Odalv
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1000
|
 |
August 19, 2015, 10:26:58 PM |
|
Nodes up by 16% in a couple of days? Looks like Gavin and Hearn fixed the node decline as well then.
I think that it is a manipulation and nodes are fake. https://github.com/basil00/PseudoNodepseudonode --coin=bitcoin-xt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"There should not be any signed int. If you've found a signed int
somewhere, please tell me (within the next 25 years please) and I'll
change it to unsigned int." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
schizoid
Member
Offline
Activity: 73
Merit: 10
|
|
August 19, 2015, 10:28:24 PM |
|
Scaling to 56 transaction per second by forcing doesn't magically increase the market cap either.
Nice strawman. |
|
|
|
|
|
sAt0sHiFanClub
|
|
August 19, 2015, 10:29:05 PM |
|
We are going down from 280$ to 220$ in less than 10 days because two shills want to prove their might by forking bitcoin?
Okay, so now we know how little you understand the market. Thanks for sharing, partner!  The answer from community is clear now, Gavin & Mike ?
Yup. 14% of nodes now and rising.  LOL Gavin&Mike fanboys. I don't want to discuss about blockchain size anymore, I just look at the price, ok? Prove me wrong otherwise GTFO. Ok, you look at the price. But be careful not to hurt yourself, they're a bit spikey. Btw, your 14% is mostly new nodes. Existing nodes doesn't change. No, we're going down because investors are starting to pay attention and realize that a coin capped at 2-3 tps does not deserve a $3 billion market cap.
Scaling to 56 transaction per second by forcing doesn't magically increase the market cap either. Nobody is forcing you to do anything. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
samson
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2097
Merit: 1068
|
|
August 19, 2015, 11:25:48 PM |
|
CCMF ?  I dumped all my BTC long ago. |
|
|
|
|
|
natewelt
|
|
August 19, 2015, 11:45:28 PM |
|
CCMF ? I dumped all my BTC long ago. No surprise |
|
|
|
|
hdbuck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1002
|
|
August 19, 2015, 11:54:28 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
 Online
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1776
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
 |
August 20, 2015, 12:02:43 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kenji
|
|
August 20, 2015, 12:06:02 AM |
|
do you guys expect sub $200 coins soon?
|
|
|
|
|
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2348
Eadem mutata resurgo
|
|
August 20, 2015, 12:22:38 AM |
|
ummm, merely an attempted coup at this stage ... and pretty pathetically transparent power grab dressed up as "helping all the things". |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1776
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
August 20, 2015, 01:02:39 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
xIronCrossx
Member
Offline
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
|
|
August 20, 2015, 01:37:51 AM |
|
Over 2x as many sell orders vs buy orders on coinbase exchange  |
|
|
|
|
billyjoeallen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1007
Hide your women
|
|
August 20, 2015, 01:40:58 AM |
|
I see what's happening here. The miners are looking at losing half their block reward and they want to make it up in fees. So they are using the core devs to block ANY blocksize increase and the technical objections are an excuse. I actually agree with Prof. Trolfi that they will find excuses no matter what.
Screw these guys. We don't need them. There's plenty of people who would rather mine for 12.5 BTC/block with BTC at $400 than 25 BTC/block with BTC at $150.
This is an attempted coup alright, but it's from idiot miners who want a bigger slice of a smaller pie. If we cave on this, they will never allow our network to become competitive enough to disrupt the banksters.
Fine. I'll call your bluff. Let's see you mine for $100 coins profitably. I've gone without revenue since 2013 and I can go years more. How long can you mine at a loss?
Fuck. You. Scale or die.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlackSpidy
|
|
August 20, 2015, 02:02:12 AM |
|
I really dont think that there is an excuse not to scale up. Hell, it should be an automated process by now. The community will grow and we're going to need the larger blocks. I dont see how making the block, say... 8MB would cause any trouble. At all. Personally, I dont think this most recent crash back to $220s is merely because of the blocksize debate, but it's not helping. Bitcoins are good for me at $1000 or $100, it's just too useful to not use. Much more useful than some other methods of transferring money. If we let Bitcoin stall behind, we have hundreds of other cryptocurrencies lining up to be the face of cryptocurrencies.
Bitcoin will live on, ether in scaled-up core or XT. Meanwhile, there will be more "bitcoin is dead" headlines to add to that one webpage.
|
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1776
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
August 20, 2015, 02:02:30 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlexGR
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1049
|
|
August 20, 2015, 02:03:04 AM |
|
This is an attempted coup alright, but it's from idiot miners who want a bigger slice of a smaller pie. If we cave on this, they will never allow our network to become competitive enough to disrupt the banksters.
Bloating the blockchain to DOA levels will disrupt bitcoin, not the banksters. Besides, 8mb blocks, or even 80mb blocks, aren't enough to scale to such levels. You'd need enormous storage (and bandwidth) per day to compete with the volume of banks and credit cards. Visa does 2000 tx/s. Bitcoin needs 300-700mb/blocks to do that, not accounting for spam. If you add mastercard, bank transfers, swift, paypal, and, finally, cash transactions from person to person that could be digitized with btc, not even 1gb blocks would scale. |
|
|
|
|
|
fonsie
|
|
August 20, 2015, 02:12:13 AM |
|
This is an attempted coup alright, but it's from idiot miners who want a bigger slice of a smaller pie. If we cave on this, they will never allow our network to become competitive enough to disrupt the banksters.
Bloating the blockchain to DOA levels will disrupt bitcoin, not the banksters. Besides, 8mb blocks, or even 80mb blocks, aren't enough to scale to such levels. You'd need enormous storage (and bandwidth) per day to compete with the volume of banks and credit cards. No, not enormous. Realistic amounts which are available today is enough. Also ever heard about pruning? Not every node has to have an entire copy, I'm sure the NSA will be glad to assist in keeping an entire copy for you. Including every government agency in the world. Hey, spoiler alert, the blocks won't be 8MB from the start, they will be as big as the miners want them to be. |
|
|
|
|
AlexGR
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1049
|
|
August 20, 2015, 02:17:08 AM |
|
I'm sure the NSA will be glad to assist in keeping an entire copy for you. Including every government agency in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
brg444
|
|
August 20, 2015, 02:33:42 AM |
|
I really dont think that there is an excuse not to scale up. Hell, it should be an automated process by now. The community will grow and we're going to need the larger blocks. I dont see how making the block, say... 8MB would cause any trouble. At all. Personally, I dont think this most recent crash back to $220s is merely because of the blocksize debate, but it's not helping. Bitcoins are good for me at $1000 or $100, it's just too useful to not use. Much more useful than some other methods of transferring money. If we let Bitcoin stall behind, we have hundreds of other cryptocurrencies lining up to be the face of cryptocurrencies.
Bitcoin will live on, ether in scaled-up core or XT. Meanwhile, there will be more "bitcoin is dead" headlines to add to that one webpage.
Oh yeah? I'm curious how do you use Bitcoin? |
|
|
|
|
billyjoeallen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1007
Hide your women
|
|
August 20, 2015, 02:34:40 AM |
|
This is an attempted coup alright, but it's from idiot miners who want a bigger slice of a smaller pie. If we cave on this, they will never allow our network to become competitive enough to disrupt the banksters.
Bloating the blockchain to DOA levels will disrupt bitcoin, not the banksters. Besides, 8mb blocks, or even 80mb blocks, aren't enough to scale to such levels. You'd need enormous storage (and bandwidth) per day to compete with the volume of banks and credit cards. so which is it, the increase is too big and too small at the same time? We don't need to go head to head with VISA right now. We need grown up core devs who don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
