ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT

[JayJuanGee]

anarchy

Anarchy does not mean "no rules", it means (translated literally from Ancient Greek) "no rulers". We've got the opposite problem; rulers exist, the rules do not (for the rulers, at least)

I beg to differ regarding my perception of the world governance situation - whether that be rules or rulers.. it does not matter to the point that I was making, and accordingly, I stand on my earlier comments. 

In essence, my earlier point was suggesting that there is a lack of world governance, and therefore, a kind of anarchy in any attempt to suppress bitcoin and therefore bitcoin is going to be able to profit from some of this lack of coordination.. in which, even if some national or local governments attempt to ban bitcoin, these various forces are too disjointed and conflicting, and accordingly, bitcoin is going to become stronger and stronger, even if some national governments attempt to take various actions against it.

[iCEBREAKER]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model#Stages

1.  Denial — The first reaction is denial. In this stage individuals believe the diagnosis is somehow mistaken, and cling to a false, preferable reality.

[marcus_of_augustus]

http://xtnodes.com/#bitcoin_classic

ooops, suffered a scary "catastrophe cliff" of some sort?

http://xtnodes.com/#block_explorer

1 block in last 100 ... tell that guy to read his memos.

Stick a fork in it guise ...

[Carlton Banks]

anarchy

Anarchy does not mean "no rules", it means (translated literally from Ancient Greek) "no rulers". We've got the opposite problem; rulers exist, the rules do not (for the rulers, at least)

I beg to differ regarding my perception of the world governance situation - whether that be rules or rulers.. it does not matter to the point that I was making, and accordingly, I stand on my earlier comments. 

No, I wasn't contesting your perception, and I would agree with it broadly. But you described it badly when using the word "anarchy" to confer a lack of consistent governance. It doesn't mean that. That's wrong. You did it again here:

there is a lack of world governance, and therefore, a kind of anarchy

Anarchy doesn't mean "no rules", it means "no rulers".

No rules would be a bad thing. No rulers would be a good thing. Hence, anarchy good, government bad.

[iCEBREAKER]

http://xtnodes.com/#bitcoin_classic

ooops, suffered a scary "catastrophe cliff" of some sort?

http://xtnodes.com/#block_explorer

1 block in last 100 ... tell that guy to read his memos.

Stick a fork in it guise ...

Wow, 1% is higher than I expected.

Slush must be "matching" the actual 0.5% of Classic miners with neutral/nonvoting miners in order to exaggerate Gavinista support.   

Nobody is going to mine Classic blocks once segwit activates.

Will the last Gavinista to leave A16z please turn off the Frappuccino machine?

[adamstgBit]

classic isn't dead!

classic fanboys aren't maybe, but you guys had to be pretty braindead to support it to begin with. Oh no, you're one of these "subtle" fanboys who claimed to "only" support 2MB2MB2MB2MB2MB, right?


Everyone knows Adam, Classic and XT had ZERO to do with scaling, because they weren't credible scaling solutions by any metric, they were designed to slowly strangle Bitcoin (if Gavin Andresen had his way, we'd have 20MB blocks right now, and there'd no chance that people like me could maintain my Bitcoin node).


So, for the umpteenth time, if you haven't got anything sensible to say, be quiet

with thinblocks and other improvements you probably could run a node from home with 100MB blocks ( provided you have a unlimit BW plan, somthing in the order of 50-100$/month  )
not that i care if individual users have to run SPV clients while full node are ran by 1000's of businesses.
what you dismiss as a scaling solution is infact the classical scaling solution.
and you fail to understand that centralization of accessibility to TX on the blockchain is infinitely worse then node centralization.

[Carlton Banks]

Ok Adam, that sounds wonderful, but it isn't Bitcoin. Can we take it that you will be adopting this non-existent currency you're talking about? You're abandoning Bitcoin?

