The Blocksize Debate & Concerns

[franky1]

lol, oh carlton. go play with your monero

i know i have angered you by highlighting your plans to throw luke Jr to the curb in a couple months in the same style as hearn and gavin. so now everyone knows what dribble to expect from you, its no longer going to be drama. (which has angered you as a known provocateur who wants drama)

and by the way i have looked at your history and 98% is insulting other people.

anyway back to the topic at hand.
lets find out from the other blockstreamers if they will do the same kick to the curb antics of "luke Jrs release will be an altcoin" as another way to keep the blocksize contention alive so that its made as hard as possible to implement across the network

[1715385594]

1715385594

[1715385594]

1715385594

[1715385594]

1715385594

[1715385594]

1715385594

[Carlton Banks]

Franky, it doesn't matter how many times you repeat-repeat-repeat this "Lukejr and his altcoin are dancing with wolves" word salad, I and everyone else have no idea what you're talking about. Please explain lol. In detail.

[franky1]

Franky, it doesn't matter how many times you repeat-repeat-repeat this "Lukejr and his altcoin are dancing with wolves" word salad, I and everyone else have no idea what you're talking about. Please explain lol. In detail.

every implimentation that validates bitcoin data and relays bitcoin data... but is not a bitcoin-core release because it includes code for a hard fork, you have deemed an altcoin..

come on, theres a 90page topic made by icebreaker that you love so much. purely trying super hard to shout out that anything with hard fork code is an altcoin.
BU(which funnily last year you actually liked) then XT, then classic.. next is the bitcoinLjr im guessing

but goodluck with your job on the comedy circuit.. i have even used one of my browser tools to remind me of your only "skills"

[Carlton Banks]

Um, in legible English? I genuinely can't make sense of what you're saying

[jonald_fyookball]

Where nullc conclusively demonstrates that free market incentives will never work for Bitcoin mining:



Miners must never be called upon to determine the size of their own blocks. This power shall be centralized into the hands of the Core technicians, thus correcting an extreme mistake and oversight in satoshi's original design.

Extra points for using the emotional buzzword "censoring" to describe rational economic behavior of miners in the operation of their business.

Nice to see that some intelligent folks on reddit are seeing what's really going on
with blockstream. 

[Carlton Banks]

Jonald, that's a reddit post from nullc. nullc is gmaxwell. Who did you think it was? (it helps to read things you endorse lol)

[RealBitcoin]

Jonald, that's a reddit post from nullc. nullc is gmaxwell. Who did you think it was? (it helps to read things you endorse lol)

It's separation of powers, which is obviously good. These guys are bashing the devs but at least the devs add 1 more separation of power to bitcoin, would they really want to give all power to miners.

Here is the bitcoin powerstructure:

Bitcoin Owners = Ultimate Power, they can vote with their coins, and sell the coins as their veto, therefore the bitcoin price should be a voting indicator

Bitcoin Media = Power to influence owners, and to get ideas across to the people. If they push too much propaganda, their ad revenue will shrink and competitors take over.

Bitcoin Businesses = They hold some significant bitcoins, but they are also running a business therefore they must conform to the will of their customers or risk going out of business

Bitcoin Developers = They are the most experts on bitcoin's technical background. Have big influence on the people and can give technical advices, but they still need to be approved by miners and by the owners.

Bitcoin Miners = They have power to vote on technical changes, but they must conform to the wishes of the bitcoin owners, since they are very dependent on them to sustain big prices, because otherwise they go out of business.

Bitcoin Nodes = They are like the accountants of bitcoin , as they verify the integrity of the blockchain, and maintain the technical stability, they are rarely affected by the other 5, and mostly act as observers on these issues.

There are the 6 powers in bitcoin, and we need all of them. Centralization is not an option.

[Carlton Banks]

Not finding fault with that overview. It's a fairly complex social/knowledge based feedback loop, so coming up with a clear description is no mean feat, plaudits.

And this, of course, runs roughshod over the contention that "miners own the network", or that "development team is the new central bank" or any of the other ridiculous over-simplified propaganda spouted by.... I've forgotten which shill said it, probably better that way (and don't get me started mama-jamas... you know you'll get eaten)

[RealBitcoin]

Not finding fault with that overview. It's a fairly complex social/knowledge based feedback loop, so coming up with a clear description is no mean feat, plaudits.

