BitcoinTalk, your bias is showing.

[gmaxwell]

Since we're in meta--

I think PepeLapiu2's conduct is kind of out of hand-- the issue is that he keeps starting new threads, mostly repeating the same disputed claims generally without acknowledging that they're disputed.  Basically seems like an exhaustion attack to misinform the public. On this account he's started ~7 threads on the subject in ~7 days, plus participated in a similar manner in every other live thread started by others.  He also appears to have another account which has recently started 5 threads on the subject-- assuming they are the same it's 12 new posts in total on this subject from just one person.  And his participation, as noted, seems to frequently be in the form of repeated posts.

So as a participant in the discussion I (and others that disagree with him) either have to chose to tiresomely repeat myself in thread after thread or just accept that he's going to create threads until he's ignored by everyone who disagrees and as a result have his (IMO false) statements of fact treated as the uncontested truth by people who happen into them without seeing the rest of the discussion.

While there is likely some truth to the claim that Bitcointalk is biased towards Core, I think Knots is probably a bit young to be actively promoted in the same way. I realize the issue is bigger than that and with people like Nick Szabo coming out in favor of running Knots as a way to fight spam on the blockchain, I think it will continue growing and maybe in the future could replace Core as being the most popular Bitcoin wallet software.

Isn't Nick Szabo just another ocean mining investor-- like Samson Mow, and the many of the other few better known names endorsing this drama?

In any case it's hard to take serious anyone stating an opinion on this that hasn't even had a discussion with people with conflicting views.

[nutildah]

He is motivated by the idea of collecting "views."

Anyways, this thread was moved against my will to a section where a lot less people will see it.

This is why he keeps replying to himself and bumping his own threads, so they go to the top of the page. Its a bit intrusive, especially since he's not really keen on taking in opposing viewpoints, but I don't know at what point the mods would issue a temporary or permanent ban for failing to respect the bumping rule. Seems to be a case by case thing.

[OgNasty]

I think PepeLapiu2's conduct is kind of out of hand-- the issue is that he keeps starting new threads, mostly repeating the same disputed claims generally without acknowledging that they're disputed.  Basically seems like an exhaustion attack to misinform the public. On this account he's started ~7 threads on the subject in ~7 days, plus participated in a similar manner in every other live thread started by others.  He also appears to have another account which has recently started 5 threads on the subject-- assuming they are the same it's 12 new posts in total on this subject from just one person.  And his participation, as noted, seems to frequently be in the form of repeated posts.

So as a participant in the discussion I (and others that disagree with him) either have to chose to tiresomely repeat myself in thread after thread or just accept that he's going to create threads until he's ignored by everyone who disagrees and as a result have his (IMO false) statements of fact treated as the uncontested truth by people who happen into them without seeing the rest of the discussion.

Are you saying he's been given too much space to spam and that you think some sort of limiter should be put in place to discourage his ability to spam?  Have you tried creating more topics on the subject for him to post in?  That seems to be the preferred solution.

While there is likely some truth to the claim that Bitcointalk is biased towards Core, I think Knots is probably a bit young to be actively promoted in the same way. I realize the issue is bigger than that and with people like Nick Szabo coming out in favor of running Knots as a way to fight spam on the blockchain, I think it will continue growing and maybe in the future could replace Core as being the most popular Bitcoin wallet software.

Isn't Nick Szabo just another ocean mining investor-- like Samson Mow, and the many of the other few better known names endorsing this drama?

In any case it's hard to take serious anyone stating an opinion on this that hasn't even had a discussion with people with conflicting views.

No.  Nick Szabo is a legend someone like Samson Mow could never be, but you already knew that.  I've also seen him try to have debates on the subject, but it seems that one side isn't interested in debating and instead has chosen to block those who have alternative thoughts on how to address blockchain spam.

[PepeLapiu2]

Are you saying he's been given too much space to spam and that you think some sort of limiter should be put in place to discourage his ability to spam?  Have you tried creating more topics on the subject for him to post in?  That seems to be the preferred solution.

You are talking to a core shill. They are incapable of coming up with a definition of spam when Bitcoin chain is concerned. But rest assured they have very rigid and precise definitions of spam on this forum that they can decide to deploy when they don't like your point of view.

