Thoughts from Russia on the block size situation and Blockstream

[knight22]

Enough with this hyprocrisy. You are free to choose but not to talk about it on the main forum right?

Give us a break.

I'm pretty sure that anyone calling out for censorship has no idea what that is. You are not free to talk about it? Name me a single person who got punished for talking about XT? Because this is what censorship is.
You get killed (hello North Korea) for doing things that are not allowed. XT discussions are allowed in this forum, in the altcoin section. This was never, and is never going to be censorship.

I am banned from /r/bitcoin for this very reason so yeah give me a break and STFU.

[VeritasSapere]

Here we go again. Another round of false information, FUD, ad hominem and whatnot. Blockstream is not cancer. What if someone told you that you were cancer for calling them cancer? (for the record, I'm not stating this; some might try to abuse this). This is not how you discuss. This is not how you move forward.

Just because some people started a company, we should ignore both sidechains and the lightning network? This is not how everything works. As people have told me (when discussing XT) that nobody can force you to run Hearn's changes, then nobody can force you to use any solution from Blockstream.
There is no censorship. This is a privately owned forum. If you do not like the rules, start a new one and convince people to join it. Nobody can force you to be here either, can they?

If we do not increase the blocksize and there is a significant increase in adoption then transacting on the main chain would become prohibitively expensive. At this point the only alternative which would provide sufficient scale is using third parties on top of Bitcoin, or you could just use another cryptocurrency.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=946236.0

[turvarya]

Enough with this hyprocrisy. You are free to choose but not to talk about it on the main forum right?

Give us a break.

I'm pretty sure that anyone calling out for censorship has no idea what that is. You are not free to talk about it? Name me a single person who got punished for talking about XT? Because this is what censorship is.
You get killed (hello North Korea) for doing things that are not allowed. XT discussions are allowed in this forum, in the altcoin section. This was never, and is never going to be censorship.

Really? You are putting out the "but North Korea is worse"-card? You must be really desperate.
Fact is, threads r/bitcoin got deleted. That is censorship. If it is a private forum, doesn't matter at all in the definition of censorship. Look it up at at Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

So, could you please don't change the definition of words, just because it suits your agenda?

[meono]

Enough with this hyprocrisy. You are free to choose but not to talk about it on the main forum right?

Give us a break.

I'm pretty sure that anyone calling out for censorship has no idea what that is. You are not free to talk about it? Name me a single person who got punished for talking about XT? Because this is what censorship is.
You get killed (hello North Korea) for doing things that are not allowed. XT discussions are allowed in this forum, in the altcoin section. This was never, and is never going to be censorship.

Really? You are putting out the "but North Korea is worse"-card? You must be really desperate.
Fact is, threads r/bitcoin got deleted. That is censorship. If it is a private forum, doesn't matter at all in the definition of censorship. Look it up at at Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

So, could you please don't change the definition of words, just because it suits your agenda?

I wish i can invite Lauda to my house one day for a cup of tea. We can talk all kind of stuff. But as soon as she/he mention bip100, i will slap his/her face. Ask a question why? another slap to the face.... keep going with the topic and i will kick her/his bottoms so hard , she/he can barely work.

Its not censorship at all you know.
 

[knight22]

Enough with this hyprocrisy. You are free to choose but not to talk about it on the main forum right?

Give us a break.

I'm pretty sure that anyone calling out for censorship has no idea what that is. You are not free to talk about it? Name me a single person who got punished for talking about XT? Because this is what censorship is.
You get killed (hello North Korea) for doing things that are not allowed. XT discussions are allowed in this forum, in the altcoin section. This was never, and is never going to be censorship.

Really? You are putting out the "but North Korea is worse"-card? You must be really desperate.
Fact is, threads r/bitcoin got deleted. That is censorship. If it is a private forum, doesn't matter at all in the definition of censorship. Look it up at at Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

So, could you please don't change the definition of words, just because it suits your agenda?

I wish i can invite Lauda to my house one day for a cup of tea. We can talk all kind of stuff. But as soon as she/he mention bip100, i will slap his/her face. Ask a question why? another slap to the face.... keep going with the topic and i will kick her/his bottoms so hard , she/he can barely work.

Its not censorship at all you know.
 

Of course not. It's your house 

[VeritasSapere]

Enough with this hyprocrisy. You are free to choose but not to talk about it on the main forum right?

Give us a break.

I'm pretty sure that anyone calling out for censorship has no idea what that is. You are not free to talk about it? Name me a single person who got punished for talking about XT? Because this is what censorship is.
You get killed (hello North Korea) for doing things that are not allowed. XT discussions are allowed in this forum, in the altcoin section. This was never, and is never going to be censorship.

