Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)

[iCEBREAKER]

XT stifled the discussion, please spare us your revisionist history.

The whole act has been a huge drain on the attention and focus of the developing community.

You say drain, I say motivate. *poof* A BIP100 appears!

History is always revised according the viewpoint of the person recounting it. In those tricky cases where its recorded in black and white, it can be dismissed as an appeal to authority.

Hmm, who should I believe about the impact of XT on BTC development?

Clueless nobody sgbett (who believed "Pseudo nodes aren't mining blocks") or uber-crypto-boss Adam Back (BitGold, Blockstream)?

As for BIP100, please note it's not even fully specified, much less coded.  Given that context, BIP100 means nothing more than a vote against 101.

BIP100 was obviously just the nearest handy large rock for the pools to pick up and beat XT to death with.

BIP100 can be gamed and it sets a bad precedent, thus the socioeconomic majority won't give miners that much power.

I know you and Garzik are all hot and bothered over it, but sorry, it ain't gonna happen.

bitcoin will get larger blocks, just not now, "not tonight dear"

#REKKKKT

[1714232652]

1714232652

[sgbett]

XT opened a debate

There you go again, thinking you know WTF you're talking about when you actually do not.

The block size debate has been ongoing, in the proper Lserv/IRC/BIP channels, for many years.

Just because your Redditurd Army recently discovered the topic and quickly developed Strong Opinions does not indicate XT "opened a debate."

The debate has been open since 2009.  The subjective appearance of novelty by which you are afflicted is a cognitive artifact resulting from your status as a N00B who should listen more and talk less, or GTFO.

you are the person that thinks its dead

I wish you all the best in your grieving transitions from the denial stage, on through bargaining, and to a final acceptance.

Pedanticism and arrogance don't make for good arguments. Of course I know that there has been prior discussion of removing the 1MB limit. Thats not the same as 'the block size debate' though. You know it, but you'd rather avoid acknowledging the specific difference for fear of exposing the reality of the situation that the 1MB limit is temporary and should be removed. That much is true.

Back to form you are. Mudslinging, pithy, obnoxious. These are characteristics of someone who has a weak argument and just wants to try and bully those who disagree into submission.

This argumentative thread makes no difference, the market will decide, so you and beg can get as angry as you like about everyone not agreeing with you but ultimately its only yourselves you are hurting. The fact you think you know everything just demonstrates how close minded you are. This means you can't be reasoned with. The only purpose of replying to you is so that others are aware of what you are doing. Nothing I say will make any difference to you personally.

[sgbett]

XT stifled the discussion, please spare us your revisionist history.

The whole act has been a huge drain on the attention and focus of the developing community.

You say drain, I say motivate. *poof* A BIP100 appears!

History is always revised according the viewpoint of the person recounting it. In those tricky cases where its recorded in black and white, it can be dismissed as an appeal to authority.

Hmm, who should I believe about the impact of XT on BTC development?

Clueless nobody sgbett (who believed "Pseudo nodes aren't mining blocks") or uber-crypto-boss Adam Back (BitGold, Blockstream)?

As for BIP100, please note it's not even fully specified, much less coded.  Given that context, BIP100 means nothing more than a vote against 101.

BIP100 was obviously just the nearest handy large rock for the pools to pick up and beat XT to death with.

BIP100 can be gamed and it sets a bad precedent, thus the socioeconomic majority won't give miners that much power.

I know you and Garzik are all hot and bothered over it, but sorry, it ain't gonna happen.

bitcoin will get larger blocks, just not now, "not tonight dear"

#REKKKKT

I agree BIP100 is a terrible proposal. I agree it can be gamed, and so it will be gamed. I agree it was only produced to try and neutralise the 'threat' of XT.

I also believe that nobody will take it seriously and it will go no further.

[brg444]

Pedanticism and arrogance don't make for good arguments. Of course I know that there has been prior discussion of removing the 1MB limit. Thats not the same as 'the block size debate' though. You know it, but you'd rather avoid acknowledging the specific difference for fear of exposing the reality of the situation that the 1MB limit is temporary and should be removed. That much is true.

