Open Letter to GMaxwell and Sincere Rational Core Devs

[traincarswreck]

Lol, a rando logs in claiming they read through the thread, but also simultaneously calling me out for CITING my argument in accepted economic literature?

Why are you so afraid of science and founded reasoned arguments?

[1714135600]

1714135600

[Killerpotleaf]

like I said... if you know what the markets will accept you'd be a billionaire.

The fact that you pretend to know what the markets will do with certainty tells me you're a noob when it comes to actually understanding markets.

Oops I lost you.

1) It's basic accepted science the free markets act rationally
2) The markets won't accept an scientifically unfounded proposal

Which of these two do you deny?

there's only one thing you can reasonably expect from any market free or otherwise,
individuals will generally do what they FEEEEEL is in their best interest.

consider the free market that is the plant, and what all the individuals are doing with it.
does this seem rational or scientific.
 

[jonald_fyookball]

like I said... if you know what the markets will accept you'd be a billionaire.

The fact that you pretend to know what the markets will do with certainty tells me you're a noob when it comes to actually understanding markets.

Oops I lost you.

1) It's basic accepted science the free markets act rationally
2) The markets won't accept an scientifically unfounded proposal

Which of these two do you deny?

Not going to go down your labrynth of questions as that does not entertain me. sorry.

I'll give you the following tidbits of info:

a) Markets can and do act irrationally from time to time.
b) what is rational to one man is irrational to another
c) supply and demand trump everything else.  It really doesn't matter if something meets a criteria of being 'scientific', as long as people want it.  

If you really think you understand markets better than the rest of us, i again
invite you to explain why you've failed to use that information to make billions.

[traincarswreck]

like I said... if you know what the markets will accept you'd be a billionaire.

The fact that you pretend to know what the markets will do with certainty tells me you're a noob when it comes to actually understanding markets.

Oops I lost you.

1) It's basic accepted science the free markets act rationally
2) The markets won't accept an scientifically unfounded proposal

Which of these two do you deny?

Not going to go down your labrynth of questions as that does not entertain me. sorry.

I'll give you the following tidbits of info:

a) Markets can and do act irrationally from time to time.
b) what is rational to one man is irrational to another
c) supply and demand trump everything else.  It really doesn't matter if something meets a criteria of being 'scientific', as long as people want it.  

If you really think you understand markets better than the rest of us, i again
invite you to explain why you've failed to use that information to make billions.

Yes you deny both 1 and 2, and you therefore deny science, which is why you have arrived at an irrational conclusion. 

Did you know that irrational and vocal people far outweigh people with reasoned arguments?

[joey007]

Lol, a rando logs in claiming they read through the thread, but also simultaneously calling me out for CITING my argument in accepted economic literature?

Why are you so afraid of science and founded reasoned arguments?

My friend, please listen. I will not comment anymore as this debate is useless imo and I hate putting time and energy in useless things.

First, thank you for proofing 50% of my theory about you as a person in just 1 reply. You dont know who I am, howlong Ive been here and what my background is. Just honestly and by all means check ip logs whatever I am not smurfing, i just never posted here. Get an admin to confirm this with logs i am ok with this.

I never said your opinion was right or wrong, so saying if i am scared about you copy pasting other people... not by a bit but I just said imo this isnt the time yet for bitcoin to be dealing with this, or maybe put best its totally not as critical as you make it sound like it is. Bitcoin will develop the way it always has. It has brought us to where we are today. If the macro-economics implications of bitcoin seem to be critical at some point in the future, it will certainly be adressed.

Please dont challenge me to reply anymore. Stop wasting peoples time.

[jonald_fyookball]

Yes you deny both 1 and 2, and you therefore deny science, which is why you have arrived at an irrational conclusion. 

I can only assume that if and when BU does succeed, you'll no doubt have a very good sounding explanation of why you changed your mind.

Did you know that irrational and vocal people far outweigh people with reasoned arguments?

My arguments are based on common sense, observable facts, and real world experience. 
If you'd like to believe yours are more reasoned, that's cool.

[traincarswreck]

 
My arguments are based on common sense, observable facts, and real world experience. 
If you'd like to believe yours are more reasoned, that's cool.

Your argument is based on the common ASSUMPTION that increasing the tps increases the value of bitcoin, there is no founded scientific argument for this.  It's not that my argument is 'more reasoned' its that your is NOT.  There is no foundation for it other than a tacit assumption.

[traincarswreck]

2) you hardly bring any new evidence or proof to the discussion. Its always what someone else wrote in this or that book/essay. What if they were wrong?

You've done nothing but try to attack my character and you have not spoken to the argument at all.  But I wanted to highlight number 2 because its a denial of science and logic. The whole premise of science is that argument are founded on other founded arguments that trace to undeniable and commonly accepted truths that were founded over the last thousands of years of human history.

That's how science works, and thats what science is. 

When you question it, you are showing that you don't understand the purpose of science.  And it is always that those that don't understand science support BU.

[jonald_fyookball]

 
My arguments are based on common sense, observable facts, and real world experience. 
If you'd like to believe yours are more reasoned, that's cool.

