/r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda

[dinofelis]

I believe in Satoshi's vision.  Hate me for it if you want, I don't care

You have been explain already how satoshi's vision is incompatible with the concept of cash, because setting a blocksize big enough to allow for main stream transactions on-chain, would mean the people validating the transactions have the power to censor transactions at will because it would be no longer people running nodes but corporations.

Satoshi was wrong when he wanted datacenters running nodes while calling his project p2p cash.

My opinion is that there's no way around it.  Whether these data centers are miners, LN banking hubs, or other forms of delegated power concentrations, the very idea that a trustless cash system must allow in principle, each participant to verify independently the:
1) validity of a right to spend
2) the non-existence of a spending transaction <--- the hard part
3) the non-existence of "counterfeiting" <---- the other hard part

means that a fungible cash system has a burden per user that grows with the size of the system.  This scaling burden per user will give rise to economies of scale by concentrating the "validation" process in "delegated trust authorities", and users preferring to trust some authority instead of suffering the burden himself.  This delegated trust will give power to the owners of those trust authorities, and that's the end of the decentralized, trustless system.

However, this can go almost unnoticed, because these authorities derive their power also from the credibility of the overall system, so in fact, these centralized stake holders have all interest in giving the impression to the user that everything is running as expected.  These centralized entities will be, in fact, the greatest stake holders in the system and will do everything to keep the system running for the users, defend the system and propagate the illusion of a decentralized system.

[cellard]

You have been explained already by a couple people how satoshi's vision is incompatible with the concept of cash, because setting a blocksize big enough to allow for main stream transactions on-chain, would mean the people validating the transactions have the power to censor transactions at will because it would be no longer people running nodes but corporations.

Satoshi was wrong when he wanted datacenters running nodes while calling his project p2p cash.

translation:
"gigabytes by midnight"
"visa by midnight"
"hold bitcoin at 1mb to prevent it growing naturally at a pace that home nodes can cope with over decades, because visa by midnight not naturally in a few decades"
(facepalm)

You are out of your mind if you think technology will grow naturally with the amount of blocksize needed for mainstream onchain cheap fast transactions while allowing people to run nodes at home.

By the time bitcoin reaches VISA levels, VISA will be lightyears away.

We can't never compete against the expected standards of the average joe onchain, because they are used to the perceived speed of centralized systems.

We can do very moderate blocksize increases and that's about it (if you care about network decentralization that is)

[franky1]

You have been explained already by a couple people how satoshi's vision is incompatible with the concept of cash, because setting a blocksize big enough to allow for main stream transactions on-chain, would mean the people validating the transactions have the power to censor transactions at will because it would be no longer people running nodes but corporations.

Satoshi was wrong when he wanted datacenters running nodes while calling his project p2p cash.

translation:
"gigabytes by midnight"
"visa by midnight"
"hold bitcoin at 1mb to prevent it growing naturally at a pace that home nodes can cope with over decades, because visa by midnight not naturally in a few decades"
(facepalm)

You are out of your mind if you think technology will grow naturally with the amount of blocksize needed for mainstream onchain cheap fast transactions while allowing people to run nodes at home.

By the time bitcoin reaches VISA levels, VISA will be lightyears away.

We can't never compete against the expected standards of the average joe onchain, because they are used to the perceived speed of centralized systems.

We can do very moderate blocksize increases and that's about it (if you care about network decentralization that is)

your out of your mind if you believe:
1. visa got to where it is over night
2. that bitcoin NEEDS to process billions of transactions tonight
3. that bitcoin will be a one world currency for 7 billion people.. tonight or even in a couple decades
3. that halting onchain growth because of fake fears it cant grow.

let me guess if you had kids you would break their knee caps at 6month old out of fear they may walk into a moving car before they are 15. and the only thing you can think of is not letting them walk because a wheelchair with airbags is safer which you can only get if your child is disabled.

bitcoin today is like the internet in 1992, so let me guess if you could time travel to 1997. you would want to kill off the guys that invent skype and activision because video calls and online gaming wont happen the next day of 1997..