Poll: Mike H. Interview - Convincing or not?

[brg444]

I think we agree that the block size should be a function of the resources requirement for one person to become a peer in the network (fully validate by running a full node).

Therefore it stands to reason that the Bitcoin blockchain will forever be able to accommodate only a marginal amount of transactions worldwide given the resources load implied. Hence the exclusive, "luxury" qualitative.

In which case, we need a definition for the size/location of the margin. I suspect that outright exclusivity is only one way out of many.

Exclusivity is a consequence of the strict security requirements of Bitcoin.

Fortunately this exclusivity does not discriminate people based on status, gender, religion, sexuality, etc but mere financial means.

Moreover, unlike what some narrow minded people would have you believe this does not limit the benefits of Bitcoin to transactions occuring directly on its blockchain. I'm sure you understand that anyway...

Okay, but I stand by my original point really: using words like "luxury" gives the wrong impression of your actual own position, as you've conceded that you only intend a premium on main chain transaction space, not with off-chain transactions or other secondary solutions. You're not making this distinction clear IMO.

I did think your issue was with my choice of word but I'd like to remind you that it was picked in response to knight22's qualification of Bitcoin as some sort of "commercial" good.

In that context, I do think it is legitimate to qualify Bitcoin as a "luxury" item, an "exclusive" payment network.

If bitcoin goes down that path, another more "inclusive" and affordable/competitive system will take over. The bitcoin blockchain has nothing magical tied to it. If you create an artificial cost associated to its usage, you only create an economic incentives for ALL market participant to use another blockchain that scales better and is cheaper.

Bitcoin blockchain might be the stronger and bigger one ATM but it could easily change if there is an economic incentive to do so.

 

You sound like all socialist shills.

There is no value in "inclusion" and "affordable". Did you not learn anything from your plastic cars, plastic appliances and rampant planned obsolescence.

Cheap people deserve cheap chains, driving costs down necessarily means driving quality down and then your left with a piece of shit that everyone can use but has no value. This is pretty much a reflection of what is wrong with this consumer-driven society: everyone feel entitled to things they can't pay for.

[iCEBREAKER]

He looks like the type of bloke who'd invite you to stay at his house, throw you down a well while you're having a piss in the garden and spend the entire night trying to guilt trip your girlfriend into moving his cock around. Thus I don't find him a comforting presence.

 

nailed it

Yes, Heam is by far our most valuable lolcow, and has been all summer.

This last season of All My Bitcoins would have been relatively boring without that stooge playing Wormtounge to Gavin's Théoden.

[gentlemand]

You sound like all socialist shills.

I'm not sure what you sound like. I do know it has very little to do with how that real world place operates.

If it happens I hope you enjoy your luxury blockchain and all the comforts, prestige and wonderful evenings on the riviera it brings. I'll be shopping elsewhere with the little people.

[DooMAD]

You sound like all socialist shills.

I'm not sure what you sound like. I do know it has very little to do with how that real world place operates.

If it happens I hope you enjoy your luxury blockchain and all the comforts, prestige and wonderful evenings on the riviera it brings. I'll be shopping elsewhere with the little people.

I know exactly what brg444 sounds like.  They have little concern for the real world and only consider the magical world of make believe their fellow MP worshippers reside in.  I'll be shopping elsewhere with the little people too if those particular lunatics manage to take over the asylum.

[Holliday]

he never said he wanted to "take fees away from bitcoin"...

In the absence of a block size cap miners can be supported using network assurance contracts.

Totally agree that we want fees to be zero for as long as possible (or forever).

How's running that full node going for you Adam?

[johnyj]

At the end of the interview he mentioned that the communication between devs has come to a halt, this is a problem right now, maybe because there is no clear and efficient way to communicate, or could be caused by totally different view, difficult to reach any consensus

Pretty Romania girl by the way  

[coalitionfor8mb]

I'll be shopping elsewhere with the little people.

I'll be shopping elsewhere with the little people too.

Hey, guys, Shopping is easier done with those plastic VISA cards, they work pretty good, you should try! Users of independent and autonomous Bitcoin network carry both costs: (1) transacting on the blockchain and (2) maintaining its operation. We carry both and it's the sole purpose of Bitcoin existing. This is how real world operates: VISA for shopping, Bitcoin for taking responsibility for your own future.

[knight22]

I'll be shopping elsewhere with the little people.

I'll be shopping elsewhere with the little people too.

Hey, guys, Shopping is easier done with those plastic VISA cards, they work pretty good, you should try! Users of independent and autonomous Bitcoin network carry both costs: (1) transacting on the blockchain and (2) maintaining its operation. We carry both and it's the sole purpose of Bitcoin existing. This is how real world operates: VISA for shopping, Bitcoin for taking responsibility for your own future.

For shopping on internet there will be a better blockchain. Like it or not. That blockchain will be more useful than bitcoin will ever be.

But thanks for reminding us that bitcoin is not the only one in town.

