beastmodeBiscuitGravy
|
|
June 14, 2016, 07:37:36 PM |
|
I wonder if Masha Sha is related to Ma Ya. The small block propagandist on the chinese forum 8btc. I'm looking for apologies from those that got down on their knees for Blockstream, bought the fear campaign, and now left us with inadequate capacity for a halving rally. https://bitcoinfees.21.co/The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 80 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top. For the median transaction size of 258 bytes, this results in a fee of 20,640 satoshis (0.13$). There's over 4.7 BTC in fees sitting in the mempool. 25,000 transactions worth 134,000 BTC... just sitting there. All because Maxwell's company scared you... shameful. I'll be awaiting apologies here. vvvvvvvvv
|
|
|
|
Masha Sha (OP)
|
|
June 14, 2016, 07:44:32 PM |
|
I'm looking for apologies from those that got down on their knees for Blockstream, bought the fear campaign, and now left us with inadequate capacity for a halving rally. https://bitcoinfees.21.co/The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 80 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top. For the median transaction size of 258 bytes, this results in a fee of 20,640 satoshis (0.13$). There's over 4.7 BTC in fees sitting in the mempool. 25,000 transactions worth 134,000 BTC... just sitting there. All because Maxwell's company scared you... shameful. I'll be awaiting apologies here. vvvvvvvvv You have a strong argument. What I didn't like about the solutions proposed is how temporary and disruptive they were. For example at each halving block size x10 would be more realistic if the road of increase transactions must be taken. No idea. WTF is a "pond duration storage solution"?
Typo... I wanted to write long duration... But pound storage(underwater is quite discrete:))
|
/sarc /snowflakeshield /iammorevirtuousthanyou /2692 /pixelsonscreeen /fuckthemusep2p /p2p=love
|
|
|
rizzlarolla
|
|
June 14, 2016, 07:55:01 PM |
|
if the road of increase transactions must be taken.
What other road is there? Oh yeah, the Luke jr. road to less transactions, or the core road to nowhere fast. Please explain to me how increasing fees, scarce block space and continuing user adoption can work together?
|
|
|
|
franky1
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4228
Merit: 4501
|
|
June 14, 2016, 07:56:18 PM |
|
You have a strong argument. What I didn't like about the solutions proposed is how temporary and disruptive they were. For example at each halving block size x10 would be more realistic if the road of increase transactions must be taken.
10x scaling per halving? ok we are at 1mb for last few years, this is your maths for 10x scaling 2016 10mb 2020 100mb 2024 1gb 2028 10gb 2032 100gb have you not read my post that had realistic numbers of about a maximum of 500mb in 16 years far far far less then your 100gb or 1tb predictions. the lower number i quoted is both achievable and non impacting on users usage or costs of use. and like i said maximum. meaning as long as the $ bitcoin price rises the requirement for even 500mb scaling becomes less needed to cover costs, which you ellude to as being the big thing you care about but dont understand
|
I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER. Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
|
|
|
Kprawn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1073
|
|
June 14, 2016, 07:57:19 PM |
|
I'm looking for apologies from those that got down on their knees for Blockstream, bought the fear campaign, and now left us with inadequate capacity for a halving rally. https://bitcoinfees.21.co/The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 80 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top. For the median transaction size of 258 bytes, this results in a fee of 20,640 satoshis (0.13$). There's over 4.7 BTC in fees sitting in the mempool. 25,000 transactions worth 134,000 BTC... just sitting there. All because Maxwell's company scared you... shameful. I'll be awaiting apologies here. vvvvvvvvv Just 0.13$ .... It's still way cheaper than any other competitive system, where cross border transfer of currency is involved. .... Nobody scared anyone... what will be scary, is when the whole experiment fails because the Block size were increased without good reason. The other side of the coin is, people were scared into thinking the roof were coming down, when the foundation were still strong enough to handle a lot more..
|
|
|
|
RodeoX
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1147
The revolution will be monetized!
|
|
June 14, 2016, 07:59:45 PM |
|
Blocksize will still need to be increased. Just because the price went up does not mean our problems are solved.
|
|
|
|
beastmodeBiscuitGravy
|
|
June 14, 2016, 08:01:20 PM |
|
I'm looking for apologies from those that got down on their knees for Blockstream, bought the fear campaign, and now left us with inadequate capacity for a halving rally. https://bitcoinfees.21.co/The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 80 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top. For the median transaction size of 258 bytes, this results in a fee of 20,640 satoshis (0.13$). There's over 4.7 BTC in fees sitting in the mempool. 25,000 transactions worth 134,000 BTC... just sitting there. All because Maxwell's company scared you... shameful. I'll be awaiting apologies here. vvvvvvvvv Just 0.13$ .... It's still way cheaper than any other competitive system, where cross border transfer of currency is involved. .... Nobody scared anyone... what will be scary, is when the whole experiment fails because the Block size were increased without good reason. The other side of the coin is, people were scared into thinking the roof were coming down, when the foundation were still strong enough to handle a lot more.. Bitcoin doesn't have a monopoly on cryptographic value transfer, there is a point at which rational people switch to alternatives. ETH investors are counting on you keeping this mindset.
|
|
|
|
franky1
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4228
Merit: 4501
|
|
June 14, 2016, 08:02:57 PM |
|
Bitcoin doesn't have a monopoly on cryptographic value transfer, there is a point at which rational people switch to alternatives.
