heres one
bitmain wants bigger blocks so he can rake in more fee.
he wants the biggest blocks the network will allow him to make!
I already refuted that. You are repeating your same argument which doesn't make any economic sense. wtf doesn't make sense about providing a better service for cheaper? seems like the in thing to do... |
|
|
|
Internet connection speeds have not improved. In the US, the average internet connection speed has been dropping recently due to increased loads due to HD video streaming etc and not enough investment in new infrastructure to counter this.
A big cause of this was many years ago ISP's set up coaxial networks instead of fibre to try and save money, and it's just not economical to rip out the coaxial and replace it with fibre now. Another cause is that in many areas people only have the choice of one ISP. That ISP has a monopoly and has no incentive to invest in a better network as there is no competition. Government regulations prevent new ISP's from setting up in the area, due to the ISP's lobbying to get this regulation past.
What a load of bullshit. Why the fuck are you quoting shits from 2011 when we're now in 2017 and FCC has stated that 'Average U.S. Internet speed has more than tripled since 2011', back in 2016?http://bgr.com/2016/01/02/us-internet-speeds-average/Average U.S. Internet speed has more than tripled since 2011As for which nationwide ISPs deliver the highest average download speed, the study found that Cablevision checked in at number one with an average speed of 60 Mbps, followed by Verizon and Charter at 50 Mbps, Cox at 40 Mbps and Comcast at 35 Mbps.As for the average Internet speeds across different states, New Jersey had the highest figure with 57 Mbps while Idaho came in last with an average Internet download speed of 14 Mbps. The FCC’s full report is available in its entirety via the source link below. What kind of dumb fuck use 2011 data in 2017 for something as fast growing as the internet, you're either yet another intentionally dishonest shill or yet another uninformed dumb fuck trolling over shit he doesn't understand.  |
|
|
|
Can anyone find a flaw in my analysis?
not really. it rings a tad false to me, and seems highly speculative, but its a workable theory... If you can't come up with an alternative ECONOMICALLY plausible theory, then you'll know mine isn't speculative. You can't just believe what people say. You have to analyze if what they say makes any sense or not. heres one bitmain wants bigger blocks so he can rake in more fee. he wants the biggest blocks the network will allow him to make! and blockstream is MAJORLY in his way / threatening to take away a huge amount to TX demand of chain bitmain must do everything in his power to make sure HE profits from bitcoins success not Blockstream. bigger blocks is his goal. and IMO whats good for miners is good for us. (mostly true) |
|
|
|
So sorry for the random interjection here but I have regularly observed what seems to be a purely ideological debate against *between blockstream and the presumption that centralized miners are either good or bad actors so.....
Ugh, do I really need to care about centralized hubs in the future? If the market decides they are great and people want to go through them to benefit from the blockchain, why should I care? As long as I can still conduct peer to peer transactions from my own wallet, what skin is it off my back?
yes, these are generalizations, call me devil's advocate.
NO you dont need to worry about " centralized hubs " ( as long as you dont use them ) are you worried about bitfinex, mtgox, mybitcoin.com?? not if you dont use them... what's important is that YOU can TX on the main chain. and more then once every 5 years when you either buy a car or house -_- it very important the blockchains is open to as many people as possible. running a full-archive-supernode by as many poeple as possible, not so important... |
|
|
|
Can anyone find a flaw in my analysis?
not really. it rings a tad false to me, and seems highly speculative, but its a workable theory... |
|
|
|
I also think that giving every asicboost for free means that no one will have the advantage, and so now one will stand to lose anything by going with bigger blocks.
Not everybody has Bitmain's hardware. Not everybody is willing to risk the liability of running a (potentially) patented thing covertly. It is just simple economics. Miners are forced to support what gives them an economic advantage. but Bitmain said he would want to work with other patent holders to null and void the patents and make it available to everyone. his reasoning was, its better for bitcoin's security, to have an extra 20% hashpower over all, then drop hashing power by disabling his (potential) advantage. you might need to do a little correction to your conspiracy theory. remember the episode of star trek voyager where 7 of 9 assimilate to much data and comes up with crazy conspiracy theories Star Trek: Voyager The Voyager Conspiracy Season 6 | Episode 9 you should go watch this now, and then GET SOME SLEEP!  i should do that to... |
|
|
|
this is highly speculative but seemingly flawless logical reasoning I think you're attributing deliberate intent based on some grand master plan, which only exists in your head. I think the reality is more transparent and random coincidence then you make it out to be. I also think that giving everyone asicboost for free means that no one will have the advantage, and so now one will stand to lose anything by going with bigger blocks. |
|
|
|
trump appears sincerely deeply troubled. not fake news! Could be fake fake news. you mean fake news macerating as not fake news  what will they think of next! |
|
|
|
trump appears sincerely deeply troubled. not fake news! |
|
|
|
|
now lets take a look at what a maxed out bittorrent node can do.
