2016 is the year of at least the remove of your beloved 1MB cap. Forget the fee market that blockstream core wants to enforce with this cap. It won't happen, because it won't be accepted by the market.Best regards to all of you censorship cheerleaders. |
|
|
|
Agreed. One of the most regrettable things about this block-size snafu in my view is this characterization of 800% or 2000% increases as "modest" or a _doubling_ as being too small to consider.
It is very modest, compared to a completely removed cap, which has been set as a temporary anti-spam measure. come back whenever the spam stops. We'll be back. 2016 is the year of at least the remove of your beloved 1MB cap. Forget the fee market that blockstream core wants to enforce with this cap. It won't happen, because it won't be accepted by the market. "Bitcoin is the Devil's way of teaching geeks economics." |
|
|
|
Szatoshi has spoken!
"Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" |
|
|
|
Agreed. One of the most regrettable things about this block-size snafu in my view is this characterization of 800% or 2000% increases as "modest" or a _doubling_ as being too small to consider.
It is very modest, compared to a completely removed cap, which has been set as a temporary anti-spam measure. |
|
|
|
|
The Great Zerg nailed it:
One response to the idea of a "star blockchain, with sidechains and overlays around it?" is yes but Bitcoin does not have to be and should not be the smallest, slowest chain. What bitcoin HAS going for it is adoption. What it doesn't have is fancy features.
So some other sidechain can be the 1MB or 100KB setttlement network between banks.
|
|
|
|
I'm curious why Charlie Lee has not been able to knock some sense into Brian Armstrong.
 Pointy Headed CEOs do not listen to their Dilberts and Wallys (IE coders/engineers).
He wants coffee buyers to use... litecoin?
freetrade
Yep. I'd say that is exactly what he wants.
Litecoin is essentially a bet that Bitcoin won't scale.
If Bitcoin fails to scale, Litecoin use rockets. I'm assuming CL has a big chunk of LTC, and even if not, I'm sure he'd like to see his baby grow. Not judging, just seems like the obvious rationale.
Zaromet
We did see that last time we had price spike and we had full blocks and even fees of 0,4$ didn't work to get you in a block for hours. LTC blocks got big... Imagen what happens when that process takes even longer...
|
|
|
|
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-mining-pool-f-pool-discus-fish-maintains-bip-not-an-option-1449003767"Switching to BIP 101 or Bitcoin XT is a bad idea; we will never do that,” Chun reiterated his earlier position. “After a meeting with some other Chinese pools earlier this year, we proposed an 8-megabyte limit, because we thought Gavin's initial 20 megabyte proposal was too big for us. I always thought 2 megabytes would be better as a first step, but I did not want to offend Gavin with a 10 times smaller proposal. Gavin then answered us with BIP 101, which due to its steep growth curve is essentially 8 gigabytes, so it’s done. I don’t trust Gavin anymore – nor Hearn for that matter.” XT rekt like Jeremy Corbyn  1 MB rekt. Chun, too, believes that raising the block-size limit is an urgent matter, explaining: “I think it is urgent, because the transaction volume is increasing on the blockchain, and if the price rises in near future, it will push the transaction volume to be even higher. I think the max block size should be raised as soon as possible, but it should not be raised too much. Two megabytes is preferred as the first step.” You'll get at least a doubled cap soonish. Not tonight dear, but 2016. |
|
|
|
We don't know, but (and I believe this to be the case) if the developers are not petulant children arguing on a forum such as this, then its likely that their discussion will revolve around finding the common ground in between opposing opinions. That would be a more interesting discussion to be having but all I see every day are polarised opinions (presented as fact). Exaggeration by both camps, hostility, refusal to move from entrenched positions and mischarecterisation of others views.
Maybe you're not looking hard enough? https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3uzwgs/scaling_bitcoin_2_in_just_5_days/You're fooling yourself if you expect productive development to be held "on a forum such as this" I notice alot of people using this forum as a platform to berate it. I also notice that alot of people are using this forum as a platform to advertise alternative forums. Kind of an inconsistency between what these two groups are saying and what they're doing: Why do they keep coming back here if bitcointalk.org is held in such contempt? Meh, if only they would stick with their VERified Kingdom. There surely must be as much freedom as idiocy there. As ICEBREAkER aptly predicted let's just say they are having their their own freedom of speech problems https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3uyyfx/i_didnt_think_this_day_would_come_but_ive_been/The Gavinista shitlords didn't anticipate NotXT (despite my warning of weaponized version signals). And they didn't anticipate NotGavinistas emulating their assclownery within the tight parameters of Poe's law, nor the chaos that would ensue from their being unable to tell genuine-but-dim friends from fake-but-clever foes. Let's all brigade their rump subs and forums, acting really stupid (but not too stupid) by constantly reposting debunked FUD about RBF, CLTV, Peter (The) Todd, Blockstream, Theymos, and Sensor Ships. Then throw tantrums when our shitposts are moderated... Oh wait, we're already doing that...  EDIT: ZOMG THE PRECIOUS 'FREE STOLFI' POST! ITS BEEN THREADLOCKED!!1! ZOMG SENSOR SHIPS SENSORING MUH SUB!!! WORSE THAN A POL POT-STALIN-MAO-SERPENTOR-HILLARY HYBRID1!!1 https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/3us1kl/free_jstolfi/The vulgarian clowns and censorship-cheerleaders still believe that their agitation is a help to the BS-core development. But it isn't: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3uw5tp/slush_pool_to_reenable_bip_101_bitcoin_mining/cxj0m7s |
|
|
|
We don't know, but (and I believe this to be the case) if the developers are not petulant children arguing on a forum such as this, then its likely that their discussion will revolve around finding the common ground in between opposing opinions. That would be a more interesting discussion to be having but all I see every day are polarised opinions (presented as fact). Exaggeration by both camps, hostility, refusal to move from entrenched positions and mischarecterisation of others views.