Back to form you are. Mudslinging, pithy, obnoxious. These are characteristics of someone who has a weak argument and just wants to try and bully those who disagree into submission.

This argumentative thread makes no difference, the market will decide, so you and beg can get as angry as you like about everyone not agreeing with you but ultimately its only yourselves you are hurting. The fact you think you know everything just demonstrates how close minded you are. This means you can't be reasoned with. The only purpose of replying to you is so that others are aware of what you are doing. Nothing I say will make any difference to you personally.

Please get off your high horse and spare us your moral high ground bullshit.

The market decides indeed and it has made a point to crush your pipe dreams of exponential block size growth.

You can attempt to re-write history all you want the fact is BIP101/XT was DOA and only served to shine light on the numerous tumors that were necessary for us to get rid of.

All you've managed is to force core devs to manufacture a bone they could toss to XTards to distract them with while the actual scaling work is being done.

[brg444]

XT stifled the discussion, please spare us your revisionist history.

The whole act has been a huge drain on the attention and focus of the developing community.

You say drain, I say motivate. *poof* A BIP100 appears!

History is always revised according the viewpoint of the person recounting it. In those tricky cases where its recorded in black and white, it can be dismissed as an appeal to authority.

Hmm, who should I believe about the impact of XT on BTC development?

Clueless nobody sgbett (who believed "Pseudo nodes aren't mining blocks") or uber-crypto-boss Adam Back (BitGold, Blockstream)?

As for BIP100, please note it's not even fully specified, much less coded.  Given that context, BIP100 means nothing more than a vote against 101.

BIP100 was obviously just the nearest handy large rock for the pools to pick up and beat XT to death with.

BIP100 can be gamed and it sets a bad precedent, thus the socioeconomic majority won't give miners that much power.

I know you and Garzik are all hot and bothered over it, but sorry, it ain't gonna happen.

bitcoin will get larger blocks, just not now, "not tonight dear"

#REKKKKT

I agree BIP100 is a terrible proposal. I agree it can be gamed, and so it will be gamed. I agree it was only produced to try and neutralise the 'threat' of XT.

I also believe that nobody will take it seriously and it will go no further.

So why even bring it up?

[muyuu]

Overfitting 101

https://archive.is/FJoTB#selection-1899.0-1905.23

"Why did you square the number of transactions?
PR: It produces a good fit"

[hdbuck]

Overfitting 101

https://archive.is/FJoTB#selection-1899.0-1905.23

"Why did you square the number of transactions?
PR: It produces a good fit"

[sgbett]

Pedanticism and arrogance don't make for good arguments. Of course I know that there has been prior discussion of removing the 1MB limit. Thats not the same as 'the block size debate' though. You know it, but you'd rather avoid acknowledging the specific difference for fear of exposing the reality of the situation that the 1MB limit is temporary and should be removed. That much is true.

Back to form you are. Mudslinging, pithy, obnoxious. These are characteristics of someone who has a weak argument and just wants to try and bully those who disagree into submission.

This argumentative thread makes no difference, the market will decide, so you and beg can get as angry as you like about everyone not agreeing with you but ultimately its only yourselves you are hurting. The fact you think you know everything just demonstrates how close minded you are. This means you can't be reasoned with. The only purpose of replying to you is so that others are aware of what you are doing. Nothing I say will make any difference to you personally.

Please get off your high horse and spare us your moral high ground bullshit.

The market decides indeed and it has made a point to crush your pipe dreams of exponential block size growth.

You can attempt to re-write history all you want the fact is BIP101/XT was DOA and only served to shine light on the numerous tumors that were necessary for us to get rid of.

All you've managed is to force core devs to manufacture a bone they could toss to XTards to distract them with while the actual scaling work is being done.

Yes the market hasn't decided it needs bigger blocks. This will continue to be true, until it's not. Nobody needs to rewrite anything.

Both of you continue to speak like everything is decided, and because you are right now, that you will be right always.