such centralization!
|
|
|
|
Personally, my biggest concern about large block sizes is, to put simply: Datacenters instead of home users running full nodes.
Thats already a reality. Vast majority of nodes are currently run in datacenters. The 300GB/mo bandwidth it takes to run a node is a lot for any home users connection. Even unmetered internet has a "fair usage policy", which is an undisclosed bandwidth limit that the ISP can change at any time. If your running a node at home and have multiple people streaming HD videos, you're going to get a call from your ISP about your "excessive bandwidth usage" regardless of what your limit is. hi welcome to my datacenter. i think what you mean to say is if a user wishes to have a node with 99.9% uptime, which is constantly trying to connect to as many other nodes as possible, serving them the blockchain without any speed limit on individual connections, you'll hit 1T-300GB / month depending on the internet speed. pretty sure if you we're nutty enough to connect to all ~6000 node and serve highspeed blockchain syncs at will, with a datacneter like speed connection, you'll probably manage to use 4TB of bandwidth / month i forget what was your point? |
|
|
|
|
I can spot the paid trolls so easily.
I've been here way to long....
|
|
|
|
|
i guess its time for Ver to make a youtube video backing bitmain
|
|
|
|
 click the button "Quote" at the top left of this post, and find out. |
|
|
|
You shills crack me up i perfer to remain an amartue shill so i can compete in the olympics |
|
|
|
|
core has a bug in its code where it cannot accept 2MB blocks
NOW its clear why they didnt honer the HK argument and get segwit activated
|
|
|
|
Give it a rest because obviously you being paid by  to attack anyone for reasons. Nobody pays me dude. I am sincere. And you're still acting like an idiot. I looked at your post history, if you're not paid to shill why the hell have you been posting non-stop since the asicboost scandal with your anti-core/blockstream propaganda? Give me a break dude  iamnotback is also anti BU if he is a paid troll, he is paid to introduce some serious amount of confusion on both sides to the end goal of making sure bitcoin make no progress and LTC can take over |
|
|
|
::sigh::
So they admit to having it in their hardware, expected-- this is impossible to deny, and people on Reddit were already uncovering it for themselves. They insist they have a right to use it. The admit to using it on testnet. They deny using it on mainnet "for the good of Bitcoin"-- but where was the "good of bitcoin" when they insisted that they would keep making empty blocks because the protocol allows it?
I expected the denial, the unfortunate thing about covert boosting is that its very difficult to prove its actual except by what it blocks. The proposal I made was specifically constructed with it in mind. If they aren't using the covert boost then they should vigorously support the proposal because it would prevent others from using it and gaining an advantage over them with it (while disrupting protocol improvements).
What I didn't expect was the sheer level of adhominen and personal attack, and the attacks against the Bitcoin project. It makes it hard to respond to, because obviously I reject and refute those points-- but they're also a distraction from points that actually matter: like how they've completely mischaracterized the proposal. |
|
|
|
BU thinks the idea that these boost miners can't upgrade is largely overstated Even with the transaction-reodering ASICBOOST trick (which we don't have any proof they are doing), they could still upgrade to a new transaction format like FlexTrans or BUIP037. Or even Extension blocks.
The thing that theoretically screws it up is sticking the WTXID Merkle root into the coinbase transaction. |
|
|
|
So he has been selling cheated miners which give you more hashpower if you don't signal for Segwit, is that it? And everyones's being activating BU because segwit is giving them -%haspower? And that's why BU support were rising over time...
He needs some serious punishment if this shit is true. I mean, JAIL like punishment btw. What a fuckng clown.
no no no altho he has chips which can do asic boost he doesn't turn that feature on. he does not ship miners with it turned on he supported segwit +2mB but core fucked him over. he continues to support future upgrades including some which will hinder boosting ( like bigger blocks ) and hes deeply concerned about how core has managed to brainwash you |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
