block limit, high fees Vs centralization.

[adamstgBit]

good adam, glad you stopped cheering for sum twisted BIPs and got into the centralization/security issue.

keep diggin


ps: how about BIP000? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1170700.0  

BIP00 is fine until miners are losing money because

a) they cant fit all TX in a block even some with fees
b) bitcoin become expensive to use therefore less useful, making its value DROP.

This is all extrapolations.

+ I dont see how miners would loose money including only transactions with fees. Besides, halving is coming so...

Bitcoin's security should not be cheap, it is precisely what drives its token's value, again, not freely spamming the holy decentralized ledger with coffee tips.

For this you can use whatever altcoin thats suits you. Maybe even banks blockchains? or ripple. ^^

Bitcoin is not for the mass, it is not user friendly. Hence, the mass dont care about bitcoin, or only when they get bailed in... but still not for buying crap over the internet.

see this is where i went wrong, i though bitcoin was to buy crap over the internet.

you're saying poeple ( alot of poeple ) are willing to pay huge fees to use bitcoin because it is holy?

idk, maybe high fees makes all kinds of blockchain apps impractical. not sure i see much demand for large TX using bitcoin just yet. maybe oneday.

with my BIP we can tell developers with a high degree of certainty that they can and always will be free to spam the holy decentralized ledger with wtv shit they wish so long as they pay a small fee.

now that i've said it it sounds funny.

[hdbuck]

good adam, glad you stopped cheering for sum twisted BIPs and got into the centralization/security issue.

keep diggin


ps: how about BIP000? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1170700.0  

BIP00 is fine until miners are losing money because

a) they cant fit all TX in a block even some with fees
b) bitcoin become expensive to use therefore less useful, making its value DROP.

This is all extrapolations.

+ I dont see how miners would loose money including only transactions with fees. Besides, halving is coming so...

Bitcoin's security should not be cheap, it is precisely what drives its token's value, again, not freely spamming the holy decentralized ledger with coffee tips.

For this you can use whatever altcoin thats suits you. Maybe even banks blockchains? or ripple. ^^

Bitcoin is not for the mass, it is not user friendly. Hence, the mass dont care about bitcoin, or only when they get bailed in... but still not for buying crap over the internet.

see this is where i went wrong, i though bitcoin was to buy crap over the internet.

you're saying poeple ( alot of poeple ) are willing to pay huge fees to use bitcoin because it is holy?

idk, maybe high fees makes all kinds of blockchain apps impractical. not sure i see much demand for large TX using bitcoin just yet. maybe oneday.

I mean, no, you were not wrong, and I also happen to spend some bitcoins for things too (this are the perks of being early at this party, and will make a helluva story for the grand children ^^)

But i'd rather ultimately have a 1st ledger with high security and not some centralized digital dollar 2.0

Basically, this is all it boils down to:  bitcoin cannot technically handle all transactions in the world and on its own without being centralized, in terms of resources, bandwidth, storage etc.

So I think we need it as a sane base to build a lot of other things on top, like probably a cash 2.0.

But rejoy because if we manage to do so, Bitcoin will be the new worldwide FED.

So, as we saw what happened with other human governances like, noone should control it, for bitcoin's intrinsic value lies in its security, which should remain unbreakable, rock solid.

The second some 'cartel' (devs, miners, etc) gets a slight advantage over its network in order to "bend" the rules, bitcoin's value will be gone. This i'm sure of it.

[adamstgBit]

good adam, glad you stopped cheering for sum twisted BIPs and got into the centralization/security issue.

keep diggin


ps: how about BIP000? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1170700.0  

BIP00 is fine until miners are losing money because

a) they cant fit all TX in a block even some with fees
b) bitcoin become expensive to use therefore less useful, making its value DROP.

This is all extrapolations.

+ I dont see how miners would loose money including only transactions with fees. Besides, halving is coming so...

Bitcoin's security should not be cheap, it is precisely what drives its token's value, again, not freely spamming the holy decentralized ledger with coffee tips.