As I said this is supreme arrogance, as well as a profound failure to understand something as simple as the fact that things can change. Its like you think that if you argue really hard and stamp your feet and shout loudest that you think you can control it. You can't, I can't. The future of bitcoin is unknown and its emergent behaviour of all participants. If the market needs bigger blocks they will happen, however loudly you protest, and regardless of what the bitcoin core implementation has. If the market does not need bigger blocks then none of this will matter and core stays relevant. If bigger blocks aren't needed there will be a good reason I am sure, and it won't be 'artificial'.

That moral high ground you are so desperate to avoid is where real people make real decisions. This troll infested cesspool of a thread is where you and ice try and pimp out your own personal view of what you think bitcoin should be as if it were a fact.

It's not. You don't know what bitcoin will be, neither do I. You can only keep saying what you want it to be. It's important that anyone reading this understand that your opinions aren't fact. These posts are not for you to respond to, because there is nothing constructive you can say. You may as well not even bother reading them. In fact it'd be better all round if you just put me on ignore.

[brg444]

Pedanticism and arrogance don't make for good arguments. Of course I know that there has been prior discussion of removing the 1MB limit. Thats not the same as 'the block size debate' though. You know it, but you'd rather avoid acknowledging the specific difference for fear of exposing the reality of the situation that the 1MB limit is temporary and should be removed. That much is true.

Back to form you are. Mudslinging, pithy, obnoxious. These are characteristics of someone who has a weak argument and just wants to try and bully those who disagree into submission.

This argumentative thread makes no difference, the market will decide, so you and beg can get as angry as you like about everyone not agreeing with you but ultimately its only yourselves you are hurting. The fact you think you know everything just demonstrates how close minded you are. This means you can't be reasoned with. The only purpose of replying to you is so that others are aware of what you are doing. Nothing I say will make any difference to you personally.

Please get off your high horse and spare us your moral high ground bullshit.

The market decides indeed and it has made a point to crush your pipe dreams of exponential block size growth.

You can attempt to re-write history all you want the fact is BIP101/XT was DOA and only served to shine light on the numerous tumors that were necessary for us to get rid of.

All you've managed is to force core devs to manufacture a bone they could toss to XTards to distract them with while the actual scaling work is being done.

Yes the market hasn't decided it needs bigger blocks. This will continue to be true, until it's not. Nobody needs to rewrite anything.

Both of you continue to speak like everything is decided, and because you are right now, that you will be right always.

As I said this is supreme arrogance, as well as a profound failure to understand something as simple as the fact that things can change. Its like you think that if you argue really hard and stamp your feet and shout loudest that you think you can control it. You can't, I can't. The future of bitcoin is unknown and its emergent behaviour of all participants. If the market needs bigger blocks they will happen, however loudly you protest, and regardless of what the bitcoin core implementation has. If the market does not need bigger blocks then none of this will matter and core stays relevant. If bigger blocks aren't needed there will be a good reason I am sure, and it won't be 'artificial'.

That moral high ground you are so desperate to avoid is where real people make real decisions. This troll infested cesspool of a thread is where you and ice try and pimp out your own personal view of what you think bitcoin should be as if it were a fact.

It's not. You don't know what bitcoin will be, neither do I. You can only keep saying what you want it to be. It's important that anyone reading this understand that your opinions aren't fact. These posts are not for you to respond to, because there is nothing constructive you can say. You may as well not even bother reading them. In fact it'd be better all round if you just put me on ignore.

Maybe you're in the wrong thread?

This one says: XT (and BIP101) #REKT

If you wanna create another one that discuss Bitcoin's future feel free but don't omit to mention XT, BIP101, exponential growth blocks, Gavin or Hearn, will not be a part of it.

[sgbett]

Sorry i drifted off topic.

I'll go back to my "just you wait till december" stance then

When Jan rolls around you can give me a good kicking for being wrong eh!

[iCEBREAKER]

I'm not sure if this qualifies for the Bitcoin Obituaries or not.

It does not, because XT is an altcoin.

I remember you shilling for XT back in March, and telling us "You guys keep seeing a war (now it has a name: The Bitcoin Civil War) where there is none."

Not only were you (unlike MP and myself) wrong about the emerging civil war, you were also on the wrong, IE losing, side of it.