[adamstgBit]

who will open LN channels and make 1000's of payments to each other? poeple like CoinBase and Bitpay.
LN will interconnect these large entities and allow them to settle without the blockchain.
here is a visual representation of the LN scaling solution

[iCEBREAKER]

with thinblocks and other improvements you probably could run a node from home with 100MB blocks ( provided you have a unlimit BW plan, somthing in the order of 50-100$/month  )   
not that i care if individual users have to run SPV clients while full node are ran by 1000's of businesses.   
what you dismiss as a scaling solution is infact the classical scaling solution.   
and you fail to understand that centralization of accessibility to TX on the blockchain is infinitely worse then node centralization.   

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model#Stages

3.  Bargaining — The third stage involves the hope that the individual can avoid a cause of grief. Usually, the negotiation for an extended life is made in exchange for a reformed lifestyle. People facing less serious trauma can bargain or seek compromise.

[CIYAM]

LN will interconnect these large entities and allow them to settle without the blockchain.

Incorrect - as settlement is not possible without the blockchain (do you have a clue how LN actually works?).

Settlement requires channels to be closed and this is done "on the blockchain".

[iCEBREAKER]

  who will open LN channels and make 1000's of payments to each other? poeple like CoinBase and Bitpay.   

  LN will interconnect these large entities and allow them to settle without the blockchain.   

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model#Stages

2.  Anger — When the individual recognizes that denial cannot continue, they become frustrated, especially at proximate individuals. Certain psychological responses of a person undergoing this phase would be: "Why me? It's not fair!"; "How can this happen to me?"; '"Who is to blame?"; "Why would this happen?".

[adamstgBit]

Ok Adam, that sounds wonderful, but it isn't Bitcoin. Can we take it that you will be adopting this non-existent currency you're talking about? You're abandoning Bitcoin?

I am adopting BU (Bitcoin Unlimited). because it is dev.ing in the direction i like, ex. its thinblocks impl.
I hope more and more poeple look into BU and start running BU nodes, i dont know buy the argument that these devs are amateurs. and i dont like cores monopoly over development. i believe in competing impl working hard to have their feathers adopted by miners and nodes, not a handful of poeple dictating what bitcoin is, and what it ought to be.

[BitUsher]

who will open LN channels and make 1000's of payments to each other? poeple like CoinBase and Bitpay.
LN will interconnect these large entities and allow them to settle without the blockchain.
here is a visual representation of the LN scaling solution

What you are discussing is a sidechain like liquid. LN is a p2p solution that requires 100% of payments to settle on the blockchain.
No wonder you are a Classic/BU supporter, you have absolutely no clue how the LN works.

Every single LN transaction is a real on the chain(but delayed from settlement) bitcoin transaction the moment it is initiated.

and i dont like cores monopoly over development.

Another often repeated delusional myth . Explain to me exactly how Core has a monopoly on development? I see a ton of alternative implementations with completely independent teams of developers. Just because people tend to prefer Core's work over others doesn't make them a monopoly.

i believe in competing impl working hard to have their feathers adopted by miners and nodes, not a handful of poeple dictating what bitcoin is, and what it ought to be.

Developers cannot dictate anything, just write code and hope that users/miners/merchants/exchanges accept it. It is all voluntary. You are creating a misleading narrative.

[pereira4]

Well, it seems it's trully over now for Classic camp. Any hope of Classic gaining any relevant notoriery has been destroyed in the past few weeks. The nail in the coffin has been Peter Wiulle delivering segwit on time, the guy is a wizard and we have it on Bitcoin Core dev team.
Also, Gavin failing to convince the chinese miners that 2MB block size was needed and banning anyone Core-related on that meeting was it.

[iCEBREAKER]

I am adopting BU (Bitcoin Unlimited). because it is dev.ing in the direction i like, ex. its thinblocks impl.   

I hope more and more poeple look into BU and start running BU nodes, i dont know buy the argument that these devs are amateurs. and i dont like cores monopoly over development. i believe in competing impl working hard to have their feathers adopted by miners and nodes, not a handful of poeple dictating what bitcoin is, and what it ought to be.   

5.  Acceptance — "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it, I may as well prepare for it."
In this last stage, individuals embrace mortality or inevitable future, or that of a loved one, or other tragic event. People dying may precede the survivors in this state, which typically comes with a calm, retrospective view for the individual, and a stable condition of emotions.