[Holliday]

For shopping on internet there will be a better blockchain. Like it or not. That blockchain will be more useful than bitcoin will ever be.

I really hope so because I have such terrible difficulties shopping on the internet as things currently stand...

...But I have TONS of options to go to when looking for censorship-proof money.

[knight22]

For shopping on internet there will be a better blockchain. Like it or not. That blockchain will be more useful than bitcoin will ever be.

I really hope so because I have such terrible difficulties shopping on the internet as things currently stand...

...But I have TONS of options to go to when looking for censorship-proof money.

Bitcoin is also about frictionless money. No so much with VISA. If you can't see the big picture I do.

[Holliday]

Bitcoin is also about frictionless money. No so much with VISA.

I guess I don't really understand the "frictionless" in frictionless programmable money. There are many kinds of friction I can think of, and it seems like you are just saying censorship-proof in a different way.

I would even go so far as to say that Bitcoin is not frictionless at all. Fees, for example, are one type of friction which is going to be required in order to pay for network security.

Edit: Unless Heam's "network assurance contracts" of course!

[knight22]

Bitcoin is also about frictionless money. No so much with VISA.

I guess I don't really understand the "frictionless" in frictionless programmable money. There are many kinds of friction I can think of, and it seems like you are just saying censorship-proof in a different way.

I would even go so far as to say that Bitcoin is not frictionless at all. Fees, for example, are one type of friction which is going to be required in order to pay for network security.

Edit: Unless Heam's "network assurance contracts" of course!

Not sure I understand what you are trying to say. Of course censorship is also a considerable layer of friction but the legacy financial system has a lot more frictions than just censorship.

[Holliday]

Bitcoin is also about frictionless money. No so much with VISA.

I guess I don't really understand the "frictionless" in frictionless programmable money. There are many kinds of friction I can think of, and it seems like you are just saying censorship-proof in a different way.

I would even go so far as to say that Bitcoin is not frictionless at all. Fees, for example, are one type of friction which is going to be required in order to pay for network security.

Edit: Unless Heam's "network assurance contracts" of course!

Not sure I understand what you are trying to say. Of course censorship is also aa considerable layer of friction but the legacy financial system has a lot more frictions than just censorship.

The last time you mentioned that Bitcoin is also "frictionless programmable money", I responded that I didn't really know what you mean by that. I was hoping for an explanation or some examples.

Then while thinking about it, I realized that Bitcoin has several kinds of friction, some of which are essential to the operation of the network itself.

I still don't know what the use cases of "frictionless programmable money" are, or why Bitcoin is best suited for those uses.

[brg444]

I'll be shopping elsewhere with the little people.

I'll be shopping elsewhere with the little people too.

Hey, guys, Shopping is easier done with those plastic VISA cards, they work pretty good, you should try! Users of independent and autonomous Bitcoin network carry both costs: (1) transacting on the blockchain and (2) maintaining its operation. We carry both and it's the sole purpose of Bitcoin existing. This is how real world operates: VISA for shopping, Bitcoin for taking responsibility for your own future.

For shopping on internet there will be a better blockchain. Like it or not. That blockchain will be more useful than bitcoin will ever be.

But thanks for reminding us that bitcoin is the only one in town.

PLEASE PHORK OFF ALONG WITH YOUR EBAYCOIN

[brg444]

Bitcoin is also about frictionless money. No so much with VISA.

I guess I don't really understand the "frictionless" in frictionless programmable money. There are many kinds of friction I can think of, and it seems like you are just saying censorship-proof in a different way.

I would even go so far as to say that Bitcoin is not frictionless at all. Fees, for example, are one type of friction which is going to be required in order to pay for network security.

Edit: Unless Heam's "network assurance contracts" of course!

Not sure I understand what you are trying to say. Of course censorship is also aa considerable layer of friction but the legacy financial system has a lot more frictions than just censorship.

The last time you mentioned that Bitcoin is also "frictionless programmable money", I responded that I didn't really know what you mean by that. I was hoping for an explanation or some examples.

Then while thinking about it, I realized that Bitcoin has several kinds of friction, some of which are essential to the operation of the network itself.

I still don't know what the use cases of "frictionless programmable money" are, or why Bitcoin is best suited for those uses.

Better questions: what friction are we supposed to believe people experience today in their online shopping experience? Is anyone really complaining?

For an average person it comes down to user experience, Bitcoin has the worst of them all.

[knight22]

Bitcoin is also about frictionless money. No so much with VISA.

I guess I don't really understand the "frictionless" in frictionless programmable money. There are many kinds of friction I can think of, and it seems like you are just saying censorship-proof in a different way.

I would even go so far as to say that Bitcoin is not frictionless at all. Fees, for example, are one type of friction which is going to be required in order to pay for network security.

Edit: Unless Heam's "network assurance contracts" of course!

Not sure I understand what you are trying to say. Of course censorship is also aa considerable layer of friction but the legacy financial system has a lot more frictions than just censorship.