It must be hard for someone who can argue that presumption is not negative "Because Godel" to be so utterly and completely wrong.  How humiliating!  No wonder you don't post here very much these days.   

[brg444]

Sorry i drifted off topic.

I'll go back to my "just you wait till december" stance then

When Jan rolls around you can give me a good kicking for being wrong eh!

You're waiting for the next Scaling Bitcoin conference too heh   I'm curious to see what they have in store as well.

If I had to make a guess I'd say it will probably looks somewhat like Pieter Wuille's proposal but adjusted with Rusty Russel's most recent bandwidth growth estimates so something like 30% YOY increase but only for 2 years then revisit.

If you ask me this whole thing is kind of a waste of time but again I think they're just set on throwing you people a bone so as to keep you from breaking things. We'll see if the market buys it though

[hdbuck]

Pedanticism and arrogance don't make for good arguments. Of course I know that there has been prior discussion of removing the 1MB limit. Thats not the same as 'the block size debate' though. You know it, but you'd rather avoid acknowledging the specific difference for fear of exposing the reality of the situation that the 1MB limit is temporary and should be removed. That much is true.

Back to form you are. Mudslinging, pithy, obnoxious. These are characteristics of someone who has a weak argument and just wants to try and bully those who disagree into submission.

This argumentative thread makes no difference, the market will decide, so you and beg can get as angry as you like about everyone not agreeing with you but ultimately its only yourselves you are hurting. The fact you think you know everything just demonstrates how close minded you are. This means you can't be reasoned with. The only purpose of replying to you is so that others are aware of what you are doing. Nothing I say will make any difference to you personally.

Please get off your high horse and spare us your moral high ground bullshit.

The market decides indeed and it has made a point to crush your pipe dreams of exponential block size growth.

You can attempt to re-write history all you want the fact is BIP101/XT was DOA and only served to shine light on the numerous tumors that were necessary for us to get rid of.

All you've managed is to force core devs to manufacture a bone they could toss to XTards to distract them with while the actual scaling work is being done.

Yes the market hasn't decided it needs bigger blocks. This will continue to be true, until it's not. Nobody needs to rewrite anything.

Both of you continue to speak like everything is decided, and because you are right now, that you will be right always.

As I said this is supreme arrogance, as well as a profound failure to understand something as simple as the fact that things can change. Its like you think that if you argue really hard and stamp your feet and shout loudest that you think you can control it. You can't, I can't. The future of bitcoin is unknown and its emergent behaviour of all participants. If the market needs bigger blocks they will happen, however loudly you protest, and regardless of what the bitcoin core implementation has. If the market does not need bigger blocks then none of this will matter and core stays relevant. If bigger blocks aren't needed there will be a good reason I am sure, and it won't be 'artificial'.

That moral high ground you are so desperate to avoid is where real people make real decisions. This troll infested cesspool of a thread is where you and ice try and pimp out your own personal view of what you think bitcoin should be as if it were a fact.

It's not. You don't know what bitcoin will be, neither do I. You can only keep saying what you want it to be. It's important that anyone reading this understand that your opinions aren't fact. These posts are not for you to respond to, because there is nothing constructive you can say. You may as well not even bother reading them. In fact it'd be better all round if you just put me on ignore.

Maybe you're in the wrong thread?

This one says: XT (and BIP101) #REKT

If you wanna create another one that discuss Bitcoin's future feel free but don't omit to mention XT, BIP101, exponential growth blocks, Gavin or Hearn, will not be a part of it.

oh.. but he did...


[prediction] Next spike $560,000 14 months from now

[brg444]

Pedanticism and arrogance don't make for good arguments. Of course I know that there has been prior discussion of removing the 1MB limit. Thats not the same as 'the block size debate' though. You know it, but you'd rather avoid acknowledging the specific difference for fear of exposing the reality of the situation that the 1MB limit is temporary and should be removed. That much is true.

Back to form you are. Mudslinging, pithy, obnoxious. These are characteristics of someone who has a weak argument and just wants to try and bully those who disagree into submission.