Really? You are putting out the "but North Korea is worse"-card? You must be really desperate.
Fact is, threads r/bitcoin got deleted. That is censorship. If it is a private forum, doesn't matter at all in the definition of censorship. Look it up at at Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

So, could you please don't change the definition of words, just because it suits your agenda?

I wish i can invite Lauda to my house one day for a cup of tea. We can talk all kind of stuff. But as soon as she/he mention bip100, i will slap his/her face. Ask a question why? another slap to the face.... keep going with the topic and i will kick her/his bottoms so hard , she/he can barely work.

Its not censorship at all you know.
 

Of course not. It's your house 

There is a big difference to when a government commits censorship compared to when a private entity does. However even though a private entity has the right to censor its own space, in the same way that you could do so in your own home. It does not however follow that such action is justified, it is not. It is the wrong thing to do even if you have the right to do it.

[meono]

Enough with this hyprocrisy. You are free to choose but not to talk about it on the main forum right?

Give us a break.

I'm pretty sure that anyone calling out for censorship has no idea what that is. You are not free to talk about it? Name me a single person who got punished for talking about XT? Because this is what censorship is.
You get killed (hello North Korea) for doing things that are not allowed. XT discussions are allowed in this forum, in the altcoin section. This was never, and is never going to be censorship.

Really? You are putting out the "but North Korea is worse"-card? You must be really desperate.
Fact is, threads r/bitcoin got deleted. That is censorship. If it is a private forum, doesn't matter at all in the definition of censorship. Look it up at at Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

So, could you please don't change the definition of words, just because it suits your agenda?

I wish i can invite Lauda to my house one day for a cup of tea. We can talk all kind of stuff. But as soon as she/he mention bip100, i will slap his/her face. Ask a question why? another slap to the face.... keep going with the topic and i will kick her/his bottoms so hard , she/he can barely work.

Its not censorship at all you know.
 

Of course not. It's your house 

There is a big difference to when a government commits censorship compared to when a private entity does. However even though a private entity has the right to censor its own space, in the same way that you could do so in your own home. It does not however follow that such action is justified, it is not. It is the wrong thing to do even if you have the right to do it.

Thats exactly the point.

Go around and tell ppl, thats not censorship because its private property is absurdly dumb,

[brg444]

1. Again:  This was debated for 3 years.   Gavin was forced to release something with Mike Hearn
because Greg and the kids on the blockstream wouldn't play ball.   If they really wanted to
release something, they would have worked with Gavin so the solution is more to their preferences.  Either
their interests in Blockstream prevented that, or they lack leadership/communication/team
skills.  Either way is a problem.  I think when you boil it down, they just don't see the urgency
as Gavin does.  Maybe that's because of their other solutions like the lightening network.
Maybe they are willing to stall Bitcoin and take bigger risks.  They don't want to take technical
risks purportedly, but they are willing to risk slowing down adoption.  There is a risk/reward.
and part of their reward is blockstream business activities.  This is what you seem to deny.

Absolutely not what happened. You can read about it here.

As far as the rest of the post your are just making an ass of yourself again making all kinds of disingenuous assumptions.

2.  This leads to the next point.  Gavin says a fix is urgently needed.
I say an imperfect fix IS better than no solution.  Gavin
essentially said "Core devs won't agree, but we need bigger blocks,
so I'm going to do the best thing I can and release Bip 101 on Mike's fork."
No one ever said Bip 101 was perfect, but who are you to say its "broken"
and its worse than no solution?  I guess you know more about bitcoin than
Gavin so we should listen to you.  
---  

That you fell into the "urgency" trap does not mean everyone is stupid enough to do so.

You can find various explanations on the web as to why it is broken. In short: an arbitrary limit (8MB) picked out of a chinese fortune cookie and an absolutely irresponsible activation threshold (75%)

The only way your position even makes sense is if you truly believe its not
important to have bigger blocks asap.  It must mean you agree with the devs
who aren't ready to raise the limit. Somehow it doesn't scare you.  You're not
worried about scalability.  Again, risk/reward.  But you won't be getting the
rewards that blockstream and its investors get by taking their side. 

Have you taken a looked at the average block size recently? We've been averaging less than 500kb for most of the year. Considering this, I indeed fail to see the need for "bigger blocks asap"

But you won't be getting the rewards that blockstream and its investors get by taking their side. 

 

[jonald_fyookball]

I cant change your beliefs that we dont need bigger blocks but fortunately the miners are already voting on bigger blocks so I really dont care.

[iCEBREAKER]

You don't seem to grasp the confilct of interest between blocksteam and Core development. I doubt you someday will because you don't seem to know what a conflict of interest actually is. That's OK.

Repeating the 'Vast Blockstream Conspiracy' rumor won't make it true.

Blockstream is scaling Bitcoin in ways far more effective than XT's naive, ham-fisted, derpy 'duh just make the block moar big' approach.

