Satoshi invented Bitcoin not to disrupt corrupt central banking and gold markets, but so we could save 20% on Frappuccinos, dont'cha know?  I mean, who would want to hlod nasty old BTC, when they could be spending them to get Big Savings on Pumpkin Spice Lattes? It's not like Frap.doc spent years exhorting us to avoid spending our BTC too early because they will someday be worth much more than gold....  The right wing socialist Front National should never have the chuzpah to spell the Name of Satoshi. |
|
|
|
Update: XT propaganda folk doesn't know the definition of freedom of speech. "Freedom of speech is the right to communicate one's opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship." This is obviously the case here since theymos is the government. BS. Everybody knows what censorship is:
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CensorshipAre you really going to start moaning about 'teh sensor ships' again?  It does. http://lesswrong.com/lw/c1/wellkept_gardens_die_by_pacifism/Agreed. Banning and censoring is obviously a trigger to decentralization, which is happening as soon as it is necessary. Now it obviously is, otherwise it wouldn't happen. in the end, you got couple brand new forums and some subreddits to freely express yourself. so why you still complaining?!  Complaining? I'm amused about this banning behavior. They are so funny. They do it because they have no life experience. They must be very young. |
|
|
|
Glorious: Peter R reposts his lame pie chart and gets proper fukkin' rekt by no less than Paul "It is an Engineering Requirement that Bitcoin be Above the Law Sztorc!
And who got the votes? Banning couldn't help. |
|
|
|
Update: XT propaganda folk doesn't know the definition of freedom of speech. "Freedom of speech is the right to communicate one's opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship." This is obviously the case here since theymos is the government. BS. Everybody knows what censorship is:
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CensorshipAre you really going to start moaning about 'teh sensor ships' again? It does. http://lesswrong.com/lw/c1/wellkept_gardens_die_by_pacifism/Agreed. Banning and censoring is obviously a trigger to decentralization, which is happening as soon as it is necessary. Now it obviously is, otherwise it wouldn't happen. |
|
|
|
Update: XT propaganda folk doesn't know the definition of freedom of speech. "Freedom of speech is the right to communicate one's opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship." This is obviously the case here since theymos is the government. BS. Everybody knows what censorship is:
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CensorshipAre you really going to start moaning about 'teh sensor ships' again? |
|
|
|
Guys can you quit the EGO wars already? @Zarathustra Man don't you get tired of quoting yourself?  When they're lying about my predictions, I like to quote myself. But maybe I'll soon get tired to entertain this ad hominem thread. Do you know bitco.in? Another level of discussion. No warriors, no ad hominems against each other, no censorship lovers, no Front National, no Bullshit. |
|
|
|
Update: XT propaganda folk doesn't know the definition of freedom of speech. "Freedom of speech is the right to communicate one's opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship." This is obviously the case here since theymos is the government. BS. Everybody knows what censorship is:
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship |
|
|
|
How many times do you have to be told that the limit will be raised next year?? Do you understand? Not tonight dear! Next year! 2016!
Opinions of the outcome of the block-size issue? von nyeko_92 in btc
[]ForkiusMaximus 12 Punkte vor 19 Stunden
Either Core will implement a modest increase, like 2-4-8 (or Flexblocks), or they will be forked off.
Once that goes off without a hitch, many of the small block adherents' objections will be gone, and we can fork again as needed to raise it more.
And now you're presenting Adam Back's proposition as a victory for "big blockists"?  You're out of your mind. Luke, gmax and other miniblockists will have to compromize up at least to Adams numbers. And then: Once that goes off without a hitch, many of the small block adherents' objections will be gone, and we can fork again as needed to raise it more.It's slightly amazing how vindictive you're being, all while failing to admit how badly your argument has failed? "Look at how successful we've been, the opposite of everything we've said so far has been demonstrated to be true!" You're clearly unhinged in some way or another, and you're expecting to attract people to your argument, how, exactly? Blablubb. What do you mean? I always said that core will be forced to raise the limit next year. To prolong the stalemate by talking about different 'proposals' will not work anymore into the halving period. Furthermore they will be forced to raise that limit as much that it will not block the stream. The community (market) will not tolerate a cap that is small enough to enforce the stream artificially into sidechains. As soon as that happens another fork will be enforced by the market. |
|
|
|
How many times do you have to be told that the limit will be raised next year?? Do you understand? Not tonight dear! Next year! 2016!
Opinions of the outcome of the block-size issue? von nyeko_92 in btc
[]ForkiusMaximus 12 Punkte vor 19 Stunden
Either Core will implement a modest increase, like 2-4-8 (or Flexblocks), or they will be forked off.
Once that goes off without a hitch, many of the small block adherents' objections will be gone, and we can fork again as needed to raise it more.
