|
821
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)
|
on: November 02, 2015, 06:32:33 AM
|
The highlighted quote was not made by me. Brg444 has unethically and falsely used my name in a quote which I am not responsible for, it was most likely written by him. To do this is wrong, it is fraud, libel and slander. I have requested that he ceases to falsely quote me yet he continues to do so.
The quote wasn't made by you, but it very accurately predicted things you were to say later. The fact that you are lucky enough to be able to afford to run a full node has no bearing on the discussion. Lots of people are unable to run a full node already, and certainly wouldn't be able to keep up with XT's plan of doubling the blocksize limit every 2 years until it is 8192 times bigger than the current limit. Bu..buut buttt the majority of the very privileged, global minority, of users in the developed world can run a node!! Screw the other guys, they don't need to run full nodes, they can just use SPV right, right !? I mean, if me & my friends can run a node from the comfort of our european metropolis that should be enough decentralization? At least I think so... and if you don't agree well man it's just like.. your opinion, yaknow? |
|
|
|
|
823
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)
|
on: November 02, 2015, 01:21:57 AM
|
It is ridiculous to maintain that everybody should be able to continue running a full node, surely there should be a lower bound to this requirement.
And this reveals the dishonesty of your position (as ever). It was only a few weeks ago you that and the rest of the XT cheerleaders were claiming that the BIP101 schedule was more than adequate to allow the majority of ordinary users to run full nodes. Now, we see that you are subtly shifting your position towards the SPV-for-all end of the spectrum. If you wish to continue shouting about sophistry and conceited arguments, remember that you're already shouting as such all too frequently. , some people will not be able to, I have never denied that. You are not the one to talk about sophistry attacking me the way that you are. I disagree, I'm a very well off European with very cheap internet access and I personally don't think it is inconvenient nor expensive to run my node. Third-world problems are not my problems.
 |
|
|
|
|
824
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: BTC is about to be $5K-$8K ++
|
on: November 02, 2015, 01:14:03 AM
|
10 years until 5k? Conservatively, if it takes more than 3-4 years to get to 5k, that would be tragic.
If Bitcoin stays 10 more years in penny stock territory then it is a total failure. depends who you ask? if it doesn't increase in value at all, but transforms the way we conduct transactions around the world, I would deem that transformative and a huge success. when you speak of bitcoin as a failure you are only looking at it as a value proposition...yet its is much more than that. Bitcoin is about reintroducing sound money to the world. Transforming how we conduct fiat transactions around the world does not compare in terms of impact on society. |
|
|
|
|
825
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Will the Fed's auction move the price up, or down?
|
on: November 01, 2015, 10:29:58 PM
|
|
As the halving approaches it will get increasingly difficult for large players to acquire sizeable positions in this market.
The Fed auctions were by far the most legitimate and convenient way to acquires large blocks of coins.
As these type of opportunities slowly expire the demand will inevitably trickle down into markets and exchanges which IMO will contribute to the rise in price.
|
|
|
|
|
826
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: BTC is about to be $5K-$8K ++
|
on: November 01, 2015, 10:12:52 PM
|
Right but perhaps the pumping of bitcoins price as a speculative instrument has run its course. Perhaps if the price is going to rise further it needs to demonstrate more value other than being something a fool buys in order to sell to a bigger fool for a bigger price sometime down the road. Call me naive but I do think that bitcoin has something to offer outside of that.
It hasn't. Just sit back and enjoy the show. Speculation and greed is what drives this beast, at least until we get to a 1T$ market cap. |
|
|
|
|
827
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Thanks to people who support 1-2 MB blocks - great idea u fools...
|
on: November 01, 2015, 09:40:01 PM
|
The #1 attraction of Bitcoin is its monetary sovereignty. This is how it proposes to change people's life. Not because of free & instant transactions.
How will you reach that sovereignty when you need exchangers to change it to fiat? It would be useless then. You need it as an every currency. Spendable when you want. And jeff, the value of bitcoin really comes from those who hold and does not sell. Because they believe in the value of bitcoin and store real world value in bitcoin. They sold something to get the bitcoin. If they would sell then it would mean they lost trust and bitcoin price would crash. I'm not going to address any of your posts since you've conveniently ignored about half of my arguments. Better sell now, Bitcoin is dead as its block size will remain capped likely forever. |
|
|
|
|
828
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: BTC is about to be $5K-$8K ++
|
on: November 01, 2015, 08:49:53 PM
|
Merchants accepting it, stand ups utilizing it.
Recently newegg that implemented i think increased the price a bit. Then there is the g2a which sells game keys and other game stuff. Dell also accepts bitcoin for a long time now, and hope one day amazon and ebay will implement the bitcoin. Amazon is what so many people are waiting for. The current blocksize issue is what potentially holds Amazon back. If they accept Bitcoin payments, then most likely each block will be full. ...that's non sense. No one is rushing to buy bitcoins because merchants accept them |
|
|
|
|
831
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)
|
on: October 31, 2015, 09:37:57 PM
|
Truth can stand on its own, people please use wisdom and reason, measure our arguments by thinking for yourself. Decide for yourself what you think would be the best path for Bitcoin. Do not be fooled by the constant ad hominem and sophistry. Inform your self and understand what the pros and cons are and do not forget that Bitcoin will reflect the will of its participants so think carefully of what you would like Bitcoin to become. https://medium.com/faith-and-future/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1#.ybxg8kz61Yes it does It sure does, which is why more then seventy percent of the miners now support bigger blocks.  Which pretty much means nothing until 100% of the nodes agree. That is impossible, 90%-100% consensus is impossible among large groups of people. Bitcoin was also never designed to be this way, Bitcoin can split with only 51% of the mining power. This is a good thing because it solves the age old problem of tyranny of the majority. Watch it happen retard. Still pretending a 51% miner attack is a legitimate fork of the network heh  oh well... Do you understand what Bitcoin is? A peer-to-peer network? If you honestly believe the protocol is dictated by the mining power and not the actual peers then there's really no use wasting my time with you. To be clear: no, Bitcoin cannot split with 51% of the hashing power. |
|
|
|
|
834
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)
|
on: October 31, 2015, 08:39:43 PM
|
Its a bit strange that the small blockists are so opposed to BIP100 consider that BIP100 would allow the miners to decrease the blocksize if they determined this to be to their advantage.
