Time to stand up to the XT shills here!

[pedrog]

More than 4000 unconfirmed transactions, total size 3382.8271 (KB), latest blocks very near 1MB.

https://blockchain.info/en/unconfirmed-transactions

I wouldn't call this "barely any activity on the network."

[Zarathustra]

By the way your forum "forks" are nothing but unproductive circlejerks.

When I compare those threads with yours, I know who is unproductive and who is productive:

https://bitco.in/forum/threads/bitcoin-unlimited-ideas-arguments-and-proposals.123/

Please tell me you didn't just linked me to the Bitcoin Unlimited thread, a spherical cow pipedream that's never going to see the light of the day  

Who's going to develop it, Peter R & cypherdoc ?

The devs.
Your unproductive fulltime brabbling here will never result in anything useful but the opposite: You and your alikes are the best enemies of core. You are doing great, together with the mods. Go on! Or do you think Adam should be happy with such 'help'?

[brg444]

More than 4000 unconfirmed transactions, total size 3382.8271 (KB), latest blocks very near 1MB.

https://blockchain.info/en/unconfirmed-transactions

I wouldn't call this "barely any activity on the network."

Yep, mostly uneconomic spam not valuable enough for their sender to include a reasonable fee.

[CIYAM]

XT Guru: "Hey - Satoshi - you've got a great idea there. Now to make it really appeal we should engineer it so that rather than caring about boring things like changing the world's remittance or settlement systems we should focus on teens getting paid to make pointless posts on forums so they can later buy coffees at Starbucks."

Satoshi: "Wow - I never would have come up with that idea - pure genius. You should be the CEO of Bitcoin!"

[pereira4]

Im all up for free discussion, but XT is shit. It is not only against the decentralization of nodes principle as above everything else (the most fundamental one), but it as all the dodgy anti anonymity features as well (the fishy anti TOR code..)

[brg444]

By the way your forum "forks" are nothing but unproductive circlejerks.

When I compare those threads with yours, I know who is unproductive and who is productive:

https://bitco.in/forum/threads/bitcoin-unlimited-ideas-arguments-and-proposals.123/

Please tell me you didn't just linked me to the Bitcoin Unlimited thread, a spherical cow pipedream that's never going to see the light of the day  

Who's going to develop it, Peter R & cypherdoc ?

The devs.
Your unproductive fulltime brabbling here will never result in anything useful but the opposite: You and your alikes are the best enemies of core. You are doing great, together with the mods. Go on! Or do you think Adam should be happy with such 'help'?

I'm doing my job supporting Bitcoin, running my node and buying coins.

You, on the other hand are promoting contentious forks from incompetent individuals. I wouldn't say that's productive now, would ya?

[hdbuck]

By the way your forum "forks" are nothing but unproductive circlejerks.

When I compare those threads with yours, I know who is unproductive and who is productive:

https://bitco.in/forum/threads/bitcoin-unlimited-ideas-arguments-and-proposals.123/

Please tell me you didn't just linked me to the Bitcoin Unlimited thread, a spherical cow pipedream that's never going to see the light of the day 

Who's going to develop it, Peter R & cypherdoc ?

The devs.
Your unproductive fulltime brabbling here will never result in anything useful but the opposite: You and your alikes are the best enemies of core. You are doing great, together with the mods. Go on! Or do you think Adam should be happy with such 'help'?

I'm doing my job supporting Bitcoin, running my node and buying coins.

You, on the other hand are promoting contentious forks from incompetent individuals. I wouldn't say that's productive now, would ya?

he probably does not even have a full coin...

[Zarathustra]

By the way your forum "forks" are nothing but unproductive circlejerks.

When I compare those threads with yours, I know who is unproductive and who is productive:

https://bitco.in/forum/threads/bitcoin-unlimited-ideas-arguments-and-proposals.123/

Please tell me you didn't just linked me to the Bitcoin Unlimited thread, a spherical cow pipedream that's never going to see the light of the day 

Who's going to develop it, Peter R & cypherdoc ?

The devs.
Your unproductive fulltime brabbling here will never result in anything useful but the opposite: You and your alikes are the best enemies of core. You are doing great, together with the mods. Go on! Or do you think Adam should be happy with such 'help'?

I'm doing my job supporting Bitcoin, running my node and buying coins.

You, on the other hand are promoting contentious forks from incompetent individuals. I wouldn't say that's productive now, would ya?

he probably does not even have a full coin...