Maybe you're not looking hard enough? https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3uzwgs/scaling_bitcoin_2_in_just_5_days/You're fooling yourself if you expect productive development to be held "on a forum such as this" I notice alot of people using this forum as a platform to berate it. I also notice that alot of people are using this forum as a platform to advertise alternative forums. Kind of an inconsistency between what these two groups are saying and what they're doing: Why do they keep coming back here if bitcointalk.org is held in such contempt? Meh, if only they would stick with their VERified Kingdom. There surely must be as much freedom as idiocy there. As ICEBREAkER aptly predicted let's just say they are having their their own freedom of speech problems https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3uyyfx/i_didnt_think_this_day_would_come_but_ive_been/SPLITTER!!1  Yes, and some people (you and your friends from the Front National) like that censorship, while we don't. |
|
|
|
Peter R definitely seems to be trolling sometimes. I've stopped taking him seriously long ago. This visualization of BIP101 makes it even look worse than it actually is: Visa-2015-level transactions by 2032! Sounds awesome.
Notice how it says it would take us until 2032 to reach the CURRENT ts/ps of Visa. LOL. Such blocksize increase is futile and will only centralize Bitcoin, this is a fact. We aren't getting nowhere without LN. Get a grip.
Handling the amount of Visa transactions of 2015, by 2032, will make Bitcoin obsolete then because it will not be able to handle enough volume (i.e. BIP101 solves nothing). Cant' you read? It means that this alone will make it possible to grow like that. More will be possible together with protocol improvements and other measures. We don't need artificial scarcity:
BeYourOwnBank ; 33 Punkte vor 13 Stunden*
Blockstream/Core are weak and desperate, centralized and fragile.
Their only hope of succeeding is by creating artificial scarcity all around: artificially restricting us from speaking out freely on our forums, artificially restricting us from transacting directly and cheaply on our blockchain and in our mempool.
Their only chance of success is to change everything from being permissionless back into being permissioned: they want us to ask their permission to speak on "their" forums (via their censors), they want us to ask permission to transact on "their" blockchain (via LN), and they want us to compete to pay higher fees to propagate in "their" mempool (via RBF).
They know they are vulnerable and they are running scared.
All Bitcoin has to do to succeed is remain decentralized and anti-fragile and open to everyone.----------------- My feeling (not that a feeling is worth much) is that 8GB blocks will be enough. If we really do see that level of adoption (~1 billion transactions per day) there will be a lot of off-chain transactions as well.
In other words, the idea that 1 MB blocks (or 2 or 4 or can be "enough" with layer-2 or offchain solutions is... unrealistic, but that layer-2 or offchain solutions can help Bitcoin get from 1 billion to 10 (or 100) billion transactions per day seems plausible to me.
chriswilmer, Today at 12:36 AM -----------------
I agree, and even 32MB blocks will allow for 100 TPS on-chain, which is a lot of real-world business, and would support a very healthy BTC price. It is fully reasonable to expect off-chain solutions to take a lot of volume *eventually*. The strategic error is trying to force that outcome before off-chain solutions develop organically and take volume on their own merits.
solex, Today at 1:10 AM |
|
|
|
The tide is turning. Check the votes. The stream will be unblocked; soonish. Votes? You believe Bitcoin is a democracy; how adorable.  Of course it is. It's neither a Front National movement nor another right or left wing socialist project. The Tide is Turning https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbeLFG6Lglo |
|
|
|
all 431 comments sorted by: controversial (suggested)Manipulation Comedy in perfection. |
|
|
|
The tide is turning. Check the votes. The stream will be unblocked; soonish. |
|
|
|
More and more desperation from the XTard drone camp.
Good.
Things are progressing in the right direction.
They are really buttrekt about the RBF thing; they know their ludicrous vision of coffees-on-the-Holy-Ledger is now truly dead and buried. I haven't seen such wailing, gnashing of teeth, and rending of garments at FrappeForum since the original Great Schism. The moronero shills shouldn't laugh to early. The chance, that the community will be unable to respond to the blockstream attack (change a 'Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System' into a settlement layer for the banksters) is miniscule. https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/3ush79/then_they_fight_you/ |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
