...aaaand a partial rebuttal.
Unlimited is not a great solution
In implementing emergent consensus, BU is a near-ideal solution.
and it won't be adopted.
Umm, you sure you want to go with that? That's an awfully strange statement to make, while d(BUHashpower)/dt and d(BUNodes)/dt are both positive.
Nodes up over 30% in last two weeks alone:
https://coin.dance/nodes/unlimited.
The real fight is to just increase the effing blocksize with a simple hard fork AS WAS DONE IN 2014 ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS AND WITHOUT ANY ISSUES.
I can get behind that. But I don't want to face the same stupid value-destroying battle every year. BU solves this.
Unlimited only exists to block Segwit
All right, now you've pissed me off. Who are you to tell those behind BU what its purpose is? You are 100%, categorically, indisputably, wrong in this assertion.
Unlimited blocks now surpass Segwit blocks.
In full disclosure, SegWit has retaken a slight lead. We'll see where this goes.
I think this conveys some sense of urgency to Core, which is long overdue, given that they've had their thumbs up their butts for FOUR+ YEARS now on this blocksize problem.
Indeed. Absolute failure of leadership.
Ver seems convinced that more usage = higher price which ignores velocity and isn't necessarily true. Supply and demand still applies no matter what.
Laws of supply and demand generally apply to price discovery of labor and assets, not currencies.
Inasmusch as cryptocurrency is more of a new asset class than a 'classical' currency, should we not consider the verdict still out as to its adherence to traditional money behaviors?
The US Federal Reserve doubled the money supply in 2008-12 but the USD value remained constant, did you wonder how they did that?
That's easy - they did it by giving the money they created to already-rich entities that did not need it for anything. Accordingly, it did not get spent. It merely got set aside, propping up Wall Street, thereby displaying a velocity asymptotically approaching zero.
Also, BTC velocity is a touchy subject because much of the transaction base is spam and churn.
Inasmuch as there is no objective way of looking at any given transaction, and classifying it as spam or notspam, I 'forbid' you from using this characterization. OK, 'forbid' gets a winkie:
But the term 'spam' is useless.
I think Ver is stating the obvious that if Bitcoin is not useful to people, its value will go to zero. Hard to argue that. The BTC supply increases every day, and demand is likely increasing due to greater global acceptance and tightening capital controls. But how will millions of new users adopt Bitcoin? I can tell you that someone who waits 24 hours for their transaction to confirm will not be back...
Yup.
Blocking Segwit seems to be just anti-Blockstream paranoia or a ploy by miners to keep the fees up for as long as they can.
Valid theories but no hard evidence. I think Blockstream has been a bit shady of late. I'm not sure there is such a thing as a $100 million corporation WITHOUT a profit motive and a plan to execute on. I find it strange to be in the company of Gavin, Ver, Hearn, etc., as I regard them as generally less tech-savvy than Core devs. Often times the most important thing is to "know what you don't know". I feel like the Core devs aren't aware of their lack of economic knowledge and outside perspective, or alternately (and far less likely) that they are playing dumb and have been compromised by a hidden agenda from Blockstream.
Yeah, I'm unsure what to think about Blockstream. I certainly hope they have the best interests of the system -- in a Nakamoto sense -- as a driving principle. But it is hard to ignore dozens of millions from the barons of fiat.
Didja see Dr. Back's discussion on r/btc yesterday? Quite a hoot!
Unless an anti-segwit person comes up with and implements a real alternative scaling solution
Hard fork to 2MB, and then immediately start screaming about the next increase to 4MB
in ten years immediately.
FTFY. Until we started regularly bumping against block size limit last year, block size had been doing roughly 2x per year. BU solves this issue once and for all. Elegantly.