[adamstgBit]

who will open LN channels and make 1000's of payments to each other? poeple like CoinBase and Bitpay.
LN will interconnect these large entities and allow them to settle without the blockchain.
here is a visual representation of the LN scaling solution

What you are discussing is a sidechain like liquid. LN is a p2p solution that requires 100% of payments to settle on the blockchain.
No wonder you are a Classic/BU supporter, you have absolutely no clue how the LN works.

Every single LN transaction is a real on the chain(but delayed) bitcoin transaction the moment it is initiated.

1000's of TX are boiled down to and open and close TX on the blockchain, sure, this is fine this is good. but if we only allow these types of open and close TX on the blockchain ( by strictly limiting blockspace and having high fees ) we end up forcing individual users into trusting someone like coinbase ( how is in a position to utilize the LN ) to with their bitcoin TX.

Grass Hill Alpaca will not start using LN, it will use let bitpay deal with that sort of thing.
bitpay will not open millions of channels to users it will open them with Coinbase or bitfinex, users will be allowed to pay bitpay using coinbase account without there TX ever hitting the blockchain, because LN interconnects bitpay and coinbase.

kinda like you need to go through a bank to do a e-transfer, you'll need to go through something like coinbase to do a Bitcoin TX to pay for your morning coffee.

[CIYAM]

1000's of TX are boiled down to and open and close TX on the blockchain, sure, this is fine this is good. but if we only allow these types of open and close TX on the blockchain ( by strictly limiting blockspace and having high fees ) we end up forcing individual users into trusting someone like coinbase ( how is in a position to utilize the LN ) to with their bitcoin TX.

Wrong (again for about the 100th time).

You clearly don't understand how LN works (most likely on purpose as you refuse to read anything about it and ignore everything that is posted in reply to your silly posts) - why won't you educate yourself rather than posting FUD again and again?

(or do you find the truth a pesky thing that gets in the way of your FUD?)

[BitUsher]

1000's of TX are boiled down to and open and close TX on the blockchain, sure, this is fine this is good. but if we only allow these types of open and close TX on the blockchain ( by strictly limiting blockspace and having high fees ) we end up forcing individual users into trusting someone like coinbase ( how is in a position to utilize the LN ) to with their bitcoin TX.

Grass Hill Alpaca will not start using LN, it will use let bitpay deal with that sort of thing.
bitpay will not open millions of channels to users it will open them with Coinbase or bitfinex, users will be allowed to pay bitpay using coinbase account without there TX ever hitting the blockchain, because LN interconnects bitpay and coinbase.

kinda like you need to go through a bank to do a e-transfer, you'll need to go through something like coinbase to do a Bitcoin TX to pay for your morning coffee.

The exact opposite is the case with the LN. LN allows untrusting parties to perform instant and secure confirmations without needing a hub or third party like coinbase/bitpay. LN will be tightly integrated within wallets where users can choose to make regular or LN payments and Anyone will be able to open up LN channels. Yes coinbase/bitpay will have their own LN channel but so will many others as well. You are under a very naive impression that only coinbase/bitpay has large pools of liquidity. Do you know how many large bagholders their are that are cryptoanarchists to provide KYC free and anonymous pools of liquidity?

Don't let your narrative blind you from the facts.

[adamstgBit]

these are my concerns with LN + small blocks, maybe i'm way off... maybe going through somthing like coinbase to pay for morning coffee is acceptable, maybe fees on the blockchain will only prohibit these tiny <25$ payments. maybe this is the best course to follow. IDK i'm just here chitchat about this FUD on my mind.

[Carlton Banks]

Ok Adam, that sounds wonderful, but it isn't Bitcoin. Can we take it that you will be adopting this non-existent currency you're talking about? You're abandoning Bitcoin?

I am adopting BU (Bitcoin Unlimited).

Why not adopt a real currency, instead of a hard-fork stalking horse? BU successfully forking the blockchain is about as likely as XT doing the same at this point. Dogecoin, maybe?