Both of you joined the forum around alltime high price. Must be the reason why you are so angry and notoriously attacking ad hominem.

[yayayo]

he probably does not even have a full coin...

Maybe Gavin and Mike promised him a full XTcoin if he is successful in promoting this altcoin. That would explain his motivation - assuming that he is only half and not full retard.

ya.ya.yo!

[brg444]

Both of you joined the forum around alltime high price. Must be the reason why you are so angry and notoriously attacking ad hominem.

Yep, you scared.

[Zarathustra]

err.. Bit rich Ciyam, since you started this 'with us against us' thread !?

Funny - as I'm not on any side (am just against the XT shilling and Mike Hearn's approach).

It is the XT supporters that are demanding people to "take sides" (and attacking anyone that isn't on theirs but it would be better if the ad-homs were not being used by anyone).

It's not the big block supporters who are censoring, banning, DDoSing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_mentality

Agreed. Banning, censoring and DDoSing is victim mentality. Healthy people would never do such things.

[hdbuck]

Both of you joined the forum around alltime high price. Must be the reason why you are so angry and notoriously attacking ad hominem.

Yep, you scared.

lel yet another example of extrapolating shit from some random dates.

zomg in 2020 there will be 20GB blocks with 1pb domestic wifi and free coffee tips for the whole african continent!!1 XD

such research! ^^

edit: classic shill, did not even bother to refute the fact that he probably does not own a single bitcoin.

[pedrog]

More than 4000 unconfirmed transactions, total size 3382.8271 (KB), latest blocks very near 1MB.

https://blockchain.info/en/unconfirmed-transactions

I wouldn't call this "barely any activity on the network."

Yep, mostly uneconomic spam not valuable enough for their sender to include a reasonable fee.

Microtransactions, if that's what you're referring to, are not spam, if people want to make big transactions and pay a big fee there are lots of better systems than bitcoin.

"I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume."

Not

I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be no (bitcoin) transaction volume or the volume development team thinks is valuable enough to occur.

[hdbuck]

More than 4000 unconfirmed transactions, total size 3382.8271 (KB), latest blocks very near 1MB.
https://blockchain.info/en/unconfirmed-transactions
I wouldn't call this "barely any activity on the network."

Yep, mostly uneconomic spam not valuable enough for their sender to include a reasonable fee.

Microtransactions, if that's what you're referring to, are not spam, if I people want to make big transactions and pay a fee fee there are lots of better systems than bitcoin.

i am all ears, please do enlight.

"I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume."
Not
I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or the volume development team thinks is valuable enough to occur.

could we be done with the appeals to authority by now?
dont you think satoshi left exactly to avoid such childish arguments and titty sucking decision making?

seriously, i dont know who this satoshi is, nor what he meant back then, yet he also implemented a anti-spam bock size and bitcoin is still alive and running as far as i am concerned.

in the end, it drives lots of interest and people are free to use it or not.

[brg444]

More than 4000 unconfirmed transactions, total size 3382.8271 (KB), latest blocks very near 1MB.

https://blockchain.info/en/unconfirmed-transactions

I wouldn't call this "barely any activity on the network."

Yep, mostly uneconomic spam not valuable enough for their sender to include a reasonable fee.

Microtransactions, if that's what you're referring to, are not spam, if people want to make big transactions and pay a big fee there are lots of better systems than bitcoin.

"I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume."

Not

I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be no (bitcoin) transaction volume or the volume development team thinks is valuable enough to occur.

Bitcoin denominated transactions can be made outside of the Bitcoin's blockchain. Microtransactions are simply not compatible with engineering demand of the blockchain and will be relegated to payment channels soon enough.

Bitcoin is in fact best suited for large transactions (settlements).

If a transaction is not valuable enough to cover the costs of the network security then it doesn't belong on the blockchain.

[Carlton Banks]

More than 4000 unconfirmed transactions, total size 3382.8271 (KB), latest blocks very near 1MB.

https://blockchain.info/en/unconfirmed-transactions

I wouldn't call this "barely any activity on the network."

Yep, mostly uneconomic spam not valuable enough for their sender to include a reasonable fee.

Microtransactions, if that's what you're referring to, are not spam, if I people want to make big transactions and pay a fee fee there are lots of better systems than bitcoin.

"I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume."

Not

I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or the volume development team thinks is valuable enough to occur.