Your argument is based on the common ASSUMPTION that increasing the tps increases the value of bitcoin, there is no founded scientific argument for this.  It's not that my argument is 'more reasoned' its that your is NOT.  There is no foundation for it other than a tacit assumption.

I've given the reasons for that argument earlier in the thread.  Almost everyone on both sides of the scaling debate wants to increase TPS one way or another.  Therefore there is demand for it. nuff said.

[traincarswreck]

I've given the reasons for that argument earlier in the thread.  Almost everyone on both sides of the scaling debate wants to increase TPS one way or another.  Therefore there is demand for it. nuff said.

No i understand the reasoning which is irrational unfounded exuberance from both sides, I'm saying its not founded in accepted economic science. They are trying to push the markets with an irrational proposition and that runs counter to accepted science and reason.

And by accepted I am not talking about the irrational faction of people.

#science

[traincarswreck]

Let me sum up a few non-topic things first that I find out after reading 45 pages.

After claiming to read 45 pages you should be able to state my argument to some extent otherwise no one is going to believe you and you look like a sockpuppet.

[AGD]

Lol, a rando logs in claiming they read through the thread, but also simultaneously calling me out for CITING my argument in accepted economic literature?

Why are you so afraid of science and founded reasoned arguments?

My friend, please listen. I will not comment anymore as this debate is useless imo and I hate putting time and energy in useless things.

First, thank you for proofing 50% of my theory about you as a person in just 1 reply. You dont know who I am, howlong Ive been here and what my background is. Just honestly and by all means check ip logs whatever I am not smurfing, i just never posted here. Get an admin to confirm this with logs i am ok with this.

I never said your opinion was right or wrong, so saying if i am scared about you copy pasting other people... not by a bit but I just said imo this isnt the time yet for bitcoin to be dealing with this, or maybe put best its totally not as critical as you make it sound like it is. Bitcoin will develop the way it always has. It has brought us to where we are today. If the macro-economics implications of bitcoin seem to be critical at some point in the future, it will certainly be adressed.

Please dont challenge me to reply anymore. Stop wasting peoples time.

How come you waited years to make your first posting in a "useless debate"?

[jonald_fyookball]

I've given the reasons for that argument earlier in the thread.  Almost everyone on both sides of the scaling debate wants to increase TPS one way or another.  Therefore there is demand for it. nuff said.

No i understand the reasoning which is irrational unfounded exuberance from both sides, I'm saying its not founded in accepted economic science. They are trying to push the markets with an irrational proposition and that runs counter to accepted science and reason.

And by accepted I am not talking about the irrational faction of people.

#science

So because everyone generally agrees that we want more than a few transactions per second, its irrational exuberance?

Your argument makes as much sense to me as saying Starbucks stock won't go up because its unscientific for anyone to want more than 1 moccafrappuchino a month. 

[isoneguy]

What's with the incessant use of logical fallacies in discussion? Your emotions have no place here.

[David Rabahy]

So, to recap; per Nash et al, Bitcoin can help guide/force fiat into being ideal money.  I just knew Bitcoin was good for something.

I do worry that the SegWit BU schism might undermine (ha!) the role of Bitcoin in this mission.

[BurtW]

traincarswreck:  here is a thread that might be of interest to you

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1824293.0

[danda]

I just saw this on reddit.   Seems gmaxwell is content enough if bitcoin remains status quo forever.

Maybe OP's work is done, lol.

Segwit isn't forced onto anyone without their consent. Take it or don't take it.
I'm comfortable if Bitcoin doesn't change any further. I think it would be better if it did, but that isn't up to any person, much less me.

[jonald_fyookball]

I just saw this on reddit.   Seems gmaxwell is content enough if bitcoin remains status quo forever.

Maybe OP's work is done, lol.

Segwit isn't forced onto anyone without their consent. Take it or don't take it.
I'm comfortable if Bitcoin doesn't change any further. I think it would be better if it did, but that isn't up to any person, much less me.

Gmaxwell, (the CTO of Blockstream) is content if Bitcoin doesn't scale on chain?  Wow, what a shocker.  Next you're gonna tell me there's fish in the ocean.

[danda]

speaking as a developer myself with 20+ years experience, I respect his opinion quite a lot more than, say... yours.

Gmaxwell, (the CTO of Blockstream) is content if Bitcoin doesn't scale on chain?  Wow, what a shocker.  Next you're gonna tell me there's fish in the ocean.

[jonald_fyookball]

speaking as a developer myself with 20+ years experience, I respect his opinion quite a lot more than, say... yours.

Gmaxwell, (the CTO of Blockstream) is content if Bitcoin doesn't scale on chain?  Wow, what a shocker.  Next you're gonna tell me there's fish in the ocean.

I'm not saying I'm as technically skilled, or as knowledgable about Bitcoin as Mr. Maxwell. (I'm surely not).  I'm saying I believe there's a huge and obvious conflict of interest in anything he says regarding Bitcoin scaling.  Surely, as a developer of 20+ years experience, you're intelligent enough to understand why that is a reasonable opinion for someone to have?