Poll: Mike H. Interview - Convincing or not?

[brg444]

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.

"Just move to the next blockchain"

 

If only it could really be so simple as it is in your delusions...

[MicroGuy]

What is the difficulty in moving assets to another blockchain? This does not seem complicated.

--

Not sure how a blockchain with a disorganized core team is going to compete long term with a core that has an organized team. << Thinking otherwise would be the delusional mindset.

[knight22]

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.

"Just move to the next blockchain"

 

If only it could really be so simple as it is in your delusions...

Just wait for an economic incentive to do so and you won't believe how simple it will be. https://shapeshift.io/

Not sure how a blockchain with a disorganized core team is going to compete long term with a core that has an organized team. << Thinking otherwise would be the delusional mindset.

Ask yourself why bitcoin have an organized team then you'll understand why it will happen to another blockchain if necessary.

[tvbcof]

...
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.

Why do you need to kill Bitcoin?  Why not just move on now before it is ruined?

[knight22]

...
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.

Why do you need to kill Bitcoin?  Why not just move on now before it is ruined?

Because there is still no economic incentives to do so, but its coming. If bitcoin is killed it's because it will become irrelevant.

[tss]

you big block supporters for the sake of expanding to the masses really dont get it sometimes.  example... in my hood theres a bus that runs every 10 minutes.  its pretty much empty most of the time except rush hour.  during rush hours some people need to wait for the next bus.  so the proposal is to get a bigger bus and lets keep getting bigger buses so more people can get on.  what you dont realize is if you get a bigger bus this bus company will go out of business before enough people move to the neighborhood to use it.  this is absurd and you are all idiots.  tss out

[knight22]

you big block supporters for the sake of expanding to the masses really dont get it sometimes.  example... in my hood theres a bus that runs every 10 minutes.  its pretty much empty most of the time except rush hour.  during rush hours some people need to wait for the next bus.  so the proposal is to get a bigger bus and lets keep getting bigger buses so more people can get on.  what you dont realize is if you get a bigger bus this bus company will go out of business before enough people move to the neighborhood to use it.  this is absurd and you are all idiots.  tss out

in my hood there is a full blown subway every 4 min because your silly bus every 10 min won't be able to clear all the sheeples.

[tvbcof]

...
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.

Why do you need to kill Bitcoin?  Why not just move on now before it is ruined?

Because there is still no economic incentives to do so, but its coming. If bitcoin is killed it's because it will become irrelevant.

Bitcoin has the mindshare to succeed in some use-cases and to some degree indefinitely.  It will only be 'irrelevant' if it fails to live up to it's promise as a reliable and trusted vehicle for storage and transfer of value.  The most likely way that will happen is exactly as you seem to be anticipating...centralization and censorship.  And the most likely way that will happen is if it outgrows it's potential to be supported in a hostile environment.  I am very confident that this is exactly the goal for certain influential and well financed elements of the ecosystem at this time.

[knight22]

...
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.

Why do you need to kill Bitcoin?  Why not just move on now before it is ruined?

Because there is still no economic incentives to do so, but its coming. If bitcoin is killed it's because it will become irrelevant.

Bitcoin has the mindshare to succeed in some use-cases and to some degree indefinitely.  It will only be 'irrelevant' if it fails to live up to it's promise as a reliable and trusted vehicle for storage and transfer of value. The most likely way that will happen is exactly as you seem to be anticipating...centralization and censorship.  And the most likely way that will happen is if it outgrows it's potential to be supported in a hostile environment.

Reliable also means stay competitive in a competitive environment so it can also fails without centralization and censorship. Bitcoin can't afford to stay behind the curse too long in terms of scaling capacity and competitive fees.

I am very confident that this is exactly the goal for certain influential and well financed elements of the ecosystem at this time.

Who do you have in mind?

[bambou]

Mike and his alikes highlight what is worst in the community.

Bitcoin is suffering the childish attitude of a few irrelevant social spammers, but it shall prevail and exit this crisis reinforced in its fundamentals.

[Zarathustra]

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.

He sounds as always. As the elitist ad hominem spammer destroying also this thread. Unfortunately he believes that he has to be everywhere to take over every thread and having the last word in every case. 30 percent of the posts are written by this pseudo 'bitcoiner'. Disgusting and completely against the idea of Bitcoin.