Jeff Garzik, originator of BIP100, has himself stated it is unlikely (read:impossible) that BIP100 gets adopted so there's really no point debating it. We are opposed to it because we understand the game theory dynamics of Bitcoin which quite obviously you don't  Fortunately it is not up to the Core developers what proposal the economic majority will adopt. If Jeff Garzik does not implement BIP100 then other people can implement this so far hypothetical BIP100 instead. I would not be surprised if Core took to long to implement this, that the miners themselves might even release and support this implementation. For the millionth time, the miners don't decide what code gets run, the nodes do. Core doesn't bother with BIP100 as it is clear its hasn't gotten near consensus acceptance from relevant actors and so it should be considered dead. Cores idea of developer consensus is laughable they just censor and ban anyone who does not agree with them and call that consensus. True Bitcoin consensus is superior, firstly reflected by proof of work and then by the full nodes. It has nothing to do with developer consensus and what you propose is simply disingenuous and holds absolutely no truth. Such statements simply solidify your troll status. Miners are here to extend the longest chain deemed valid by the code run by the nodes. If miners tomorrow decide to switch their hashing power to litecoin you won't go around calling it Bitcoin will ya? What a waste of time you are... at least the usual trolls like LambChop provide some type of challenge and lulz. You're just a dull & very boring imbecile.... |
|
|
|
|
835
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)
|
on: October 31, 2015, 08:26:45 PM
|
Its a bit strange that the small blockists are so opposed to BIP100 consider that BIP100 would allow the miners to decrease the blocksize if they determined this to be to their advantage.
Jeff Garzik, originator of BIP100, has himself stated it is unlikely (read:impossible) that BIP100 gets adopted so there's really no point debating it. We are opposed to it because we understand the game theory dynamics of Bitcoin which quite obviously you don't Fortunately it is not up to the Core developers what proposal the economic majority will adopt. If Jeff Garzik does not implement BIP100 then other people can implement this so far hypothetical BIP100 instead. I would not be surprised if Core took to long to implement this, that the miners themselves might even release and support this implementation. For the millionth time, the miners don't decide what code gets run, the nodes do. Core doesn't bother with BIP100 as it is clear its hasn't gotten near consensus acceptance from relevant actors and so it should be considered dead. |
|
|
|
|
836
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)
|
on: October 31, 2015, 08:20:10 PM
|
Its a bit strange that the small blockists are so opposed to BIP100 consider that BIP100 would allow the miners to decrease the blocksize if they determined this to be to their advantage.
Jeff Garzik, originator of BIP100, has himself stated it is unlikely (read:impossible) that BIP100 gets adopted so there's really no point debating it. We are opposed to it because we understand the game theory dynamics of Bitcoin which quite obviously you don't For example you don't understand that there is no such things as "the miners" as a group. |
|
|
|
|
838
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)
|
on: October 31, 2015, 08:09:48 PM
|
I thought it would make sense to show you that Andreas Antonopoulos also supports increasing the blocksize. If I am wrong because I do not know what I am talking about and I am just some sort of "crazy XT fanatic" then surely you can not use these same "arguments" against Andreas Antonopoulos considering the respect and wisdom he commands within the Bitcoin community.
The only respect and wisdom he commands is from reddit derps who don't know better. |
|
|
|
|
839
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)
|
on: October 31, 2015, 08:02:14 PM
|
5 years later: I can tell you that IGoogle & Amazon have absolutely no problems running my full node and neither do the people around methem. So my life and my their experience and that of the people around methem does serve as a counterfactual to what you are saying. Of course some people will not be able to run full nodes forever but we should not expect them to especially when the sacrifice that this would require would be to great. With sacrifice I am referring to limiting the amount of people that can use Bitcoin.
The repeated argument to ignoramus (Andreas Antonopoulos) are the source of much lulz over here. It is very revealing that you do not admire the work of Andreas Antonopoulos. Fortunately I suspect that most other people on this forum do. I will continue to follow the true original vision of Bitcoin founded by Satoshi Nakamoto and which is presently best expressed by Andreas Antonopoulos. This original vision of Bitcoin implies increasing the blocksize. You can disagree with this original vision, even though I do think that this disagreement would be best expressed in an alternative cryptocurrency instead of trying to force your own ideology onto Bitcoin. Typical redditard homo-erotic fantasies of Andreas Antonopoulos and him saving poor African children with Bitcoin. Don't you have any pride  Why do you keep bringing up "authorities" to reinforce your position? You can not mention pride after what you just did. It is not an argument by authority, I have already made my arguments, which are separate to the position of Andreas Antonopoulos. I mentioned his name because I am being ridiculed for wanting to increase the blocksize as if I am the only person who thinks that, which is obviously not true, furthermore because of the constant ad hominem attacks, I thought it would make sense to show you that Andreas Antonopoulos also supports increasing the blocksize. If I am wrong because I do not know what I am talking about and I am just some sort of "crazy XT fanatic" then surely you can not use these same "arguments" against Andreas Antonopoulos considering the respect and wisdom he commands within the Bitcoin community. You don't have any arguments. All of your posts are nothing but political opinionated "verbiage". But please stay, you do provide comedy value |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