CORE do have the monopoly... and.. here is the biscuit to go with your gravy, CORE also have the monopoly to switch people to THEIR alternatives (sidechains) maxwell and lukes morals have been bought and twisted over to altcoin lovers. they have lost desire in expanding bitcoin maxwell loves his monero and sidechains and luke loves the profits merge mining alts.. they dont care about bitcoins utility
|
I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER. Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
|
|
|
Masha Sha (OP)
|
|
June 14, 2016, 08:07:44 PM |
|
You have a strong argument. What I didn't like about the solutions proposed is how temporary and disruptive they were. For example at each halving block size x10 would be more realistic if the road of increase transactions must be taken.
10x scaling per halving? ok we are at 1mb for last few years, this is your maths for 10x scaling 2016 10mb 2020 100mb 2024 1gb 2028 10gb 2032 100gb YES. If the blocksize is increased let's increase it massively. No more bullshit once and for all. Every halving 10x more block size. The 2mb proposal was stupid in the sense that it would change nothing and fix only temporarily. By implanting 10x more blocks space at every halving there should be enough space forever...
|
/sarc /snowflakeshield /iammorevirtuousthanyou /2692 /pixelsonscreeen /fuckthemusep2p /p2p=love
|
|
|
franky1
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4228
Merit: 4501
|
|
June 14, 2016, 08:17:23 PM |
|
You have a strong argument. What I didn't like about the solutions proposed is how temporary and disruptive they were. For example at each halving block size x10 would be more realistic if the road of increase transactions must be taken.
10x scaling per halving? ok we are at 1mb for last few years, this is your maths for 10x scaling 2016 10mb 2020 100mb 2024 1gb 2028 10gb 2032 100gb YES. If the blocksize is increased let's increase it massively. No more bullshit once and for all. Every halving 10x more block size. The 2mb proposal was stupid in the sense that it would change nothing and fix only temporarily. By implanting 10x more blocks space at every halving there should be enough space forever... personally the size of the blocks should be whatever mining pool servers can cope with.. for instance even if there was a hard limit of 10mb. the mining pools can make any size block they like going from 200bytes to 10mb.. but one thing is for sure. if the network could only handle 4mb right now(its more but anyway) that is all we would get, because anything more than what the network can work with, would just start causing lots of orphans and system lag there is no reason to push for high numbers up, just as much as there is no reason to hold low numbers down. all we need to do is get scaling up without it causing a 2year delay/discuss scheme where nothing is done each time we should not need permission from coders. or their dooms day. infact the best solution is no hard code that requires downloading updates from one source to grow. but instead a "network alert" that prompts the limit to change at block X when the requirement to expand is needed. no coder debate. no 2 year discussion.. just a change of settings that occur within a program when needed
|
I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER. Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
|
|
|
countryfree
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3052
Merit: 1047
Your country may be your worst enemy
|
|
June 14, 2016, 10:36:49 PM |
|
You have a strong argument. What I didn't like about the solutions proposed is how temporary and disruptive they were. For example at each halving block size x10 would be more realistic if the road of increase transactions must be taken.
10x scaling per halving? ok we are at 1mb for last few years, this is your maths for 10x scaling 2016 10mb 2020 100mb 2024 1gb 2028 10gb 2032 100gb have you not read my post that had realistic numbers of about a maximum of 500mb in 16 years far far far less then your 100gb or 1tb predictions. the lower number i quoted is both achievable and non impacting on users usage or costs of use. and like i said maximum. meaning as long as the $ bitcoin price rises the requirement for even 500mb scaling becomes less needed to cover costs, which you ellude to as being the big thing you care about but dont understand This isn't the first time I see a plan, with a timetable, and I think it doesn't make sense as no one can predict BTC's future growth. I would like it better if there could be some automatic adjustment, or a single rule that no block shall be more than half full.
|
I used to be a citizen and a taxpayer. Those days are long gone.
|
|
|
DooMAD
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3794
Merit: 3155
Leave no FUD unchallenged
|
|
June 14, 2016, 10:48:29 PM |
|
*Also in the thread to state unequivocally that they aren't apologising for shit* This isn't the first time I see a plan, with a timetable, and I think it doesn't make sense as no one can predict BTC's future growth. I would like it better if there could be some automatic adjustment, or a single rule that no block shall be more than half full. For automated and coded solutions that don't rely on human input, people should have paid closer attention to BIP106 (particularly the second variant, which can take a while to wrap your head around). With a few tweaks to prevent miners gaming the system and to not increase to blocksize too quickly, it could have been the ideal solution.
