Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[molecular]

I don't think so. I doubt he would approve of subversive altcoin garbage like "Classic" and the chumps behind it.

It can be phased in, like:

if (blocknumber > 115000)
    maxblocksize = largerlimit

That's essentially BitcoinClassic, proposed by Satoshi.

[1714681382]

1714681382

[1714681382]

1714681382

[1714681382]

1714681382

[aztecminer]

The Curious Case of Gregory Maxwell & The Lightning Network

https://news.bitcoin.com/the-curious-case-of-gregory-maxwell-and-the-lightning-network/

The routing problem is further complicated because they don't only want to route transactions. They want to take a slice and collect a fee for doing so. This is a fee that will come directly out of the pockets of miners and will make Bitcoin less secure.

Blockstream hobbles bitcoin, gives it a crutch and then tries to take credit that it can walk. If Core loses their position as reference client developers, they should try a career in government.

Greg would make a pretty good banker. Why not give it a try??

hearn beat him to it.

I wouldn't even know who Mike Hearn is if Core were doing their damn jobs. Blockstream is using an anti-spam kludge as an economic tool. They were never authorized by the owners (holders) or the employees (miners) to do so. They infect the network so they can sell us the cure. Mike Hearn wanted to bypass Core because Core IS the problem.  This is the free market equivalent of regulatory capture. Well, it won't work. Either the market embraces Blockstream and gives me an opportunity to cash out at a nice profit, or it rejects smallblocks and crashes, incentivizing the miners to adopt a real scaling solution.  I'm good either way, so what's it gonna be?

i heard that mike hearn was the one who wanted 'blockchain blacklists'.. maybe well intention but still a bad idea .

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

I don't think so. I doubt he would approve of subversive altcoin garbage like "Classic" and the chumps behind it.

 ... as you and your shills sell out bitcoin to the very people it was conceived to bypass.  And not even as an altcoin implementation - but bitcoin itself.

Look at what you have done:

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

^What is it good for

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

^What is it good for

too lambie?

plea in mitigation: I'm hurt, but I try to hide it.

[TReano]

already topping here?

[nioc]

already topping here?

Well it's not going over 400.

[spiderbrain]

He has probably expressed his opinion many times, but was banned for 'trolling core'.

nice.

[Anastasios]

I don't think so. I doubt he would approve of subversive altcoin garbage like "Classic" and the chumps behind it.

It can be phased in, like:

if (blocknumber > 115000)
    maxblocksize = largerlimit

That's essentially BitcoinClassic, proposed by Satoshi.

Thank you for the memory.

Segwit and all that comes with it does not seem negative in itself, but refusing to raise blocksize is. Bitcoin is growing and developers dont have the right to stop this growth.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[spiderbrain]

I don't think so. I doubt he would approve of subversive altcoin garbage like "Classic" and the chumps behind it.

Well he obviously approved of Gavin otherwise he wouldn't have given him the only commit rights to core. What he thinks of that decision now is anyone's guess.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

I'm just waiting for someone to sue the CEO of Bitcoin. Apparently that's a thing now.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[orpington]

I don't think so. I doubt he would approve of subversive altcoin garbage like "Classic" and the chumps behind it.

 ... as you and your shills sell out bitcoin to the very people it was conceived to bypass.  And not even as an altcoin implementation - but bitcoin itself.

Look at what you have done:

The only sneaky shills around here are people like you trying to undermine bitcoin with your garbage alt coin promotion. But, try as you like (and you certainly do), you will fail utterly and fortunately.

[soullyG]

The only sneaky shills around here are people like you trying to undermine bitcoin with your garbage alt coin promotion. But, try as you like (and you certainly do), you will fail utterly and fortunately.

There's a big difference between tackling a problem head on and "undermining bitcoin with garbage alt coin promotion" - are you totally adverse to increasing the block size limit at all? Would you be open to it if the Core devs implemented it instead of Classic/XT/Unlimited etc? What's the difference, an account on github?

Not to say that either of the main parties are devoid of any guilt in aggravating the situation...but surely poisoning the debate with talk like the quote above is not helpful in any way other than allowing people with opposing viewpoints to be able to say "I told you they were scumbags!", and ramp up the aggression in return....

Look how well it's going for Israel and Palestine 

[WeltMaster]

Can we just make 1 mb be more than enough for the size of a block

E.g. off-chain transactions, something else?

 

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[bargainbin]

Can we just make 1 mb be more than enough for the size of a block

E.g. off-chain transactions, something else?

 

Stop using bitcoin?

[dropt]

The only sneaky shills around here are people like you trying to undermine bitcoin with your garbage alt coin promotion. But, try as you like (and you certainly do), you will fail utterly and fortunately.

You're fkn retarded.  By your logic you're not even using Bitcoin, and none of us are.  We're all using an altcoin that just happens to ALSO be named Bitcoin.