For this you can use whatever altcoin thats suits you. Maybe even banks blockchains? or ripple. ^^

Bitcoin is not for the mass, it is not user friendly. Hence, the mass dont care about bitcoin, or only when they get bailed in... but still not for buying crap over the internet.

see this is where i went wrong, i though bitcoin was to buy crap over the internet.

you're saying poeple ( alot of poeple ) are willing to pay huge fees to use bitcoin because it is holy?

idk, maybe high fees makes all kinds of blockchain apps impractical. not sure i see much demand for large TX using bitcoin just yet. maybe oneday.

I mean, no, you were not wrong, and I also happen to spend some bitcoins for things too (this are the perks of being early at this party, and will make a helluva story for the grand children ^^)

But i'd rather ultimately have a 1st ledger with high security and not some centralized digital dollar 2.0

Basically, this is all it boils down to: bitcoin cannot technically handle all transactions in the world without being centralized, in terms of resources, bandwidth, storage etc.

So I think we need it as a sane base to build a lot of other things on top, like probably a cash 2.0.

But Bitcoin is the new worldwide FED, that is how i personnaly see it.

Noone should control it, for bitcoin's intrinsic value lies in its security, which should remain unbreakable, rock solid.

The second some 'cartel' (devs, miners, etc) gets a slight advantage over its network in order to "bend" the rules, bitcoin's value will be gone. This i'm sure of it.

a little "centralization" aka kicking the hobby miner with a DLS connection, is a small price to pay to keep bitcoin cheap.

thats were our opinions differ i guess.

i'd be OK with mining centralization that implies miners would need ~1million dollar to get into the bitcoin mining business and stay competitive  

we are far away from that but ya i'd be ok with that.

arguing against any increase almost feels like saying we should of not invented diggers to dig up gold faster, so that anyone could continue to mine gold with a pick ax and still be profitable.

[hdbuck]

good adam, glad you stopped cheering for sum twisted BIPs and got into the centralization/security issue.

keep diggin


ps: how about BIP000? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1170700.0 

BIP00 is fine until miners are losing money because

a) they cant fit all TX in a block even some with fees
b) bitcoin become expensive to use therefore less useful, making its value DROP.

This is all extrapolations.

+ I dont see how miners would loose money including only transactions with fees. Besides, halving is coming so...

Bitcoin's security should not be cheap, it is precisely what drives its token's value, again, not freely spamming the holy decentralized ledger with coffee tips.

For this you can use whatever altcoin thats suits you. Maybe even banks blockchains? or ripple. ^^

Bitcoin is not for the mass, it is not user friendly. Hence, the mass dont care about bitcoin, or only when they get bailed in... but still not for buying crap over the internet.

see this is where i went wrong, i though bitcoin was to buy crap over the internet.

you're saying poeple ( alot of poeple ) are willing to pay huge fees to use bitcoin because it is holy?

idk, maybe high fees makes all kinds of blockchain apps impractical. not sure i see much demand for large TX using bitcoin just yet. maybe oneday.

I mean, no, you were not wrong, and I also happen to spend some bitcoins for things too (this are the perks of being early at this party, and will make a helluva story for the grand children ^^)

But i'd rather ultimately have a 1st ledger with high security and not some centralized digital dollar 2.0

Basically, this is all it boils down to:  bitcoin cannot technically handle all transactions in the world and on its own without being centralized, in terms of resources, bandwidth, storage etc.

So I think we need it as a sane base to build a lot of other things on top, like probably a cash 2.0.

But rejoy because if we manage to do so, Bitcoin will be the new worldwide FED.

So, as we saw what happened with other human governances like, noone should control it, for bitcoin's intrinsic value lies in its security, which should remain unbreakable, rock solid.