This argumentative thread makes no difference, the market will decide, so you and beg can get as angry as you like about everyone not agreeing with you but ultimately its only yourselves you are hurting. The fact you think you know everything just demonstrates how close minded you are. This means you can't be reasoned with. The only purpose of replying to you is so that others are aware of what you are doing. Nothing I say will make any difference to you personally.

Please get off your high horse and spare us your moral high ground bullshit.

The market decides indeed and it has made a point to crush your pipe dreams of exponential block size growth.

You can attempt to re-write history all you want the fact is BIP101/XT was DOA and only served to shine light on the numerous tumors that were necessary for us to get rid of.

All you've managed is to force core devs to manufacture a bone they could toss to XTards to distract them with while the actual scaling work is being done.

Yes the market hasn't decided it needs bigger blocks. This will continue to be true, until it's not. Nobody needs to rewrite anything.

Both of you continue to speak like everything is decided, and because you are right now, that you will be right always.

As I said this is supreme arrogance, as well as a profound failure to understand something as simple as the fact that things can change. Its like you think that if you argue really hard and stamp your feet and shout loudest that you think you can control it. You can't, I can't. The future of bitcoin is unknown and its emergent behaviour of all participants. If the market needs bigger blocks they will happen, however loudly you protest, and regardless of what the bitcoin core implementation has. If the market does not need bigger blocks then none of this will matter and core stays relevant. If bigger blocks aren't needed there will be a good reason I am sure, and it won't be 'artificial'.

That moral high ground you are so desperate to avoid is where real people make real decisions. This troll infested cesspool of a thread is where you and ice try and pimp out your own personal view of what you think bitcoin should be as if it were a fact.

It's not. You don't know what bitcoin will be, neither do I. You can only keep saying what you want it to be. It's important that anyone reading this understand that your opinions aren't fact. These posts are not for you to respond to, because there is nothing constructive you can say. You may as well not even bother reading them. In fact it'd be better all round if you just put me on ignore.

Maybe you're in the wrong thread?

This one says: XT (and BIP101) #REKT

If you wanna create another one that discuss Bitcoin's future feel free but don't omit to mention XT, BIP101, exponential growth blocks, Gavin or Hearn, will not be a part of it.

oh.. but he did...


[prediction] Next spike $560,000 14 months from now

To be fair I like this one 

[hdbuck]

Pedanticism and arrogance don't make for good arguments. Of course I know that there has been prior discussion of removing the 1MB limit. Thats not the same as 'the block size debate' though. You know it, but you'd rather avoid acknowledging the specific difference for fear of exposing the reality of the situation that the 1MB limit is temporary and should be removed. That much is true.

Back to form you are. Mudslinging, pithy, obnoxious. These are characteristics of someone who has a weak argument and just wants to try and bully those who disagree into submission.

This argumentative thread makes no difference, the market will decide, so you and beg can get as angry as you like about everyone not agreeing with you but ultimately its only yourselves you are hurting. The fact you think you know everything just demonstrates how close minded you are. This means you can't be reasoned with. The only purpose of replying to you is so that others are aware of what you are doing. Nothing I say will make any difference to you personally.

Please get off your high horse and spare us your moral high ground bullshit.

The market decides indeed and it has made a point to crush your pipe dreams of exponential block size growth.

You can attempt to re-write history all you want the fact is BIP101/XT was DOA and only served to shine light on the numerous tumors that were necessary for us to get rid of.

All you've managed is to force core devs to manufacture a bone they could toss to XTards to distract them with while the actual scaling work is being done.

Yes the market hasn't decided it needs bigger blocks. This will continue to be true, until it's not. Nobody needs to rewrite anything.

Both of you continue to speak like everything is decided, and because you are right now, that you will be right always.

As I said this is supreme arrogance, as well as a profound failure to understand something as simple as the fact that things can change. Its like you think that if you argue really hard and stamp your feet and shout loudest that you think you can control it. You can't, I can't. The future of bitcoin is unknown and its emergent behaviour of all participants. If the market needs bigger blocks they will happen, however loudly you protest, and regardless of what the bitcoin core implementation has. If the market does not need bigger blocks then none of this will matter and core stays relevant. If bigger blocks aren't needed there will be a good reason I am sure, and it won't be 'artificial'.