[Carlton Banks]

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.

He sounds as always. As the elitist ad hominem spammer destroying also this thread. Unfortunately he believes that he has to be everywhere to take over every thread and having the last word in every case. 30 percent of the posts are written by this pseudo 'bitcoiner'. Disgusting and completely against the idea of Bitcoin.

No, you're projecting your own transgressions onto others again. You're supporting the banks taking control of Bitcoin by promoting the accelerated growth of node resource requirements out fo the reach of ordinary users and ordinary miners.

You are the psuedo-bitcoiners, and you are the relentless BS artists in this debate. You cannot alter reality by virtue of continuously re-stating your preferred fantasy, everything you and your cohort have said and done is still here in black and white, and it turns out that the vast majority of genuine bitcoiners were not as gullible as your tactics suggest that you believed. No wonder you're all so incredibly bitter.

[Zarathustra]

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.

He sounds as always. As the elitist ad hominem spammer destroying also this thread. Unfortunately he believes that he has to be everywhere to take over every thread and having the last word in every case. 30 percent of the posts are written by this pseudo 'bitcoiner'. Disgusting and completely against the idea of Bitcoin.

No, you're projecting your own transgressions onto others again. You're supporting the banks taking control of Bitcoin by promoting the accelerated growth of node resource requirements out fo the reach of ordinary users and ordinary miners.

You are the psuedo-bitcoiners, and you are the relentless BS artists in this debate. You cannot alter reality by virtue of continuously re-stating your preferred fantasy, everything you and your cohort have said and done is still here in black and white, and it turns out that the vast majority of genuine bitcoiners were not as gullible as your tactics suggest that you believed. No wonder you're all so incredibly bitter.

You are the one who is bitter. You - like brg444 - are one of those who notoriously attack others ad hominem. Your newest ad hominem attack: "Hearn is a sociopath".

[JeromeL]

Reading Mike Hearn cry on the development emails is the most cringe worthy thing.

Go read the BIP65 deployment thread on the dev emails. He is the only one opposing it, and everyone else is showing consensus.

Constantly stirring up drama, belittling other devs, and arguing like a little kid. So annoying.

Deployment of BIP65 should not be held up just because one dev is giving NACK. Many scalability projects are depending on BIP65 to progress.

When you look at the picture, there is widespread consensus in the technical community to deploy bip65 as a softfork, so there is no reason not to do it.

A NACK embellished with dubious explainations from a controversial person who has started a software propagation war and who has not contributed to core developments since a long time, should be ignored, similarly to Bitcoin nodes ignoring invalid blocks.

[Carlton Banks]

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.

He sounds as always. As the elitist ad hominem spammer destroying also this thread. Unfortunately he believes that he has to be everywhere to take over every thread and having the last word in every case. 30 percent of the posts are written by this pseudo 'bitcoiner'. Disgusting and completely against the idea of Bitcoin.

No, you're projecting your own transgressions onto others again. You're supporting the banks taking control of Bitcoin by promoting the accelerated growth of node resource requirements out fo the reach of ordinary users and ordinary miners.

You are the psuedo-bitcoiners, and you are the relentless BS artists in this debate. You cannot alter reality by virtue of continuously re-stating your preferred fantasy, everything you and your cohort have said and done is still here in black and white, and it turns out that the vast majority of genuine bitcoiners were not as gullible as your tactics suggest that you believed. No wonder you're all so incredibly bitter.

You are the one who is bitter. You - like brg444 - are one of those who notoriously attack others ad hominem. Your newest ad hominem attack: "Hearn is a sociopath".

It's not ad hominem when it's:

• The actual point of an argument
• True

[coalitionfor8mb]

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.

Taking responsibility for your own future implies that you do care about the long term impact of your choices and actions. I know, we all grew up in this consumerist mindset and are not used to things like Bitcoin, so we are still projecting the old thinking onto this new technology. But I'm glad that many now realize that this "Game" is "Just A Lil Bit" different and being conscious and responsible is "How We Do".

Moving to the next (good) blockchain might prove to be difficult as PoW systems are extremely hard to duplicate in order for them to remain secure and independent from each other. We only have a few decent ones to play with and losing the most prominent example and the pioneer of that technology may have devastating effects on the whole crypto-verse in general. I would rather have another similar system make a risky move and experiment, while Bitcoin enjoys its heavyweight champion position and the sense of stability and trust that comes along with it. The leader only responds when being challenged in its area of expertise.

