How dare you!? I am most certainly in the "just you wait until december" camp, my xt-nodes blazing as a futile show of dissent!
Alright, fair enough. You are in a (supremely nutty) third camp, which believes both 'XT died for our 1MB sins' and 'XT will return for the Gavinista rapture.' Alas, if only you could understand the superlinear relationship between tx size and verification time, we could put this civil war behind us. Unless you are determined to destroy Bitcoin's decentralization-cum-survivability, and thus subvert the engineering requirement that it be above the law... XT opened a debate, you are the person that thinks its dead  Yes, and since then they are full time hyperventilating. |
|
|
|
Big market (makers?!) here..   Is that really the same cypherdoc that accused me of not understanding the network effect? I wonder how the network value of that 6-member circlejerk forum compares to BitcoinTalk (544282 Members) and /r/bitcoin (173,242)? In fairness to frap.doc, that place is still better than Ver's shitty bitcom.com. A notorious liar. More than 200. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162684.msg12619823#msg12619823 Ah, you deleted your promise to disappear. Hard life when someone fights a fight against himself. |
|
|
|
Big market (makers?!) here.. Is that really the same cypherdoc that accused me of not understanding the network effect? I wonder how the network value of that 6-member circlejerk forum compares to BitcoinTalk (544282 Members) and /r/bitcoin (173,242)? In fairness to frap.doc, that place is still better than Ver's shitty bitcom.com. A notorious liar. More than 200. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162684.msg12619823#msg12619823 |
|
|
|
Everybody out there is talking about the ideas of Peter R.
Nobody is talking about the ideas of the brg and that mod.
Which is no surprise.
Everybody out there is laughing about the 'spherical blockchain' ideas of Peter R. Which is no surprise. Of course, that's why they are forced to censor him. Poor core devs and mods. And you still insist on conflating moderation with censorship. What an insult to actual victims of censorship. Why not claim theymos is raping Peter R as well? Your argument sucks, so you have to redefine and trivialize powerful words to make them do the advocacy work for you. That's why XT's vaunted Streisand Effect failed to achieve much of anything. Moderating only controls time/place/behavior. Censorship attempts to control ideas. Learn to tell the difference, please! Everybody knows how censorship is defined correctly:
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/Censorshiphttps://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3nq0bk/antonopoulos_gives_his_opinion_of_rbitcoin_at_5540/ |
|
|
|
Big market (makers?!) here.. You have to admire the hard work and persistence that these dozen-or-so nimrods Already more than 200 or so. And: Quality before quantity. No censorship cheerleaders, no ad hominem pseudo Bitcoiners, no bullshit. That's - in short - the difference. |
|
|
|
I've watched paid shills change opinions on this forum for years. Some of them are quite successful. They generally argue against seemingly rational and well thought out arguments with a vigor that highlights their true purpose. The next steps in the irrational debate are name calling and doxing. This happens because someone arguing against the shill wants to invalidate, what appears to be, an unwavering irrational argument. The last step is usually the "you're stupid, I'm leaving the debate" stage. What step in the process are we at now? I think we're 2-4 pages from the last step.
Wow, that was amazing. I am very impressed! edit: I'm done here, wasted enough time on you poor irrelevant sheeps, hope you find the altcoin that would fill your noobish fantasies tho. bye.
Derive my perfectly sound argument exposing your irrelevance with some accusations of seeing through whatever your simple mind can deal with while constantly vomiting your fraud of a view, making you no better than what you are accusing me to be, if not just a no-life-forum-jerking wannabe. What now, should I spend dozens of pages chitchating with you idiotic forkers? I don't think so. You even can't trust your own promises to fork off the thread. Your core competence is ad hominem, as precisely predicted by @QoA. |
|
|
|
You mean companies with a big fat 0 next to the revenue line in their balance sheet? "Start-ups" burning through VC money to stay afloat? Market makers ?  You mean stream blocking inc.? Blockstream is churning burning out code money. |
|
|
|
You mean companies with a big fat 0 next to the revenue line in their balance sheet? "Start-ups" burning through VC money to stay afloat? Market makers ? You mean stream blocking inc.? |
|
|
|
...Only Mathematics rules, and no, it does not encompass any democratic procedures within it...
It sounds like you believe that Bitcoin is governed by mathematics, rather than by the market. Is this an accurate assessment? Under what conditions (if any) do you believe it is possible for the Bitcoin protocol rules to be changed (e.g., adopting a larger block size limit)? None. Communist utopia in perfection. The market will soon teach you some thing. You do not, and in any way, represent "the market". Nor would you have any metrics to back your insolent deluded claims. Just a random poor wannabe, that is as irrelevant as the market it pretends to derive from. Another notorious ad hominem 'Bitcoiner' who calls other users sheeps and sheeples. Are there some normal small blockers anywhere who don't work against their own position? |
|
|
|
...Only Mathematics rules, and no, it does not encompass any democratic procedures within it...