That moral high ground you are so desperate to avoid is where real people make real decisions. This troll infested cesspool of a thread is where you and ice try and pimp out your own personal view of what you think bitcoin should be as if it were a fact.

It's not. You don't know what bitcoin will be, neither do I. You can only keep saying what you want it to be. It's important that anyone reading this understand that your opinions aren't fact. These posts are not for you to respond to, because there is nothing constructive you can say. You may as well not even bother reading them. In fact it'd be better all round if you just put me on ignore.

Maybe you're in the wrong thread?

This one says: XT (and BIP101) #REKT

If you wanna create another one that discuss Bitcoin's future feel free but don't omit to mention XT, BIP101, exponential growth blocks, Gavin or Hearn, will not be a part of it.

oh.. but he did...


[prediction] Next spike $560,000 14 months from now

To be fair I like this one  

still utterly wrong, misleading and you can also see the fancy rainbow grpahs pattern them PR derps like to agitate as proven science to try at make their fraudulent argument hold. #justsayin


edit: altho cant beat the GIF at this point. cant wait to see what comes next. ^^

[sgbett]

Pedanticism and arrogance don't make for good arguments. Of course I know that there has been prior discussion of removing the 1MB limit. Thats not the same as 'the block size debate' though. You know it, but you'd rather avoid acknowledging the specific difference for fear of exposing the reality of the situation that the 1MB limit is temporary and should be removed. That much is true.

Back to form you are. Mudslinging, pithy, obnoxious. These are characteristics of someone who has a weak argument and just wants to try and bully those who disagree into submission.

This argumentative thread makes no difference, the market will decide, so you and beg can get as angry as you like about everyone not agreeing with you but ultimately its only yourselves you are hurting. The fact you think you know everything just demonstrates how close minded you are. This means you can't be reasoned with. The only purpose of replying to you is so that others are aware of what you are doing. Nothing I say will make any difference to you personally.

Please get off your high horse and spare us your moral high ground bullshit.

The market decides indeed and it has made a point to crush your pipe dreams of exponential block size growth.

You can attempt to re-write history all you want the fact is BIP101/XT was DOA and only served to shine light on the numerous tumors that were necessary for us to get rid of.

All you've managed is to force core devs to manufacture a bone they could toss to XTards to distract them with while the actual scaling work is being done.

Yes the market hasn't decided it needs bigger blocks. This will continue to be true, until it's not. Nobody needs to rewrite anything.

Both of you continue to speak like everything is decided, and because you are right now, that you will be right always.

As I said this is supreme arrogance, as well as a profound failure to understand something as simple as the fact that things can change. Its like you think that if you argue really hard and stamp your feet and shout loudest that you think you can control it. You can't, I can't. The future of bitcoin is unknown and its emergent behaviour of all participants. If the market needs bigger blocks they will happen, however loudly you protest, and regardless of what the bitcoin core implementation has. If the market does not need bigger blocks then none of this will matter and core stays relevant. If bigger blocks aren't needed there will be a good reason I am sure, and it won't be 'artificial'.

That moral high ground you are so desperate to avoid is where real people make real decisions. This troll infested cesspool of a thread is where you and ice try and pimp out your own personal view of what you think bitcoin should be as if it were a fact.

It's not. You don't know what bitcoin will be, neither do I. You can only keep saying what you want it to be. It's important that anyone reading this understand that your opinions aren't fact. These posts are not for you to respond to, because there is nothing constructive you can say. You may as well not even bother reading them. In fact it'd be better all round if you just put me on ignore.

Maybe you're in the wrong thread?

This one says: XT (and BIP101) #REKT

If you wanna create another one that discuss Bitcoin's future feel free but don't omit to mention XT, BIP101, exponential growth blocks, Gavin or Hearn, will not be a part of it.

oh.. but he did...


[prediction] Next spike $560,000 14 months from now

To be fair I like this one  

still utterly wrong, misleading and you can also see the fancy rainbow grpahs pattern them PR derps like to agitate as proven science to try at make their fraudulent argument hold. #justsayin


edit: altho cant beat the GIF at this point. cant wait to see what comes next. ^^

You're underestimating the speculation subform if you think that thread doesn't fit in perfectly there...

