Thanks to people who support 1-2 MB blocks - great idea u fools...

[brg444]

i'd argue that not changing the 1MB is a change in itself, we were promised this limit would move up as needed.
not changing the limit is changing the game plan in a big way.

"i'd argue that not changing the 1MB is a change in itself" <--- I like this point.

My background is not tech

Nobody with a background in tech or basic logic will accept the surreal anti-conceptual Red Queen Interpretation that "not changing" "is changing."

Anyone with a background in policy debate should know (and deeply appreciate) why the default state is status quo, not Doing Something Because Reasons.

You don't get to redefine A as Not-A and expect anyone except drooling, easily excited ADHD Redditards to support you.

Presumption has always been negative, and that's not going to change just because you think the limit needs to move up Right Fucking Now And Faster Please.

Satoshi "promised" you nothing, with the arguable exception of Nakamoto Consensus being a solution/workaround to the Byzantine General Problem.

Good luck selling your false sense of urgency, especially now that XT's governance coup was rekt like Stannis at Winterfell and Hearn/Galvin have disappeared in a cloud of public disgrace.  

there is some urgency.
right now you can't get a TX through without a good fee.
i wonder how long you can sell that there is "plenty of time" to keep arguing in circles...

You're lying 

I can send a tx with no fee right now and it should get picked up fairly quickly.

[1714655616]

1714655616

[1714655616]

1714655616

[adamstgBit]

i'd argue that not changing the 1MB is a change in itself, we were promised this limit would move up as needed.
not changing the limit is changing the game plan in a big way.

"i'd argue that not changing the 1MB is a change in itself" <--- I like this point.

My background is not tech

Nobody with a background in tech or basic logic will accept the surreal anti-conceptual Red Queen Interpretation that "not changing" "is changing."

Anyone with a background in policy debate should know (and deeply appreciate) why the default state is status quo, not Doing Something Because Reasons.

You don't get to redefine A as Not-A and expect anyone except drooling, easily excited ADHD Redditards to support you.

Presumption has always been negative, and that's not going to change just because you think the limit needs to move up Right Fucking Now And Faster Please.

Satoshi "promised" you nothing, with the arguable exception of Nakamoto Consensus being a solution/workaround to the Byzantine General Problem.

Good luck selling your false sense of urgency, especially now that XT's governance coup was rekt like Stannis at Winterfell and Hearn/Galvin have disappeared in a cloud of public disgrace.  

there is some urgency.
right now you can't get a TX through without a good fee.
i wonder how long you can sell that there is "plenty of time" to keep arguing in circles...

You're lying 

I can send a tx with no fee right now and it should get picked up fairly quickly.

right now the traffic seems low
lets do a test?
post your address.

[iCEBREAKER]

Satoshi "promised" you nothing, with the arguable exception of Nakamoto Consensus being a solution/workaround to the Byzantine General Problem.

Good luck selling your false sense of urgency, especially now that XT's governance coup was rekt like Stannis at Winterfell and Hearn/Galvin have disappeared in a cloud of public disgrace.  

there is some urgency.
right now you can't get a TX through without a good fee.
i wonder how long you can sell that there is "plenty of time" to keep arguing in circles...

What exactly is a "good fee?"

Bitcoin provides services unavailable in any other form; there no substitute for several of its functions.

But there you are, whining about paying less than a dollar for access to those miracles (which are produced at great expense).

There is no "urgency."  Repeating such Gavinista agitprop was for a time effective at misleading the public, but that seasonal fad is over.

BIP000 (scale to 1MB now, then reconsider in a couple of years) is winning, and there is literally nothing you can do to change that fact.

So keep stewing in your impotent frustrated FUD and butt-rage.  The rest of us will continue to scale Bitcoin via the proper channels, based on facts instead of choreographed panic.

[adamstgBit]

Satoshi "promised" you nothing, with the arguable exception of Nakamoto Consensus being a solution/workaround to the Byzantine General Problem.

Good luck selling your false sense of urgency, especially now that XT's governance coup was rekt like Stannis at Winterfell and Hearn/Galvin have disappeared in a cloud of public disgrace.  

there is some urgency.
right now you can't get a TX through without a good fee.
i wonder how long you can sell that there is "plenty of time" to keep arguing in circles...

What exactly is a "good fee?"

Bitcoin provides services unavailable in any other form; there no substitute for several of its functions.

But there you are, whining about paying less than a dollar for access to those miracles (which are produced at great expense).

There is no "urgency."  Repeating such Gavinista agitprop was for a time effective at misleading the public, but that seasonal fad is over.

BIP000 (scale to 1MB now, then reconsider in a couple of years) is winning, and there is literally nothing you can do to change that fact.