And now you're presenting Adam Back's proposition as a victory for "big blockists"? You're out of your mind. Luke, gmax and other miniblockists will have to compromize up at least to Adams numbers. And then: Once that goes off without a hitch, many of the small block adherents' objections will be gone, and we can fork again as needed to raise it more. |
|
|
|
Fork off already! did he just said 'competition'?! Yeah he told so, like if Bitcoin XT was actually a real thing and not just an altcoin masked as bitcoin at the end and didn't forked because chaos is needed for XT devs otherwise the whole thing could already die in the first weeks heh, and now they giggle about their bitcoin unlimiturd... if only they had actual devs to code and fork off already, y' know let the market decide and stuff.. but clearly they are incapable annoying little kids. medical physics, political philosophy... and shit. also, not that bitcoin have any serious competition in the first place, it is so not 'competing' for bigger blocks. How many times do you have to be told that the limit will be raised next year?? Do you understand? Not tonight dear! Next year! 2016! Opinions of the outcome of the block-size issue? von nyeko_92 in btc
[]ForkiusMaximus 12 Punkte vor 19 Stunden
Either Core will implement a modest increase, like 2-4-8 (or Flexblocks), or they will be forked off.
Once that goes off without a hitch, many of the small block adherents' objections will be gone, and we can fork again as needed to raise it more.
|
|
|
|
Fork off already! did he just said 'competition'?! Yeah he told so, like if Bitcoin XT was actually a real thing and not just an altcoin masked as bitcoin at the end and didn't forked because chaos is needed for XT devs otherwise the whole thing could already die in the first weeks XT |
|
|
|
That deranged man posted the exact same thing to /r/bitcoin didn't he? That's his modus operandi. Develop talking points and repeatedly spam them everywhere Says a fulltime spamming user who spams the forums with up to 100 spams a day. |
|
|
|
Um, you mean the topic of discussion that was initiated by the great mind of Peter R. Rizun?
In other words, no matter what happens, nor how much evidence/facts someone summarizes they will still go around telling people that XT or BIP101 is the right choice. We have already figured out the two possible reasons for which they are doing this. If they want a discussion about ideas, here is one: "Both XT and BIP101 are bad." Discussion concluded. Notoriously lying won't help. BU is our preferred and right choice. Lauda against Lauda: "Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=101872Whether or not we get larger blocks the majority of network peers will still be running Core five years from now. Blockstream Core will be forced to implement larger blocks, because they've got competition. If they refuse, they'll be forked off. Their choice. https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/3ttz1o/it_actually_doesnt_really_matter_if_blockstream/ |
|
|
|
Um, you mean the topic of discussion that was initiated by the great mind of Peter R. Rizun?
In other words, no matter what happens, nor how much evidence/facts someone summarizes they will still go around telling people that XT or BIP101 is the right choice. We have already figured out the two possible reasons for which they are doing this. If they want a discussion about ideas, here is one: "Both XT and BIP101 are bad." Discussion concluded. Notoriously lying won't help. BU is our preferred and right choice. A censorship resistent currency within a censorship resistent communication environment. Lauda against Lauda: "Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=101872 |
|
|
|
is there a TL;DR?
I have not kept up with the overly long debate of "Dah Blohk Seyez"
thanks
Big Blockers : Artificial block size limit relies on a central authority decision on limit vs market dynamics. Undermines the proposition of being able to transact on chain, contrary to philosophy of "being able to send payments without going through a financial institution". Anyone that disagrees is a moron set to destroy bitcoin. Small Blockers : Increasing block size makes it i) harder to run a node, ii) favours big miners, both of which increase centralisation. Anyone that disagrees is a moron set to destroy bitcoin. And what do you think? Both sides are wrong (and therefore morons)? |
|
|
|
Rule by the economic majority is how Bitcoin is meant to be governed. So if the majority of people freely choose to adopt an alternative implementation of the Bitcoin protocol then this should be considered legitimate, even if you disagree. XT requires seventy five percent consensus in order for it to even initiate a fork after all.
-snip-
There is not going to be a "free choice". Who knows what Hearn promised supporters like Coinbase. Essentially the tactic is getting the major services to join you. Once everything is set up, the people will not have a "free choice" . It will either be sink or swim. Also 75% consensus is definitely not enough, and will cause damage (as intended). Face it, there's nothing good about XT. Do you want bigger blocks, be it 2,4,x MB? Fork Core, change the parameters/fork Core with BIP101 and there you have it. If that were true, who do you suppose he's shilling for?
The same people who are writing your papers. "Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=101872 |
|
|
|
Confirmed: Hearn = Circle = Goldman = shitlords
Confirmed: iCE = Banks = JPM = shitlords He says: Bitcoin is not for the people ("free shit army"), it's a reserve currency for the banks. |
|
|
|
Some mined blocks are (and will be) very small, this limits the possible weekly average to much smaller size than 1MB.
750kb as maximum weekly average is reasonable assumption.
It is not. Creating a new account in order to help this "argument" doesn't help it at all. Seek professional help.
Just ignore him. Either a paid shill or he does really need it. I've been telling you guys to put him on ignore for a while now, why haven't you done so? The great advisor for the streamblock shills. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