Their Scaling Bitcoin workshops represent the proper way to gather information, share expertise, compare notes, find common ground, identify irreconcilable differences, and ultimately begin to move *with consensus* toward the goal of supporting more transactions, without sacrificing Bitcoin's unique distinguishing features.

Like it or not, at present Dr. Backamoto is effectively Bitcoin's CTO just as gmax is Bitcoin's Chief Scientist.  

While Gavin and Hearn are busy splitting the community into mutually-destructive warring factions, Blockstream is doing amazing things at the frontier of computer science and cryptography.

EG, https://blockstream.com/2015/08/24/treesignatures/

[knight22]

You don't seem to grasp the confilct of interest between blocksteam and Core development. I doubt you someday will because you don't seem to know what a conflict of interest actually is. That's OK.

Repeating the 'Vast Blockstream Conspiracy' rumor won't make it true.

Blockstream is scaling Bitcoin in ways far more effective than XT's naive, ham-fisted, derpy 'duh just make the block moar big' approach.

Their Scaling Bitcoin workshops represent the proper way to gather information, share expertise, compare notes, find common ground, identify irreconcilable differences, and ultimately begin to move *with consensus* toward the goal of supporting more transactions, without sacrificing Bitcoin's unique distinguishing features.

Like it or not, at present Dr. Backamoto is effectively Bitcoin's CTO just as gmax is Bitcoin's Chief Scientist.   

While Gavin and Hearn are busy splitting the community into warring factions, Blockstream is doing amazing things at the frontier of computer science and cryptography.

EG, https://blockstream.com/2015/08/24/treesignatures/

Breadwallet just disagree with you:

https://twitter.com/breadwalletapp/status/636548340595843072

I hope you don't use it! 

[jonald_fyookball]

You don't seem to grasp the confilct of interest between blocksteam and Core development. I doubt you someday will because you don't seem to know what a conflict of interest actually is. That's OK.

Repeating the 'Vast Blockstream Conspiracy' rumor won't make it true.

Blockstream is scaling Bitcoin in ways far more effective than XT's naive, ham-fisted, derpy 'duh just make the block moar big' approach.

Their Scaling Bitcoin workshops represent the proper way to gather information, share expertise, compare notes, find common ground, identify irreconcilable differences, and ultimately begin to move *with consensus* toward the goal of supporting more transactions, without sacrificing Bitcoin's unique distinguishing features.

Like it or not, at present Dr. Backamoto is effectively Bitcoin's CTO just as gmax is Bitcoin's Chief Scientist.   

While Gavin and Hearn are busy splitting the community into warring factions, Blockstream is doing amazing things at the frontier of computer science and cryptography.

EG, https://blockstream.com/2015/08/24/treesignatures/

They are brilliant guys for sure.  However, your post is just an ad hominem that has nothing to do with the conflict of interest issue.

[johnyj]

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity of the blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

[brg444]

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

Fantastic post! Absolutely lucid and rational for once.

[knight22]

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it. 

[johnyj]

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it. 

IMO, decentralized trading platform has been promoted for some years but never gained enough traction. This is largely due to the fact that no one want to send the money/goods first, and there are many complex scam/theft schemes in payments, which makes the dispute impossible without the involvement of authorities, but when you have authorities that can rely on, you don't really need decentralized trading anymore

[brg444]

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it. 

Sounds like the logic of a crippled brain   How dare you reply to such a brilliant post with such a bland comment?

If OpenBazaar behave they can get a private, anonymity supported sidechain straight out of Blockstream Labs and run their own Lightning hub  

 

[knight22]

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it. 

Sounds like the logic of a crippled brain   How dare you reply to such a brilliant post with such a bland comment?

If OpenBazaar behave they can get a private, anonymity supported sidechain straight out of Blockstream Labs and run their own Lightning hub  

 

That's really cool but the fact is OpenBazaar will deliver much faster than blockstream will.

[brg444]

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it.  

Sounds like the logic of a crippled brain   How dare you reply to such a brilliant post with such a bland comment?

If OpenBazaar behave they can get a private, anonymity supported sidechain straight out of Blockstream Labs and run their own Lightning hub  

 

That's really cool but the fact is OpenBazaar will deliver much faster than blockstream will.

I would imagine since they got a jump start from code they didn't write  

I also imagine you are convince hordes of consumers will rush to use OpenBazaar as soon as they officially launch, right?

[knight22]

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it. 

IMO, decentralized trading platform has been promoted for some years but never gained enough traction. This is largely due to the fact that no one want to send the money/goods first, and there are many complex scam/theft schemes in payments, which makes the dispute impossible without the involvement of authorities, but when you have authorities that can rely on, you don't really need decentralized trading anymore

This is not a valid point. first decentralized trading platform have never been fully implemented before. You should read more about OpenBazaar, they received 1M$ investment and launching this fall. Joystream is another different beast where you point really don't stand.