[hdbuck]

Pedanticism and arrogance don't make for good arguments. Of course I know that there has been prior discussion of removing the 1MB limit. Thats not the same as 'the block size debate' though. You know it, but you'd rather avoid acknowledging the specific difference for fear of exposing the reality of the situation that the 1MB limit is temporary and should be removed. That much is true.

Back to form you are. Mudslinging, pithy, obnoxious. These are characteristics of someone who has a weak argument and just wants to try and bully those who disagree into submission.

This argumentative thread makes no difference, the market will decide, so you and beg can get as angry as you like about everyone not agreeing with you but ultimately its only yourselves you are hurting. The fact you think you know everything just demonstrates how close minded you are. This means you can't be reasoned with. The only purpose of replying to you is so that others are aware of what you are doing. Nothing I say will make any difference to you personally.

Please get off your high horse and spare us your moral high ground bullshit.

The market decides indeed and it has made a point to crush your pipe dreams of exponential block size growth.

You can attempt to re-write history all you want the fact is BIP101/XT was DOA and only served to shine light on the numerous tumors that were necessary for us to get rid of.

All you've managed is to force core devs to manufacture a bone they could toss to XTards to distract them with while the actual scaling work is being done.

Yes the market hasn't decided it needs bigger blocks. This will continue to be true, until it's not. Nobody needs to rewrite anything.

Both of you continue to speak like everything is decided, and because you are right now, that you will be right always.

As I said this is supreme arrogance, as well as a profound failure to understand something as simple as the fact that things can change. Its like you think that if you argue really hard and stamp your feet and shout loudest that you think you can control it. You can't, I can't. The future of bitcoin is unknown and its emergent behaviour of all participants. If the market needs bigger blocks they will happen, however loudly you protest, and regardless of what the bitcoin core implementation has. If the market does not need bigger blocks then none of this will matter and core stays relevant. If bigger blocks aren't needed there will be a good reason I am sure, and it won't be 'artificial'.

That moral high ground you are so desperate to avoid is where real people make real decisions. This troll infested cesspool of a thread is where you and ice try and pimp out your own personal view of what you think bitcoin should be as if it were a fact.

It's not. You don't know what bitcoin will be, neither do I. You can only keep saying what you want it to be. It's important that anyone reading this understand that your opinions aren't fact. These posts are not for you to respond to, because there is nothing constructive you can say. You may as well not even bother reading them. In fact it'd be better all round if you just put me on ignore.

Maybe you're in the wrong thread?

This one says: XT (and BIP101) #REKT

If you wanna create another one that discuss Bitcoin's future feel free but don't omit to mention XT, BIP101, exponential growth blocks, Gavin or Hearn, will not be a part of it.

oh.. but he did...


[prediction] Next spike $560,000 14 months from now

To be fair I like this one  

still utterly wrong, misleading and you can also see the fancy rainbow grpahs pattern them PR derps like to agitate as proven science to try at make their fraudulent argument hold. #justsayin


edit: altho cant beat the GIF at this point. cant wait to see what comes next. ^^

You're underestimating the speculation subform if you think that thread doesn't fit in perfectly there...

eh, surely it does although there are some valuable thread there, but then again i was just highlighting you and your forkers buddies propensions towards total disconnection from reality.

also, i concur the gavinistas do fit perfectly in there sorry butthole of a forum bitco.in

peace

[sgbett]

Pedanticism and arrogance don't make for good arguments. Of course I know that there has been prior discussion of removing the 1MB limit. Thats not the same as 'the block size debate' though. You know it, but you'd rather avoid acknowledging the specific difference for fear of exposing the reality of the situation that the 1MB limit is temporary and should be removed. That much is true.

Back to form you are. Mudslinging, pithy, obnoxious. These are characteristics of someone who has a weak argument and just wants to try and bully those who disagree into submission.