The second some 'cartel' (devs, miners, etc) gets a slight advantage over its network in order to "bend" the rules, bitcoin's value will be gone. This i'm sure of it.

a little "centralization" aka kicking the hobby miner with a DLS connection, is a small price to pay to keep bitcoin cheap.

thats were our opinions differ i guess.

i'd be OK with mining centralization that implies miners would need ~1million dollar to get into the bitcoin mining business and stay competitive 

we are far away from that but ya i'd be ok with that.

you wanna keep bitcoin cheap

[adamstgBit]

good adam, glad you stopped cheering for sum twisted BIPs and got into the centralization/security issue.

keep diggin


ps: how about BIP000? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1170700.0  

BIP00 is fine until miners are losing money because

a) they cant fit all TX in a block even some with fees
b) bitcoin become expensive to use therefore less useful, making its value DROP.

This is all extrapolations.

+ I dont see how miners would loose money including only transactions with fees. Besides, halving is coming so...

Bitcoin's security should not be cheap, it is precisely what drives its token's value, again, not freely spamming the holy decentralized ledger with coffee tips.

For this you can use whatever altcoin thats suits you. Maybe even banks blockchains? or ripple. ^^

Bitcoin is not for the mass, it is not user friendly. Hence, the mass dont care about bitcoin, or only when they get bailed in... but still not for buying crap over the internet.

see this is where i went wrong, i though bitcoin was to buy crap over the internet.

you're saying poeple ( alot of poeple ) are willing to pay huge fees to use bitcoin because it is holy?

idk, maybe high fees makes all kinds of blockchain apps impractical. not sure i see much demand for large TX using bitcoin just yet. maybe oneday.

I mean, no, you were not wrong, and I also happen to spend some bitcoins for things too (this are the perks of being early at this party, and will make a helluva story for the grand children ^^)

But i'd rather ultimately have a 1st ledger with high security and not some centralized digital dollar 2.0

Basically, this is all it boils down to:  bitcoin cannot technically handle all transactions in the world and on its own without being centralized, in terms of resources, bandwidth, storage etc.

So I think we need it as a sane base to build a lot of other things on top, like probably a cash 2.0.

But rejoy because if we manage to do so, Bitcoin will be the new worldwide FED.

So, as we saw what happened with other human governances like, noone should control it, for bitcoin's intrinsic value lies in its security, which should remain unbreakable, rock solid.

The second some 'cartel' (devs, miners, etc) gets a slight advantage over its network in order to "bend" the rules, bitcoin's value will be gone. This i'm sure of it.

a little "centralization" aka kicking the hobby miner with a DLS connection, is a small price to pay to keep bitcoin cheap.

thats were our opinions differ i guess.

i'd be OK with mining centralization that implies miners would need ~1million dollar to get into the bitcoin mining business and stay competitive  

we are far away from that but ya i'd be ok with that.

you wanna keep bitcoin cheap

i dont get paid till next wednesday...

TX cost cheap you know what i mean.

[hdbuck]

good adam, glad you stopped cheering for sum twisted BIPs and got into the centralization/security issue.

keep diggin


ps: how about BIP000? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1170700.0  

BIP00 is fine until miners are losing money because

a) they cant fit all TX in a block even some with fees
b) bitcoin become expensive to use therefore less useful, making its value DROP.

This is all extrapolations.

+ I dont see how miners would loose money including only transactions with fees. Besides, halving is coming so...

Bitcoin's security should not be cheap, it is precisely what drives its token's value, again, not freely spamming the holy decentralized ledger with coffee tips.

For this you can use whatever altcoin thats suits you. Maybe even banks blockchains? or ripple. ^^

Bitcoin is not for the mass, it is not user friendly. Hence, the mass dont care about bitcoin, or only when they get bailed in... but still not for buying crap over the internet.

see this is where i went wrong, i though bitcoin was to buy crap over the internet.

you're saying poeple ( alot of poeple ) are willing to pay huge fees to use bitcoin because it is holy?

idk, maybe high fees makes all kinds of blockchain apps impractical. not sure i see much demand for large TX using bitcoin just yet. maybe oneday.