So keep stewing in your impotent frustrated FUD and butt-rage.  The rest of us will continue to scale Bitcoin via the proper channels, based on facts instead of choreographed panic.

BIP100 is at 61% hashing power.

where do you get the idea that BIP000 is winning?

[brg444]

Satoshi "promised" you nothing, with the arguable exception of Nakamoto Consensus being a solution/workaround to the Byzantine General Problem.

Good luck selling your false sense of urgency, especially now that XT's governance coup was rekt like Stannis at Winterfell and Hearn/Galvin have disappeared in a cloud of public disgrace.  

there is some urgency.
right now you can't get a TX through without a good fee.
i wonder how long you can sell that there is "plenty of time" to keep arguing in circles...

What exactly is a "good fee?"

Bitcoin provides services unavailable in any other form; there no substitute for several of its functions.

But there you are, whining about paying less than a dollar for access to those miracles (which are produced at great expense).

There is no "urgency."  Repeating such Gavinista agitprop was for a time effective at misleading the public, but that seasonal fad is over.

BIP000 (scale to 1MB now, then reconsider in a couple of years) is winning, and there is literally nothing you can do to change that fact.

So keep stewing in your impotent frustrated FUD and butt-rage.  The rest of us will continue to scale Bitcoin via the proper channels, based on facts instead of choreographed panic.

BIP100 is at 61% hashing power.

where do you get the idea that BIP000 is winning?

Where do you get the idea that miners opinion is representative of consensus?

[coalitionfor8mb]

Anyone with a background in policy debate should know (and deeply appreciate) why the default state is status quo, not Doing Something Because Reasons.

That's actually a good thing.

It means that "the limit" is working and serves as a barrier preventing the network from spreading its mass across multiple bandwidth layers and as a result allowing it to stay coherent, focused and "pressurized".

The only challenge we face is how to time the transition right (when the time comes) and let the new limit become as firm and rigid as the original.


By the way, if anyone bothered to spend a few minutes and read the wiki-article about "foo bar", you'd notice that it's surrounded with mystery and things like "star gods", "UFOs", "fortune" and "good luck". The path to gr8ness looks extraordinary. I mean, you just want to be there!  

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

BIP000 (scale to 1MB now, then reconsider in a couple of years) is winning, and there is literally nothing you can do to change that fact.

LMAO!!  Second funniest statement in the whole debate!!  You are some clown. Seriously.

70% of last 100 blocks are either 100 or 8mb.  Bigger blocks...Mmmmmmmmmmm... 

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Where do you get the idea that miners opinion is representative of consensus?

Because we decided to disregard MPfag consensus.  Sorry about that. 

[brg444]

BIP000 (scale to 1MB now, then reconsider in a couple of years) is winning, and there is literally nothing you can do to change that fact.

LMAO!!  Second funniest statement in the whole debate!!  You are some clown. Seriously.

70% of last 100 blocks are either 100 or 8mb.  Bigger blocks...Mmmmmmmmmmm...  

 

100% of last 100000 blocks are BIP000. Even Jeff Garzik has given up on his broken miners vote proposal. The BIP100 coinbase tag only serves as a demonstration against BIP101 at this point.

You used to be a better troll Lambchop  

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

BIP000 (scale to 1MB now, then reconsider in a couple of years) is winning, and there is literally nothing you can do to change that fact.

LMAO!!  Second funniest statement in the whole debate!!  You are some clown. Seriously.

70% of last 100 blocks are either 100 or 8mb.  Bigger blocks...Mmmmmmmmmmm...  

 

100% of last 100000 blocks are BIP000. Even Jeff Garzik has given up on his broken miners vote proposal.

Try again noob.

Okay, I will spoon feed you. You sound like you need things broken down to simple terms.

The coinbase field being used by miners to indicate their block size preference indicates 70% for 100 or 8mb.

If BIP100 dies ( which I hope it will) then 8mb increase will be the only game in town.

Saying that all the current blocks are current blocks is a bit childish.

[adamstgBit]

BIP000 (scale to 1MB now, then reconsider in a couple of years) is winning, and there is literally nothing you can do to change that fact.

LMAO!!  Second funniest statement in the whole debate!!  You are some clown. Seriously.

70% of last 100 blocks are either 100 or 8mb.  Bigger blocks...Mmmmmmmmmmm...  

 

100% of last 100000 blocks are BIP000. Even Jeff Garzik has given up on his broken miners vote proposal.