|
. .HUGE. | | | | | | █▀▀▀▀ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █▄▄▄▄ | ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ . CASINO & SPORTSBOOK ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ | ▀▀▀▀█ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ ▄▄▄▄█ | | |
|
|
|
yayayo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1024
|
|
June 14, 2016, 11:01:45 PM |
|
YES. If the blocksize is increased let's increase it massively. No more bullshit once and for all. Every halving 10x more block size. The 2mb proposal was stupid in the sense that it would change nothing and fix only temporarily. By implanting 10x more blocks space at every halving there should be enough space forever...
No matter how dumb the XT and ClassicCoin proposals were, you can still find people that demand the maximization of idiocy. These bigblock-fanatics enjoy spreading their doomsday cult that is irrefutable by empiric evidence, because all its "reasoning" is based on religious delusion. These people will never apologize, since they are not able to learn from facts. Bitcoin in its current state as a decentralized network doesn't scale well enough to allow for every lolly to be settled as an individual transaction on the blockchain. Demanding that shows a lack of basic technological reasoning. A solution for microtransactions is already being implemented: Lightning Networks. This will allow for efficient scalability without putting Bitcoin's decentralization at risk. ya.ya.yo!
|
|
|
|
. ..1xBit.com Super Six.. | ▄█████████████▄ ████████████▀▀▀ █████████████▄ █████████▌▀████ ██████████ ▀██ ██████████▌ ▀ ████████████▄▄ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ▀██████████████ | ███████████████ █████████████▀ █████▀▀ ███▀ ▄███ ▄ ██▄▄████▌ ▄█ ████████ ████████▌ █████████ ▐█ ██████████ ▐█ ███████▀▀ ▄██ ███▀ ▄▄▄█████ ███ ▄██████████ ███████████████ | ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████▀▀▀█ ██████████ ███████████▄▄▄█ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ | ▄█████ ▄██████ ▄███████ ▄████████ ▄█████████ ▄██████████ ▄███████████ ▄████████████ ▄█████████████ ▄██████████████ ▀▀███████████ ▀▀███████ ▀▀██▀ | ▄▄██▌ ▄▄███████ █████████▀ ▄██▄▄▀▀██▀▀ ▄██████ ▄▄▄ ███████ ▄█▄ ▄ ▀██████ █ ▀█ ▀▀▀ ▄ ▀▄▄█▀ ▄▄█████▄ ▀▀▀ ▀████████ ▀█████▀ ████ ▀▀▀ █████ █████ | ▄ █▄▄ █ ▄ ▀▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀ ▄▄█████▄█▄▄ ▄ ▄███▀ ▀▀ ▀▀▄ ▄██▄███▄ ▀▀▀▀▄ ▄▄ ▄████████▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄██ ████████████▀▀ █ ▐█ ██████████████▄ ▄▄▀██▄██ ▐██████████████ ▄███ ████▀████████████▄███▀ ▀█▀ ▐█████████████▀ ▐████████████▀ ▀█████▀▀▀ █▀ | . Premier League LaLiga Serie A | . Bundesliga Ligue 1 Primeira Liga | | . ..TAKE PART.. |
|
|
|
Swimmer63
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1593
Merit: 1004
|
|
June 14, 2016, 11:47:52 PM |
|
So why not increase the block reward by 10 and the block size by 10 too? We come back to the distribution problematic and what does it means to have a protocol. It's clear that for early adopters bigger block less rewards more users is the way to wealth... Nothing to do with the success of Bitcoin. Individual greed at its finest...
Remembers the dollars does everything of Bitcoin will ever be able to do as a currency... It even sent people to the moon.
If you can't make the distinction between small technical adjustments to handle growth and changing the block reward I can't help you. No one can. One Satoshi talked about changing. The other is one of the most fundamental characteristics of bitcoin that Satoshi said would NEVER be changed.
|
|
|
|
jbreher
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1660
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
|
|
June 15, 2016, 02:29:47 AM |
|
Bitcoin in its current state as a decentralized network doesn't scale well enough to allow for every lolly to be settled as an individual transaction on the blockchain.
Please show your math.
|
Anyone with a campaign ad in their signature -- for an organization with which they are not otherwise affiliated -- is automatically deducted credibility points.
I've been convicted of heresy. Convicted by a mere known extortionist. Read my Trust for details.
|
|
|
Swimmer63
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1593
Merit: 1004
|
|
June 15, 2016, 03:08:37 AM |
|
Bitcoin in its current state as a decentralized network doesn't scale well enough to allow for every lolly to be settled as an individual transaction on the blockchain.
Please show your math. Right. That's we need to increase the block size. I'm glad you see that.
|
|
|
|
|