But even Saint Gavin concedes that the blockchain can never be big enough to allow for VISA levels of transactions, let alone economic micro-payments, not even with his BIP-never-happened 20 MB schedule. The approach that the Core people are taking is:

• re-engineer multi-sig so it's more space efficient on the blockchain
• implement a simplified version of lightning that uses less space and does not need so many new opcodes

That will take care of actual micro payments, and VISA network stuff. Using the main blockchain is still the best option for a lot of typical use, e.g. if you want to send money to one person directly but not instantly. So, if expanding the blocksize can never achieve any of that anyway, why try solving the problem that way at all?

[pedrog]

More than 4000 unconfirmed transactions, total size 3382.8271 (KB), latest blocks very near 1MB.

https://blockchain.info/en/unconfirmed-transactions

I wouldn't call this "barely any activity on the network."

Yep, mostly uneconomic spam not valuable enough for their sender to include a reasonable fee.

Microtransactions, if that's what you're referring to, are not spam, if people want to make big transactions and pay a big fee there are lots of better systems than bitcoin.

"I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume."

Not

I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be no (bitcoin) transaction volume or the volume development team thinks is valuable enough to occur.

Bitcoin denominated transactions can be made outside of the Bitcoin's blockchain. Microtransactions are simply not compatible with engineering demand of the blockchain and will be relegated to payment channels soon enough.

Bitcoin is in fact best suited for large transactions (settlements).

If a transaction is not valuable enough to cover the costs of the network security then it doesn't belong on the blockchain.

From current volume to VISA level volume there are a lot of numbers between...

Network is saturated today, the problem is right now!

[CIYAM]

Network is saturated today, the problem is right now!

Only by *spam* not by real transactions - and no doubt these spam attacks are actually by XT supporters who want to keep trying to say that it is so important that we need to change (and put Mike Hearn in charge) now.

No-one is using Bitcoin for everyday purchases even (I don't know anyone who does - including myself).

So you can go on and on about the bullshit txs representing "real txs" but that is simply not the case.

For a start - you would need to be "paid in BTC" to want to be spending it for everyday purchases - now apart from ad-siggers getting paid tiny amounts who is actually being paid in BTC now?

(answer - no-one - this is just another part of the XT misinformation)

[brg444]

Network is saturated today, the problem is right now!

 

Not tonight, dear

[pedrog]

Bitcoin denominated transactions can be made outside of the Bitcoin's blockchain. Microtransactions are simply not compatible with engineering demand of the blockchain and will be relegated to payment channels soon enough.

Bitcoin is in fact best suited for large transactions (settlements).

If a transaction is not valuable enough to cover the costs of the network security then it doesn't belong on the blockchain.

Is that what Blockstream has decided bitcoin should be?

Because that's not the original plan...

>Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
>> I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully
>> peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party.
>>
>> The paper is available at:
>> http://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
>
>We very, very much need such a system, but the way I understand your
>proposal, it does not seem to scale to the required size.
>
>For transferable proof of work tokens to have value, they must have
>monetary value. To have monetary value, they must be transferred within
>a very large network - for example a file trading network akin to
>bittorrent.
>
>To detect and reject a double spending event in a timely manner, one
>must have most past transactions of the coins in the transaction, which,
> naively implemented, requires each peer to have most past
>transactions, or most past transactions that occurred recently. If
>hundreds of millions of people are doing transactions, that is a lot of
>bandwidth - each must know all, or a substantial part thereof.
>


Long before the network gets anywhere near as large as that, it would be safe
for users to use Simplified Payment Verification (section to check for
double spending, which only requires having the chain of block headers, or
about 12KB per day. Only people trying to create new coins would need to run
network nodes. At first, most users would run network nodes, but as the
network grows beyond a certain point, it would be left more and more to
specialists with server farms of specialized hardware. A server farm would
only need to have one node on the network and the rest of the LAN connects with
that one node.

The bandwidth might not be as prohibitive as you think. A typical transaction
would be about 400 bytes (ECC is nicely compact). Each transaction has to be
broadcast twice, so lets say 1KB per transaction. Visa processed 37 billion
transactions in FY2008, or an average of 100 million transactions per day.
That many transactions would take 100GB of bandwidth, or the size of 12 DVD or
2 HD quality movies, or about $18 worth of bandwidth at current prices.

If the network were to get that big, it would take several years, and by then,
sending 2 HD movies over the Internet would probably not seem like a big deal.

Satoshi Nakamoto