Try again noob.

the specifics of BIP100 or BIP8MB are irrelevant
point is minners want  bigger blocks.
miners have a strong incentive to do what they think is best for bitcoin.
a minority in devs, miners and users feel it's not a good idea to increase block size.

you are very much in the minority.

and <100% of last 100000 blocks are BIP000

[adamstgBit]

furthermore, as far as syndicate global coins go, engineer generated paper wallets are very secure, redefine real-time ASICs or not, blocksize must be raised. exploiting non-reversible mixing services will be the achilles heel to 1MBters. hard-fork secure-key exchanges and visualize peer-to-peer miners are already in place, tamper-proof private-key hash rates and transition open-source transaction fees are the future of bitcoin.

[brg444]

BIP000 (scale to 1MB now, then reconsider in a couple of years) is winning, and there is literally nothing you can do to change that fact.

LMAO!!  Second funniest statement in the whole debate!!  You are some clown. Seriously.

70% of last 100 blocks are either 100 or 8mb.  Bigger blocks...Mmmmmmmmmmm...  

 

100% of last 100000 blocks are BIP000. Even Jeff Garzik has given up on his broken miners vote proposal.

Try again noob.

Okay, I will spoon feed you. You sound like you need things broken down to simple terms.

The coinbase field being used by miners to indicate their block size preference indicates 70% for 100 or 8mb.

If BIP100 dies ( which I hope it will) then 8mb increase will be the only game in town.

Saying that all the current blocks are current blocks is a bit childish.

 

Again, you used to at least be funny. Now you're straight up sad.  

BIP100 & BIP101 are the only proposal who bothered with the voting nonsense. Others know better and realize that miners opinion on the matter is worthless as their incentives are not aligned with Bitcoin users.

In short, any form of scaling to be implemented will not resort to pseudo-democracy but consensus.

Therefore, BIP100 dies and so does 8MB. In fact one can argue they are both dead as we speak.

Until then, all current blocks are BIP000 and you shouldn't expect this to change soon  

[brg444]

BIP000 (scale to 1MB now, then reconsider in a couple of years) is winning, and there is literally nothing you can do to change that fact.

LMAO!!  Second funniest statement in the whole debate!!  You are some clown. Seriously.

70% of last 100 blocks are either 100 or 8mb.  Bigger blocks...Mmmmmmmmmmm...  

 

100% of last 100000 blocks are BIP000. Even Jeff Garzik has given up on his broken miners vote proposal.

Try again noob.

the specifics of BIP100 or BIP8MB are irrelevant
point is minners want  bigger blocks.
miners have a strong incentive to do what they think is best for bitcoin.
a minority in devs, miners and users feel it's not a good idea to increase block size.

you are very much in the minority.

and <100% of last 100000 blocks are BIP000

Miners incentives are NOT aligned with users and therefore what miners want is irrelevant.

Moreover, it is a majority of devs that are against any significant or irresponsible block size increase and the opinion of users not running a full node is exactly worthless.

Why resort to lies and deception Adam? This is rather sad coming from you 

[adamstgBit]

BIP000 (scale to 1MB now, then reconsider in a couple of years) is winning, and there is literally nothing you can do to change that fact.

LMAO!!  Second funniest statement in the whole debate!!  You are some clown. Seriously.

70% of last 100 blocks are either 100 or 8mb.  Bigger blocks...Mmmmmmmmmmm...  

 

100% of last 100000 blocks are BIP000. Even Jeff Garzik has given up on his broken miners vote proposal.

Try again noob.

the specifics of BIP100 or BIP8MB are irrelevant
point is minners want  bigger blocks.
miners have a strong incentive to do what they think is best for bitcoin.
a minority in devs, miners and users feel it's not a good idea to increase block size.

you are very much in the minority.

and <100% of last 100000 blocks are BIP000

Miners incentives are NOT aligned with users and therefore what miners want is irrelevant.

Moreover, it is a majority of devs that are against any significant or irresponsible block size increase and the opinion of users not running a full node is exactly worthless.

Why resort to lies and deception Adam? This is rather sad coming from you 

my arguments can't stand on there own, i need lies and deception to make them appear legit 

[druggy01]

why is litegoinguy olways angry oll the time ??/ ?

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Again, you used to at least be funny. Now you're straight up sad.  

BIP100 & BIP101 are the only proposal who bothered with the voting nonsense. Others know better and realize that miners opinion on the matter is worthless as their incentives are not aligned with Bitcoin users.

In short, any form of scaling to be implemented will not resort to pseudo-democracy but consensus.

Therefore, BIP100 dies and so does 8MB. In fact one can argue they are both dead as we speak.

Until then, all current blocks are BIP000 and you shouldn't expect this to change soon  

I think you are hearing voices in your head - your persecution complex is playing tricks on you.