BTW, have you noticed that nobody has even tried to touch my question about who is funding BitcoinTalk?

Since we're in meta--
I think PepeLapiu2's conduct is kind of out of hand-- the issue is that he keeps starting new threads, mostly repeating the same disputed claims generally without acknowledging that they're disputed.  

Oh, don't worry about that just yet. I'm giving you just enough rope for you to hang yourself with. Be patient my little core friend. And keep an eye out for burning paper bags. Better stamp those out fast.

[nutildah]

BTW, have you noticed that nobody has even tried to touch my question about who is funding BitcoinTalk?

Its not a secret: Bitcointalk funds itself. It has enough funds to continue operations for another 100 years.

[gmaxwell]

Have you tried creating more topics on the subject for him to post in?  That seems to be the preferred solution.

Maybe create a separate subforum for his content where it can just be immediately and automatically deleted, if we're going to draw analogies.

Or perhaps if he had to be 0.1s/byte for his posts, I bet that would do a reasonable enough job...

Regardless, Bitcointalk is a privately run forum, not a public resource designed to be censorship resistant money-- it's controlled by people who can apply their judgement to shutting down whatever they want.  If Bitcoin worked that way it would be pointless.

I suggest reviewing the other "filtering" things knots has developed and is discussing developing before you conclude that it's all that benign.

I also didn't suggest his posts were "spam" -- unlike some here my vocabulary has more than a single word.  The complaint I have is that his approach is abusive and undermines the discourse on the subject.  I absolutely could match him in volume with little effort, but that would just further crap up the forum.

Oh, don't worry about that just yet. I'm giving you just enough rope for you to hang yourself with. Be patient my little core friend. And keep an eye out for burning paper bags. Better stamp those out fast.

wtf?

[PepeLapiu2]

wtf?

I'm abusive to you because I know you are a smart guy..I
I know you are not an idiot. Yet the shit you spew shows you either pretend to be an idiot or you think people you talk with are idiots.

For the last 8 years people like you have been spewing pure fucking bullshit. Like that idea that a big miner benefits by slowing down his own block propagation to crush small miners.

Maybe you should start a counsulting business for big miners. You'll be advising them to install a dual up modem, replace their fiber optics for aluminum braid cable, all so they can slow down their own block propagation to crush the small miners. Fucking brilliant!

Of all people, you should know better Greg. You do know better. And that is the problem.

Or that other idea that spammers are "price incentive".

This kind of retardation is only possible online. I'm told by people you are a decent guy in person. But your motives are really fucked up buddy.

You will keep slowly turning Bitcoin into a retarded dick pic and child porn repository and you'll still be bragging about preventing UTXO bloat.

How much is a pristine UTXO set for a cloud storage service worth these days?

[gmaxwell]

The fact that block propagation delays benefit larger miners at the expense of small ones is not a new thing nor is it slightly controversial,  it's been extremely well known since at least 2013 and it's one of the reasons factors behind the whole block size drama (the other one being that without a capacity limit or cartel behavior the equilibrium feerate will be ~0 resulting in no funding for security except inflation).

(It was also more informally known prior to 2013, e.g. with things like constant difficulty altcoins shattering into 1000 non-converging chaintips once the rate of block finds got too fast relative to propagation times)

Here is a simulation program that shows results with figures:  https://github.com/darosior/miningsimulation?tab=readme-ov-file#impact-of-block-propagation-on-centralization-pressure

You just disqualify your opinion by insisting this is bullshit and by attacking me for just expressing an earnest and truthful view of Bitcoin and its risks.  I have no interest in any of this except I'm a user and owner bitcoin and care that it fulfills its purpose and preserves its value and yet you just aggressively and abusively shit all over me-- and do so about points which are not seriously questionable.

[OgNasty]

I also didn't suggest his posts were "spam" -- unlike some here my vocabulary has more than a single word.

Take your pick.

"Why use many words when few words do trick?"
- Kevin Malone

"If you can't explain something simply, you don't understand it well enough."
-Albert Einstein

[gmaxwell]

Greg has quote for Og:

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
-H. L. Mencken

Does Og understand now?