The last time you mentioned that Bitcoin is also "frictionless programmable money", I responded that I didn't really know what you mean by that. I was hoping for an explanation or some examples.

Then while thinking about it, I realized that Bitcoin has several kinds of friction, some of which are essential to the operation of the network itself.

Bitcoin is frictionless compared to the legacy financial system, specially over the internet. Of course it has some friction too (confirmation time and fees) but it is negligible if we compare that with what banks have in terms of frictions.

I still don't know what the use cases of "frictionless programmable money" are, or why Bitcoin is best suited for those uses.

https://openbazaar.org/
http://www.joystream.co/
https://www.changetip.com/

As per example. And that just the beginning. Too bad all of these platforms will have to move to another more desirable blockchain that scales in a competitive manner at some point.

[Holliday]

https://openbazaar.org/
http://www.joystream.co/
https://www.changetip.com/

As per example. And that just the beginning. Too bad all of these platforms will have to move to another more desirable blockchain that scales in a competitive manner at some point.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the examples here really need the raw power of censorship-proof money if there is any chance that bloating the chain with every transaction under the sun (excuse the exaggeration) may actually harm Bitcoin's ability to remain censorship-proof (which I most certainly think it will). I would honestly prefer these transactions never touch the block chain (unless there is some kind of aggregation).

Clearly we disagree on this point and I doubt very much that either of us will be able to see the other's point of view. Perhaps the best answer is truly a fork so both sides can move forward with their specific goals in mind.

I'm curious, do you run a full node knight22?

[knight22]

https://openbazaar.org/
http://www.joystream.co/
https://www.changetip.com/

As per example. And that just the beginning. Too bad all of these platforms will have to move to another more desirable blockchain that scales in a competitive manner at some point.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the examples here really need the raw power of censorship-proof money if there is any chance that bloating the chain with every transaction under the sun (excuse the exaggeration) may actually harm Bitcoin's ability to remain censorship-proof (which I most certainly think it will). I would honestly prefer these transactions never touch the block chain (unless there is some kind of aggregation).

Clearly we disagree on this point and I doubt very much that either of us will be able to see the other's point of view. Perhaps the best answer is truly a fork so both sides can move forward with their specific goals in mind.

I'm curious, do you run a full node knight22?

OpenBazaar and joystream absolutely need censorship-poof money to operate. The thing is, good enough decentralization is good enough. If there is censorship, then these platforms will just migrate to another blockchain. There is no value to add censorship on a blockchain at all.  

To answer your question I do run a node but I don't mind if I can't at some point but I'm also sure the market will come up with cheap solutions so I can continue for a long time ahead regardless of how bitcoin scales.  

[Holliday]

OpenBazaar and joystream absolutely need censorship-poof money to operate.

Why?

The thing is, good enough decentralization is good enough. If there is censorship, then these platforms will just migrate to another blockchain. There is no value to add censorship on a blockchain at all.

I'm not sure what "good enough" decentralization is. If I can't run a full node over a shitty internet connection in an environment that is anti-Bitcoin, then I would say the decentralization is not good enough.

To answer your question I do run a node but I don't mind if I can't at some point but I'm also sure the market will come up with cheap solutions so I can continue for a long time ahead regardless of how bitcoin scales.  

Either you have fantastic resources, gimp your node like I do, or are extremely optimistic. Do you keep track of the bandwidth your node currently uses with the 1mb spam limit in place?

[knight22]

OpenBazaar and joystream absolutely need censorship-poof money to operate.

Why?

OpenBazaar is a decentralized censorship-proof market place and Joystream is an torrent sharing platform with micro-payments to give incentive for better upload.

No need to explain further why they need censorship-proof money.  

The thing is, good enough decentralization is good enough. If there is censorship, then these platforms will just migrate to another blockchain. There is no value to add censorship on a blockchain at all.

I'm not sure what "good enough" decentralization is. If I can't run a full node over a shitty internet connection in an environment that is anti-Bitcoin, then I would say the decentralization is not good enough.

Good enough decentralization is good enough to keep bitcoin censorship-free with all the feature it actually offers. I can't tell how much nodes does that represent (I guess time will tell) but being able to run it on a shitty internet connection is unnecessary although it would be a nice to have.

To answer your question I do run a node but I don't mind if I can't at some point but I'm also sure the market will come up with cheap solutions so I can continue for a long time ahead regardless of how bitcoin scales.  

Either you have fantastic resources, gimp your node like I do, or are extremely optimistic. Do you keep track of the bandwidth your node currently uses with the 1mb spam limit in place?

I guess I'm extremely optimistic but as I said, I don't really mind if I won't be able to run a node at some point. Why should I care anyway? The cat is out of the bag and if bitcoin eventually become too centralized and allow censorship then I'll just move to the next uncensored blockchain just like I will do if the bitcoin blockchain doesn't scale enough.