This argumentative thread makes no difference, the market will decide, so you and beg can get as angry as you like about everyone not agreeing with you but ultimately its only yourselves you are hurting. The fact you think you know everything just demonstrates how close minded you are. This means you can't be reasoned with. The only purpose of replying to you is so that others are aware of what you are doing. Nothing I say will make any difference to you personally.

Please get off your high horse and spare us your moral high ground bullshit.

The market decides indeed and it has made a point to crush your pipe dreams of exponential block size growth.

You can attempt to re-write history all you want the fact is BIP101/XT was DOA and only served to shine light on the numerous tumors that were necessary for us to get rid of.

All you've managed is to force core devs to manufacture a bone they could toss to XTards to distract them with while the actual scaling work is being done.

Yes the market hasn't decided it needs bigger blocks. This will continue to be true, until it's not. Nobody needs to rewrite anything.

Both of you continue to speak like everything is decided, and because you are right now, that you will be right always.

As I said this is supreme arrogance, as well as a profound failure to understand something as simple as the fact that things can change. Its like you think that if you argue really hard and stamp your feet and shout loudest that you think you can control it. You can't, I can't. The future of bitcoin is unknown and its emergent behaviour of all participants. If the market needs bigger blocks they will happen, however loudly you protest, and regardless of what the bitcoin core implementation has. If the market does not need bigger blocks then none of this will matter and core stays relevant. If bigger blocks aren't needed there will be a good reason I am sure, and it won't be 'artificial'.

That moral high ground you are so desperate to avoid is where real people make real decisions. This troll infested cesspool of a thread is where you and ice try and pimp out your own personal view of what you think bitcoin should be as if it were a fact.

It's not. You don't know what bitcoin will be, neither do I. You can only keep saying what you want it to be. It's important that anyone reading this understand that your opinions aren't fact. These posts are not for you to respond to, because there is nothing constructive you can say. You may as well not even bother reading them. In fact it'd be better all round if you just put me on ignore.

Maybe you're in the wrong thread?

This one says: XT (and BIP101) #REKT

If you wanna create another one that discuss Bitcoin's future feel free but don't omit to mention XT, BIP101, exponential growth blocks, Gavin or Hearn, will not be a part of it.

oh.. but he did...


[prediction] Next spike $560,000 14 months from now

To be fair I like this one  

still utterly wrong, misleading and you can also see the fancy rainbow grpahs pattern them PR derps like to agitate as proven science to try at make their fraudulent argument hold. #justsayin


edit: altho cant beat the GIF at this point. cant wait to see what comes next. ^^

You're underestimating the speculation subform if you think that thread doesn't fit in perfectly there...

eh, surely it does although there are some valuable thread there, but then again i was just highlighting you and your forkers buddies propensions towards total disconnection from reality.

also, i concur the gavinistas do fit perfectly in there sorry butthole of a forum bitco.in

peace

is this off topic again? I can't tell. Is it disconnected from reality to think that the future is uncertain? Sign me up for my meds.

I'm now going to switch back to "BIP101/XT died for our sins", because it will be clear that it did, should the block size increase.

Of course it will be easy for the small blockers to say 'that was going to happen anyway' even though right now they are arguing it most certainly won't.

Its great when you aren't shackled to a view point, it means you can have an open mind, change what you believe based on new information. All that kind of crazy stuff. The small block shacklees will of course post tidbits of prior comments and demand that you stick by something you said. Unable to comprehend that people can move forward.

[muyuu]

I'm now going to switch back to "BIP101/XT died for our sins", because it will be clear that it did, should the block size increase.

Nope, block sizes are dead certain to increase at some point and they always were. But if you feel better believing in the tooth fairy, feel free.

[sgbett]

I'm now going to switch back to "BIP101/XT died for our sins", because it will be clear that it did, should the block size increase.

Nope, block sizes are dead certain to increase at some point and they always were. But if you feel better believing in the tooth fairy, feel free.

A Pre-emptive strike!

Yes they are, and if you want to believe that mike, gavin, XT and BIP101 had nothing to do with making that happen sooner rather than later, then feel free.

Either way it doesn't matter, provided the increase happens in time to ensure that block size can grow naturally, then everyone is happy right? We all win right?