[knight22]

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.

He sounds as always. As the elitist ad hominem spammer destroying also this thread. Unfortunately he believes that he has to be everywhere to take over every thread and having the last word in every case. 30 percent of the posts are written by this pseudo 'bitcoiner'. Disgusting and completely against the idea of Bitcoin.

No, you're projecting your own transgressions onto others again. You're supporting the banks taking control of Bitcoin by promoting the accelerated growth of node resource requirements out fo the reach of ordinary users and ordinary miners.

You are the psuedo-bitcoiners, and you are the relentless BS artists in this debate. You cannot alter reality by virtue of continuously re-stating your preferred fantasy, everything you and your cohort have said and done is still here in black and white, and it turns out that the vast majority of genuine bitcoiners were not as gullible as your tactics suggest that you believed. No wonder you're all so incredibly bitter.

You are the one who is bitter. You - like brg444 - are one of those who notoriously attack others ad hominem. Your newest ad hominem attack: "Hearn is a sociopath".

It's not ad hominem when it's:

• The actual point of an argument
• True

In other word: an ad hominem is not an ad hominem when I do it. Riiiight.  

[worhiper_-_]

Today's the day Mike went 100% cray cray. 

[knight22]

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.

Taking responsibility for your own future implies that you do care about the long term impact of your choices and actions. I know, we all grew up in this consumerist mindset and are not used to things like Bitcoin, so we are still projecting the old thinking onto this new technology. But I'm glad that many now realize that this "Game" is "Just A Lil Bit" different and being conscious and responsible is "How We Do".

Moving to the next (good) blockchain might prove to be difficult as PoW systems are extremely hard to duplicate in order for them to remain secure and independent from each other. We only have a few decent ones to play with and losing the most prominent example and the pioneer of that technology may have devastating effects on the whole crypto-verse in general. I would rather have another similar system make a risky move and experiment, while Bitcoin enjoys its heavyweight champion position and the sense of stability and trust that comes along with it. The leader only responds when being challenged in its area of expertise.

There is nothing hard to change for the next blockchain specially if there is an economic incentive to do so PLUS real capacity limitations. There is nothing magical behind the bitcoin blockchain and if it can't deliver than be it. Trust is hard to gain but easy to loose. You won't be able to stop me and most of the market participant to move to something else and there will be no coming back. Just wait and watch.

[coalitionfor8mb]

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.

Taking responsibility for your own future implies that you do care about the long term impact of your choices and actions. I know, we all grew up in this consumerist mindset and are not used to things like Bitcoin, so we are still projecting the old thinking onto this new technology. But I'm glad that many now realize that this "Game" is "Just A Lil Bit" different and being conscious and responsible is "How We Do".

Moving to the next (good) blockchain might prove to be difficult as PoW systems are extremely hard to duplicate in order for them to remain secure and independent from each other. We only have a few decent ones to play with and losing the most prominent example and the pioneer of that technology may have devastating effects on the whole crypto-verse in general. I would rather have another similar system make a risky move and experiment, while Bitcoin enjoys its heavyweight champion position and the sense of stability and trust that comes along with it. The leader only responds when being challenged in its area of expertise.

There is nothing hard to change for the next blockchain specially if there is an economic incentive to do so PLUS real capacity limitations. There is nothing magical behind the bitcoin blockchain and if it can't deliver than be it. Trust is hard to gain but easy to loose. You won't be able to stop me and most of the market participant to move to something else and there will be no coming back. Just wait and watch.

1) "nothing hard". Oh, "You Don't Know!" how hard it is to build the excessive hash-power that controls the coins emission schedule and secures the network at the same time. It takes a lot of time and there has to be a very good reason to even begin thinking about trying to duplicate that.

2) "nothing magical". There sure has been a whole lot of "magical smoke" floating around this forum in recent months as the beam of "cluons" is getting stronger than ever.

3) Trust is indeed "hard to gain", that's why Bitcoin is not in position to make some stupid moves without careful considerations of their potential impact on the future of the whole crypto-currency idea.

4) Moving to "something else" is just fine, I'm also watching this space from many different perspectives and consider a healthy competitive environment as a positive thing in general.

5) Of course, I do! And you too "Just Watch!"