And this, of course, runs roughshod over the contention that "miners own the network", or that "development team is the new central bank" or any of the other ridiculous over-simplified propaganda spouted by.... I've forgotten which shill said it, probably better that way (and don't get me started mama-jamas... you know you'll get eaten)

Of course, if Bob has 14 million bitcoins, he literally owns bitcoin.

The only threat he has is from the miners who will threaten him to censor his transaction if he tries to sell.

But bob can just hardfork out the miners and influence all exchanges and devs with that amount of money to switch to Bobcoin. And the miners that refuse will be mining an empty coin.

So the real power really lies inside the private keys.

[jonald_fyookball]

Jonald, that's a reddit post from nullc. nullc is gmaxwell. Who did you think it was? (it helps to read things you endorse lol)

duh...

i was talking about roger ver, erik vorhees etc.

[Carlton Banks]

Who are they?


(and lol, no you weren't, there is zero reference to those non-entities in the Alice Gored post, unless you've just let slip that Alice Gored is one of them?)

[franky1]

Bitcoin Owners = Ultimate Power, they can vote with their coins, by not transfering their holdings to a segwit keypair as their veto, therefore blocks dont see segwit being used, rendering it useless

had to edit it.
after all bitcoin holders choices are not only "do what devs say or sell coins and F*CK off". they can also just keep hoarding.
i find it a shame that many blockstreamers mindset is "if you dont like the new direction fu*k off" because its totally wrong morally, technically logically and practically.

EG if we moved to Sha3.. bitcoin users can just decide not to use those types of keypairs.. and stick with traditional transactions
EG if we moved to LN.. bitcoin users can just decide not to use locked multisigs.. and stick with traditional transactions
EG if we moved to sidechains.. bitcoin users can just decide not to use locked altcoin.. and stick with traditional transactions

[Cuidler]

Where nullc conclusively demonstrates that free market incentives will never work for Bitcoin mining:

Miners must never be called upon to determine the size of their own blocks. This power shall be centralized into the hands of the Core technicians, thus correcting an extreme mistake and oversight in satoshi's original design.

The few Core technicians want to be the ultimate regulators who define what blocksize and fees are best for all other Bitcoin users and the network. Im pretty sick of all centralized regulations, it hardly brings anything good and just make the regulators very powerfull to define the fees and how many people can ever use Bitcoin, all by artifically setting blocksize limit parameter.

It reminds me of FED meeting setting interest rates to impact whole US economy. Do people really want few Core technicians defining Bitcoin usage and fees (indirectly trough defining blocksize limit) - I thought Bitcon had to be power resistant, but very small group of people controling Bitcoin and making threats if miners dont follow their vision, they change mining algo so these dictators can retain complete control over Bitcoin. Yes, Bitcoin grew up new elite of dictators from nowhere - they show history repeats and its human nature to abuse power and try to keep the power at all cost. People who dont trust PoW principles should not use Bitcoin - its the miners who secure the network afterall - yet we have to trust few Core technicians instead. Whats the need for Bitcoin then, fiat is already centralized and in control of few people, Bitcoin should be better and one hash equeal one vote is what Bitcoin PoW come with as new fair method to replace centralization and human element.

About the nullc aka gmaxwell, he lost his credibility by constantly spreading FUD about Bitcoin to become centralized and full nodes moving to datacenters if 1 MB base blocksize is ever to be increased - extraordinally claims but no proof. So nullc, come up with science data, because your claims are hilarious and just viewed as political to sceptically thinking person, especially when data based studies showing no such centralization to data centres at all. His taste to regulate fees by keeping artifical limit is well known - in economy it is called central planning if you have no faith in free market and have faith in human regulations instead, lol.

[jonald_fyookball]

So nullc, come up with science data, because your claims are hilarious and just viewed as political to sceptically thinking person, especially when data based studies showing no such centralization to data centres at all. His taste to regulate fees by keeping artifical limit is well known - in economy it is called central planning if you have no faith in free market and have faith in human regulations instead, lol.

Well said. 

Greg, you are not fooling me.

Even if Peter R is wrong about the fee market (and I'm not saying he is), there's no reason for central planning decades in advance.  I believe your position is based on your own biases and cemented in place by millions of dollars of venture capital.   I appreciate your contributions to Bitcoin, but do not support your current agenda.

[Lauda]

Here is the bitcoin powerstructure:
Bitcoin Nodes = They are like the accountants of bitcoin , as they verify the integrity of the blockchain, and maintain the technical stability, they are rarely affected by the other 5, and mostly act as observers on these issues.

There are the 6 powers in bitcoin, and we need all of them. Centralization is not an option.