I mean, no, you were not wrong, and I also happen to spend some bitcoins for things too (this are the perks of being early at this party, and will make a helluva story for the grand children ^^)

But i'd rather ultimately have a 1st ledger with high security and not some centralized digital dollar 2.0

Basically, this is all it boils down to:  bitcoin cannot technically handle all transactions in the world and on its own without being centralized, in terms of resources, bandwidth, storage etc.

So I think we need it as a sane base to build a lot of other things on top, like probably a cash 2.0.

But rejoy because if we manage to do so, Bitcoin will be the new worldwide FED.

So, as we saw what happened with other human governances like, noone should control it, for bitcoin's intrinsic value lies in its security, which should remain unbreakable, rock solid.

The second some 'cartel' (devs, miners, etc) gets a slight advantage over its network in order to "bend" the rules, bitcoin's value will be gone. This i'm sure of it.

a little "centralization" aka kicking the hobby miner with a DLS connection, is a small price to pay to keep bitcoin cheap.

thats were our opinions differ i guess.

i'd be OK with mining centralization that implies miners would need ~1million dollar to get into the bitcoin mining business and stay competitive  

we are far away from that but ya i'd be ok with that.

you wanna keep bitcoin cheap

i dont get paid till next wednesday...

TX cost cheap you know what i mean.

but see? even you refer to it as an investment, in which you just keep on throwing some (not all?! ^^) of your salary.

i dont think the rest of the world aka the mass would have a different view on bitcoin if they ever jump aboard.

hence, it is not perceived for daily transactions, but rather the ultimate safe haven, secured investment, ticket to moon, etc...

[unamis76]

No. No need for a centralized source to have a default fee setting, Bitcoin Core has it.

Some (most) copies of Bitcoin Core have it.  The reason they have it is because a centralized source put it there.

Fortuantely, right now, it's just a "default fee" and not a "required fee" or "enforced fee".  Therefore, anyone can change their own software to pay more or less if they want to.

Thanks for the clarification, I thought the 3 points on Sending where somewhat blockchain dependent and not client dependent

[adamstgBit]

good adam, glad you stopped cheering for sum twisted BIPs and got into the centralization/security issue.

keep diggin


ps: how about BIP000? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1170700.0  

BIP00 is fine until miners are losing money because

a) they cant fit all TX in a block even some with fees
b) bitcoin become expensive to use therefore less useful, making its value DROP.

This is all extrapolations.

+ I dont see how miners would loose money including only transactions with fees. Besides, halving is coming so...

Bitcoin's security should not be cheap, it is precisely what drives its token's value, again, not freely spamming the holy decentralized ledger with coffee tips.

For this you can use whatever altcoin thats suits you. Maybe even banks blockchains? or ripple. ^^

Bitcoin is not for the mass, it is not user friendly. Hence, the mass dont care about bitcoin, or only when they get bailed in... but still not for buying crap over the internet.

see this is where i went wrong, i though bitcoin was to buy crap over the internet.

you're saying poeple ( alot of poeple ) are willing to pay huge fees to use bitcoin because it is holy?

idk, maybe high fees makes all kinds of blockchain apps impractical. not sure i see much demand for large TX using bitcoin just yet. maybe oneday.

I mean, no, you were not wrong, and I also happen to spend some bitcoins for things too (this are the perks of being early at this party, and will make a helluva story for the grand children ^^)

But i'd rather ultimately have a 1st ledger with high security and not some centralized digital dollar 2.0

Basically, this is all it boils down to:  bitcoin cannot technically handle all transactions in the world and on its own without being centralized, in terms of resources, bandwidth, storage etc.

So I think we need it as a sane base to build a lot of other things on top, like probably a cash 2.0.

But rejoy because if we manage to do so, Bitcoin will be the new worldwide FED.

So, as we saw what happened with other human governances like, noone should control it, for bitcoin's intrinsic value lies in its security, which should remain unbreakable, rock solid.