It sounds like you believe that Bitcoin is governed by mathematics, rather than by the market. Is this an accurate assessment? Under what conditions (if any) do you believe it is possible for the Bitcoin protocol rules to be changed (e.g., adopting a larger block size limit)? None. Communist utopia in perfection. The market will soon teach you some thing. |
|
|
|
Ethereum seems to have a high burn rate.
400'000 USD per month. 2 Million Dollars left to burn. |
|
|
|
There's too much conspiratorial accusations on both sides here. I'm not inclined to think Peter R wants to "kill Bitcoin." But I'm also not inclined to think BlockStream is trying to "block the stream of transactions," so it's hard for me to get too upset about people accusing Peter R of trying to "kill Bitcoin."
But Peter R, I can't imagine why you thought this animated gif was a good idea. I know it's supposed to depict a "possible future" that you want to help bring about, but someone not following the issue could easily think that XT has grown to be competitive with Core, which isn't true at all. And the fact that you keep reposting it in various venues is -- well, it makes me wonder what you think you're accomplishing. And calling it a "Nash Equilibrium"? Why? Is there some mathematics supporting the gif?
Someone against XT could make a similar gif depicting a "Tyson Equilibrium" that would show XT growing to about 10% with Core being close to 90% and then the Core part of the pie chart could grow fists and beat the XT part silly until it bleeds and cries and gets overtaken. This wouldn't prove anything, but it would be funny and arguably a more accurate representation of the current situation.
But I have to say, as someone who's relieved that XT hasn't gained traction, those of us against XT could be a bit more gracious. Maybe Peter R's gif is just an indication that he's in the denial stage. People dancing on XT's grave probably isn't helping.
Are you sure that Peter Rizun is just incapable of thinking rationally? You're alluding to the implausibility of that notion when you concede that you cannot understand Peter's motivation for using misleading graphics or fantasy mathematics. Everybody knows that this graph shows an outcome that he would prefer and you fear: competition and decentralization of implementations. No ground to accuse it as misleading. |
|
|
|
notorious ad hominem clowns here
Could the dictionary definition of "hyprocrisy" ever be adequate to describe the above? Notorious ad hominem attackers don't deserve friendly answers. But Peter speaks friendly even to a sociopath like you. I couldn't; and I admire him. The absurdity is screaming when people like you and brg talk about sociopathy. I've told you before: it's not ad hominem if it's true (or relevant). Everything is here in black and white, so there's no need to repeat yourself, you're not convincing anyone. The chance that notorious, sociopathic ad hominem attackers speak the truth is zero. |
|
|
|
notorious ad hominem clowns here
Could the dictionary definition of "hyprocrisy" ever be adequate to describe the above? Notorious ad hominem attackers don't deserve friendly answers. But Peter speaks friendly even to a sociopath like you. I couldn't; and I admire him. The absurdity is screaming when people like you and brg talk about sociopathy. |
|
|
|
Holliday, are you opposed to the decentralization of development (e.g., as depicted in this animated GIF)?
Development is decentralized by nature because it's open-source -- anyone is free to fork the code. Bitcoin XT is an example of someone freely forking the code. Do you think XT is a positive thing for Bitcoin because it gives people choice? Or a negative thing for Bitcoin? Choice is usually good, when it allows for informed decisions. In this regard, I can even consider XT good. But overall I consider XT bad for numerous technical and ideological reasons, as I have repeatedly argued. Anyway, XT never gained traction, and I believe it has no future under current circumstances. People have made their decision. Yes, under the current circumstances the blocks are just half full. But the times, they are always a changin'. Tenfold txs increase spring 12 - spring 13. Better to get ready than not. Not? |
|
|
|
Holliday, are you opposed to the decentralization of development?
No. development is already decentralized. hello, open source software here. its not because you peter dont know how to code and hence never contributed to the github repo that it is centralized. seriously, you pathetic prick. Ah, you are one of those clowns who think that the internet or the blockchain isn't an interdisciplinary work. You seem to believe that coding children without any life experience produce such environments. The absurdity is screaming ... What dont you understand in "development"? Does Peter qualify in software development? No. Of course yes. His life experience in different playgrounds is on an infinite higher level than that of some core devs and mods who left school some months ago. |
|
|
|
Notorious ad hominem
Notorious ad hominem
Ten anonymous heroes against Peter. Great, how you show together who is somebody and who is not. |
|
|
|
Holliday, are you opposed to the decentralization of development?
No. development is already decentralized. hello, open source software here. its not because you peter dont know how to code and hence never contributed to the github repo that it is centralized. seriously, you pathetic prick. Ah, you are one of those clowns who think that the internet or the blockchain isn't an interdisciplinary work. You seem to believe that coding children without any life experience produce such environments. The absurdity is screaming ... |
|
|
|
Everybody out there is talking about the ideas of Peter R.
Nobody is talking about the ideas of the brg and that mod.
Which is no surprise.
Everybody out there is laughing about the 'spherical blockchain' ideas of Peter R. Which is no surprise. Of course, that's why they are forced to censor him. Poor core devs and mods. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