I really think that the controversial HF supporters either do not run nodes or are fine with Bitcoin being more centralized. There are already complaints of people who can't catch up on very inexpensive solutions, about reindex and synchronization taking long (even though libsecpk increased the speed drastically). Even if we are talking about a short period of time (let's say 1 year) and 1.75 MB blocks on average, we are talking about more than 90 GBs of space and that is just the start. IIRC there was a presentation (Scaling 2015?) about the possibility of a 'future' where new node users aren't able to catch up to the network with decent hardware(?).

The few Core technicians want to be the ultimate regulators who define what blocksize and fees are best for all other Bitcoin users and the network. Im pretty sick of all centralized regulations, it hardly brings anything good and just make the regulators very powerfull to define the fees and how many people can ever use Bitcoin, all by artifically setting blocksize limit parameter.

You are stating this out of subjective bias, because you want one thing and they want another one. Ultimately the network decides. If people wanted someone else to decide what is the better approach (yes, a 2 MB block size limit is also "centralized regulation" by your definition) then we you and almost everyone else would be using implementations like Classic.

Even if Peter R is wrong about the fee market (and I'm not saying he is), there's no reason for central planning decades in advance.  

You mean Peter R Charlatan who came out of nowhere with his "fancy graphics"?

[rizzlarolla]

and let's start debating this like civilized adults...  I hope troll posts or low intellect posts (usually 1 liners) will be removed by forum moderators.

Die you fucking scumbags

OP, Mods...

(franky I would be very pleased if you dont respond to the goading above. it belittles you. imo)


v From below v, for posterity,

Totally appropriate response to insidious lying manipulative sociopaths that won't let it go. Again: die you piece of shit

Thought you might have had some ball RealBitcoin and addressed this.
(i suppose you did in many ways by doing 2 posts both in support of Carlton Banks)

Lauda, is this not off topic, ad hom, shitposting or what?
Does Carlton Banks have immunity to following forum rules?

[RealBitcoin]

Thought you might have had some ball RealBitcoin and addressed this.
(i suppose you did in many ways by doing 2 posts both in support of Carlton Banks)

Lauda, is this not off topic, ad hom, shitposting or what?
Does Carlton Banks have immunity to following forum rules?

Lol, I cant babysit this thread 24/7, havent even read half of the thread because i see too many trolls here and i dont waste my time with that, if you dont like a post, report it to the mods. Besides this is not a self-moderated threads, so repors should go to mods not me.

[Carlton Banks]

Thought you might have had some ball RealBitcoin and addressed this.
(i suppose you did in many ways by doing 2 posts both in support of Carlton Banks)

Lauda, is this not off topic, ad hom, shitposting or what?
Does Carlton Banks have immunity to following forum rules?

I'm legitimately incensed. You're breaking the rules motherfucker: the rules of basic human moral conduct. You can't expect to use lies and deception to manipulate an important human endeavour and not receive vicious push-back. Do you want me step it up a notch with you or something? I've got extra levels of opprobrium, if that's what you want.

And for the love of god: It's not ad hominem when it's true.

[rizzlarolla]

and let's start debating this like civilized adults...  I hope troll posts or low intellect posts (usually 1 liners) will be removed by forum moderators.

Die you fucking scumbags

OP, Mods...

(franky I would be very pleased if you dont respond to the goading above. it belittles you. imo)


v From below v, for posterity,

Totally appropriate response to insidious lying manipulative sociopaths that won't let it go. Again: die you piece of shit

Thought you might have had some ball RealBitcoin and addressed this.
(i suppose you did in many ways by doing 2 posts both in support of Carlton Banks)

Lauda, is this not off topic, ad hom, shitposting or what?
Does Carlton Banks have immunity to following forum rules?

OK, reported.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1532295.0

[Carlton Banks]

Considering the gravity of your complaints *ahem* rizlarolla, you should contact your local law enforcement. I'm sure they'll take you incredibly seriously when you tell them an 80's sitcom character threatened you with death from natural causes. On the internet. Never mind the threat you represent


And what else could we expect from the sort of person who supports Gavin Andresen; who famously believes that Bitcoin homogeneity/fungibility should be replaced with blacklisting/Ethereum style blockchain rollbacks, because "nasty horrible stealing" lol




If Bitcoin has taught you anything, it should have been that lies, force and threats are not the answer, but when you man-babies can't win it straight, you resort to every immoral trick you can muster, and then some. And you have no shame. You're a waste of carbon and oxygen, how's that for a threat lol