bitcoiners are on the verge of a melt down, all thanks to the blocklimit debate, which seems to have no end in sight. market will weigh in once its all said and done assuming core gets their way....when we can play with LN we will either love it or hate it, and boom or bust follows. until then its probably in everyone's best interest to PUMP dat price. ( if we can  ) Miners are afraid the market will crash if they try to switch to big block code. The only way to take away that fear is to crash the market. Then they won't fear it anymore. we won't get big blocks without a crash. We won't get a new ATH until we get big blocks. The only way up is to go down first.i get your point, if you jump first i'll fallow  |
|
|
|
So why aren't developers supporting classic, XT , or BU ?
because all (legitimate) devs are core devs? |
|
|
|
time for a new poll...
when will aztecmaggot slit his wrists & spare us from his complete fuckwittery?
(or get carted off to the looney bin)
Someone make it so
wow such hostitliy for aztecmaggot who is aztecmaggot? you know what its probably best i just delete his comment.... |
|
|
|
You are living in a dream world if you believe a majority of users support classic.
You are living in a dream world if you believe a majority of users doesn't support 2MB blocks. And not only "majority" i would also say "supermajority". node count and hashing power would seem to disagree with that... at best we have economic marjory on our side but when you have all the miners in HK saying " gives us effective block incress or we use classic" one gets the sense that the tables can turn fast. |
|
|
|
bitcoiners are on the verge of a melt down, all thanks to the blocklimit debate, which seems to have no end in sight. market will weigh in once its all said and done assuming core gets their way....when we can play with LN we will either love it or hate it, and boom or bust follows. until then its probably in everyone's best interest to PUMP dat price. ( if we can ) |
|
|
|
multi-billion part happened with classical scaling in mind.
ROFL Adam, that's exactly what was on your mind when you, the typical everyday investor, bought back in '11, '12, '13 and 2014. Come on, lie to me. We all know what it looks like when you talk shit (lips move, fingers type etc) you've made me look back at my post history it appears i use to be a small blocker! ...
To Conclude:
Bitcoin will continue to grow and with it the number of transactions every 10 minutes. Each block has maximum number of transactions it can record. I would speculate that in 30 years, transactions will exceed this limit. As a result people will pay higher fees in order to process their transactions faster. This competition for speedy transactions will create sizable rewards for miners processing the new blocks, Thus the bitcoin network will continue to thrive.
lol well maybe i thought 1MB wasn't crippling bitcoin to 3TPS... fuck i was probably not even aware of the exact limit. wtv as a " typical everyday investor " i'll tell you this, if the LN is as shitty ( not user friendly / impractical ) as i think it will be and the blocklimit creates 1$+ fees, while banks dev there own blockchains, i'm out. |
|
|
|
How many multi-billion dollar commodities have you built from your Wizard Treehouse? Less than one?
If we’re talking about Bitcoin… the multi-billion dollar commodity was invented/built by someone else. Dude left abruptly, key's under the mat. Nope, he gave the key to the treehouse wizards before he left. And the multi-billion part happened after he left also. Bit of a crappy metaphor multi-billion part happened with classical scaling in mind. |
|
|
|
a single kid with a while loop could throw hundreds of gigabytes of data into blocks and rapidly DOS the whole system into the ground.
miners would make a 1GB block and risk a 100% chance of getting orphaned? for wat? 0.01BTC in fees? Why 100%? You're making the fallacious assumption that all miners are mining for mining's sake. maybe i'm exaggerating a little, but a 1GB block will take way too long to propagate and another miner will find a sibling before the massive 1GB block propagates. just stfu or fork off already man, 1MB is here for a long time. i need a fork to go off on to... |
|
|
|
a single kid with a while loop could throw hundreds of gigabytes of data into blocks and rapidly DOS the whole system into the ground.
miners would make a 1GB block and risk a 100% chance of getting orphaned? for wat? 0.01BTC in fees? Why 100%? You're making the fallacious assumption that all miners are mining for mining's sake. maybe i'm exaggerating a little, but a 1GB block will take way too long to propagate and another miner will find a sibling before the massive 1GB block propagates. even if the attacker has enough hashing power to make his own blocks, he wouldn't be able to rapidly DOS the whole system into the ground, because these 1GB blocks would get orphaned by siblings. |
|
|
|
a single kid with a while loop could throw hundreds of gigabytes of data into blocks and rapidly DOS the whole system into the ground.
miners would make a 1GB block and risk a 100% chance of getting orphaned? for wat? 0.01BTC in fees? |
|
|
|
|
just wondering if anyone has any info / rumor of progress with segwit?
do you think they will be ready in april as expected?
|
|
|
|
BTW is there any bad news we can attribute this "crash" too?
 |
|
|
|
And nothing to do with a fair and sustainable tx fee?
What mechanism would you suggest to establish a "fair" fee, rather than one that contemplates the costs to validate and relay transactions? If there is no competition for transaction relay, there is no contemplation of the costs required to maintain the system. "Sustainable" is the operative word from your post that we should focus on IMO. miners have a real cost to including TX in the form of orphen risk. rather than one that contemplates the costs to validate and relay transactions? what are you referring to there? blocklimit? |
|
|
|
|
BTW is there any bad news we can attribute this "crash" too?
|
|
|
|
Has Adam joined a smear campaign against bitcoin?  I don't know if that is Adam , but he definitely appears to be unstable and I hope he gets some rest or help. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1330553.msg14356177#msg14356177He has been exhibiting behavior of being all over the place, wild emotional swings, and spreading conspiracy theories and misleading statements. I doubt he sold his account, and is attacking bitcoin , but likely just emotionally invested in a contentious implementation like classic or Bitcoin Unlimited where he doesn't even realize how silly or ignorant some of his comments have become. |
|
|
|
look you see threads with the title True or False? Blockstream having so many Core developers is a conflict/centralization of interest. and no one is disputing "Blockstream having so many Core developers" as not factual and you assume its the truth.Please quote where I indicated this. You are now spreading misinformation about me. i'm not implying you said these things, i'm saying other users have No , you clearly said "I assumed" it is the truth and quoted me. In all seriousness, and with no intentions to denigrate you directly , do you smoke a lot of marijuana or do harder drugs or have any mental illnesses? You appear to be unstable and lack clarity even between posts. I'm trying to determine if you have a problem or if you are merely trolling. omfg.... and no one is disputing "Blockstream having so many Core developers" as not factual and you one assumes its the truth.better? |
|
|
|
look you see threads with the title True or False? Blockstream having so many Core developers is a conflict/centralization of interest. and no one is disputing "Blockstream having so many Core developers" as not factual and you assume its the truth. Please quote where I indicated this. You are now spreading misinformation about me. i'm not implying you said these things, i'm saying other users have |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