The second some 'cartel' (devs, miners, etc) gets a slight advantage over its network in order to "bend" the rules, bitcoin's value will be gone. This i'm sure of it.

a little "centralization" aka kicking the hobby miner with a DLS connection, is a small price to pay to keep bitcoin cheap.

thats were our opinions differ i guess.

i'd be OK with mining centralization that implies miners would need ~1million dollar to get into the bitcoin mining business and stay competitive  

we are far away from that but ya i'd be ok with that.

you wanna keep bitcoin cheap

i dont get paid till next wednesday...

TX cost cheap you know what i mean.

but see? even you refer to it as an investment, in which you just keep on throwing some (not all?! ^^) of your salary.

i dont think the rest of the world aka the mass would have a different view on bitcoin if they ever jump aboard.

hence, it is not perceived for daily transactions, but rather the ultimate safe haven, secured investment, ticket to moon, etc...

ya i guess.

but i want my cake and eat it too

low cost TX && secure
 

[hdbuck]

good adam, glad you stopped cheering for sum twisted BIPs and got into the centralization/security issue.

keep diggin


ps: how about BIP000? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1170700.0  

BIP00 is fine until miners are losing money because

a) they cant fit all TX in a block even some with fees
b) bitcoin become expensive to use therefore less useful, making its value DROP.

This is all extrapolations.

+ I dont see how miners would loose money including only transactions with fees. Besides, halving is coming so...

Bitcoin's security should not be cheap, it is precisely what drives its token's value, again, not freely spamming the holy decentralized ledger with coffee tips.

For this you can use whatever altcoin thats suits you. Maybe even banks blockchains? or ripple. ^^

Bitcoin is not for the mass, it is not user friendly. Hence, the mass dont care about bitcoin, or only when they get bailed in... but still not for buying crap over the internet.

see this is where i went wrong, i though bitcoin was to buy crap over the internet.

you're saying poeple ( alot of poeple ) are willing to pay huge fees to use bitcoin because it is holy?

idk, maybe high fees makes all kinds of blockchain apps impractical. not sure i see much demand for large TX using bitcoin just yet. maybe oneday.

I mean, no, you were not wrong, and I also happen to spend some bitcoins for things too (this are the perks of being early at this party, and will make a helluva story for the grand children ^^)

But i'd rather ultimately have a 1st ledger with high security and not some centralized digital dollar 2.0

Basically, this is all it boils down to:  bitcoin cannot technically handle all transactions in the world and on its own without being centralized, in terms of resources, bandwidth, storage etc.

So I think we need it as a sane base to build a lot of other things on top, like probably a cash 2.0.

But rejoy because if we manage to do so, Bitcoin will be the new worldwide FED.

So, as we saw what happened with other human governances like, noone should control it, for bitcoin's intrinsic value lies in its security, which should remain unbreakable, rock solid.

The second some 'cartel' (devs, miners, etc) gets a slight advantage over its network in order to "bend" the rules, bitcoin's value will be gone. This i'm sure of it.

a little "centralization" aka kicking the hobby miner with a DLS connection, is a small price to pay to keep bitcoin cheap.

thats were our opinions differ i guess.

i'd be OK with mining centralization that implies miners would need ~1million dollar to get into the bitcoin mining business and stay competitive  

we are far away from that but ya i'd be ok with that.

you wanna keep bitcoin cheap

i dont get paid till next wednesday...

TX cost cheap you know what i mean.

but see? even you refer to it as an investment, in which you just keep on throwing some (not all?! ^^) of your salary.

i dont think the rest of the world aka the mass would have a different view on bitcoin if they ever jump aboard.

hence, it is not perceived for daily transactions, but rather the ultimate safe haven, secured investment, ticket to moon, etc...

ya i guess.

but i want my cake and eat it too

low cost TX && secure
 

hehe i know, but i also recall you guys being worried about bitpay, overstock et al., keeping the price of bitcoin down because of selling their earnings etc.. ^^


edit: in the end i am not 100% against any upgrade, but it just that now is not the time: there is no need, no tests, no data, no nothing, so i dont want to risk it based on some extravagant extrapolations.
besides the rest of the financial world is crippling day by day: so im all in for an expensive secured bitcoin! for the rest i'll keep spending my euros while it still here.. ^^