So "miner incentives are not aligned with users" is your latest mantra?  Well, I have news for you - they never were, and they never will be.  Its a complete irrelevance. However, as miners are such an important part of the bitcoin ecosphere, then their opinion is important. Just because they dont agree with your small block world view does not mean you can ignore a huge proportion of the players.

Miners know that they can get more fee's from more transactions. Everybody knows it will get better with more transactions.

Except you. You just want it to be a convenient storage vessel for your little bag of gold - but you want to come back in 10 years to see they have magically increased in value due to....math.

[brg444]

Again, you used to at least be funny. Now you're straight up sad.  

BIP100 & BIP101 are the only proposal who bothered with the voting nonsense. Others know better and realize that miners opinion on the matter is worthless as their incentives are not aligned with Bitcoin users.

In short, any form of scaling to be implemented will not resort to pseudo-democracy but consensus.

Therefore, BIP100 dies and so does 8MB. In fact one can argue they are both dead as we speak.

Until then, all current blocks are BIP000 and you shouldn't expect this to change soon  

I think you are hearing voices in your head - your persecution complex is playing tricks on you.

So "miner incentives are not aligned with users" is your latest mantra?  Well, I have news for you - they never were, and they never will be.  Its a complete irrelevance. However, as miners are such an important part of the bitcoin ecosphere, then their opinion is important. Just because they dont agree with your small block world view does not mean you can ignore a huge proportion of the players.

Miners know that they can get more fee's from more transactions. Everybody knows it will get better with more transactions.

Except you. You just want it to be a convenient storage vessel for your little bag of gold - but you want to come back in 10 years to see they have magically increased in value due to....math.

Except.. you know... the nodes.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Again, you used to at least be funny. Now you're straight up sad.  

BIP100 & BIP101 are the only proposal who bothered with the voting nonsense. Others know better and realize that miners opinion on the matter is worthless as their incentives are not aligned with Bitcoin users.

In short, any form of scaling to be implemented will not resort to pseudo-democracy but consensus.

Therefore, BIP100 dies and so does 8MB. In fact one can argue they are both dead as we speak.

Until then, all current blocks are BIP000 and you shouldn't expect this to change soon  

I think you are hearing voices in your head - your persecution complex is playing tricks on you.

So "miner incentives are not aligned with users" is your latest mantra?  Well, I have news for you - they never were, and they never will be.  Its a complete irrelevance. However, as miners are such an important part of the bitcoin ecosphere, then their opinion is important. Just because they dont agree with your small block world view does not mean you can ignore a huge proportion of the players.

Miners know that they can get more fee's from more transactions. Everybody knows it will get better with more transactions.

Except you. You just want it to be a convenient storage vessel for your little bag of gold - but you want to come back in 10 years to see they have magically increased in value due to....math.

Except.. you know... the nodes.

Ah - the one about "If we raise the limit to 8mb, then blocks will automatically become 8mb OVERNIGHT!!" Dear god, wont someone think of the children blockchain!!

If that is the lie you choose to believe, then knock yourself out. Most intelligent people realise that blocks will grow in proportion to transaction volume.

[brg444]

Again, you used to at least be funny. Now you're straight up sad.  

BIP100 & BIP101 are the only proposal who bothered with the voting nonsense. Others know better and realize that miners opinion on the matter is worthless as their incentives are not aligned with Bitcoin users.

In short, any form of scaling to be implemented will not resort to pseudo-democracy but consensus.

Therefore, BIP100 dies and so does 8MB. In fact one can argue they are both dead as we speak.

Until then, all current blocks are BIP000 and you shouldn't expect this to change soon  

I think you are hearing voices in your head - your persecution complex is playing tricks on you.

So "miner incentives are not aligned with users" is your latest mantra?  Well, I have news for you - they never were, and they never will be.  Its a complete irrelevance. However, as miners are such an important part of the bitcoin ecosphere, then their opinion is important. Just because they dont agree with your small block world view does not mean you can ignore a huge proportion of the players.

Miners know that they can get more fee's from more transactions. Everybody knows it will get better with more transactions.

Except you. You just want it to be a convenient storage vessel for your little bag of gold - but you want to come back in 10 years to see they have magically increased in value due to....math.

Except.. you know... the nodes.

Ah - the one about "If we raise the limit to 8mb, then blocks will automatically become 8mb OVERNIGHT!!" Dear god, wont someone think of the children blockchain!!

If that is the lie you choose to believe, then knock yourself out. Most intelligent people realise that blocks will grow in proportion to transaction volume.

Lie?

Guess you've never heard of "supply creates its own demand". What if... you know... Fidelity switches that flip?

Of course being an intelligent person you recognize this but given that you are also a paid shill you wouldn't want people to think about this heh