@RogerVer lets make a deal. At least 60k, my BTU for your BTC.

[jay8291]

Jihan is afraid that he might lose fees once segwit is activated & LN implemented. What he cant understand is that he will receive more fees after segwit as the usage will increase again.

Dont know who is controlling who. Jihan by Roger or vice-versa.

[BigBoom3599]

Jihan is afraid that he might lose fees once segwit is activated & LN implemented. What he cant understand is that he will receive more fees after segwit as the usage will increase again.

Dont know who is controlling who. Jihan by Roger or vice-versa.

That sounds weird... Miners wouldn't get more fees because of the LN network, because they'd still be mining the 1MB/2MB blocks. BU and LN will both increase usage and adoption, however BU will stay onchain, which means more fees and profit for the miners. All these talks about Jihan wanting to control BTC are bs, he just wants money. LOL (not blaming him for it though  )

[Carlton Banks]

segwit has more blocks then btc-u last 24 hr

Coindance is a bit of a joke, IMO


Why is 1000 blocks relevant? Both Segwit and BU use 2016 block periods for their activation parameters, so the 1000 blocks sample makes zero sense

[notthematrix]

The only joke in town is Roger and btc-u
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/60ozkh/rogerver_lets_make_a_deal_1_for_1_trade_at_least/

about coindance:
coindance counts blocks.



asic miner owners are moving away from bt-u pools.
the assumption that a pool owns all asics is bul...
A lot of  asic miner owners flock in a pool to have bigger chance finding a block...
Using a chineese pool can be very handy f.e if it comes to taxing somewhere in future.
other thing is that not all china pools signal btc-u al few also signal segwit so also inside china people can reconfig there asics and switch pool.


  

[BillyBobZorton]

Jihan is afraid that he might lose fees once segwit is activated & LN implemented. What he cant understand is that he will receive more fees after segwit as the usage will increase again.

Dont know who is controlling who. Jihan by Roger or vice-versa.

That sounds weird... Miners wouldn't get more fees because of the LN network, because they'd still be mining the 1MB/2MB blocks. BU and LN will both increase usage and adoption, however BU will stay onchain, which means more fees and profit for the miners. All these talks about Jihan wanting to control BTC are bs, he just wants money. LOL (not blaming him for it though  )

If he wants money, why would he risk his entire ASIC industry in buggy software that can kill bitcoin? (and render him bankrupt as a result)

If he really wants money, lets get segwit + LN so we can reach massive usage. Also LN incentivizes running nodes since you can make money off interesting by running LN channels, which is why Core does a good job by keeping the block size small, so the average guy (us) can also make money by running LN hubs with their hodlings. Conservative block size also gives us the option to counter attack greedy miners with weapons such as UASF. The whole thing makes sense. Counting pros and cons, conservative block size, capacitiy increases (segwit) and layer 2 (LN) is the way to go.

After segwit, future block size increases will be needed anyway.

Onchain scaling will never amount to mainstream bitcoin usage. You can't be buying coffees and doing groceries waiting for the guy next to you in the lane to confirm the transactions. That's just stupid.

[jonald_fyookball]

  capacitiy increases (segwit) and layer 2 (LN) is the way to go.
 

the main problem with this is that we needed capacity increases yesterday and segwit won't be approved tomorrow...meanwhile bitcoin is losing market share to other cryptos.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

[muyuu]

Very apt 

I still hope I can double up though.

[notthematrix]

Jihan is afraid that he might lose fees once segwit is activated & LN implemented. What he cant understand is that he will receive more fees after segwit as the usage will increase again.

Dont know who is controlling who. Jihan by Roger or vice-versa.

That sounds weird... Miners wouldn't get more fees because of the LN network, because they'd still be mining the 1MB/2MB blocks. BU and LN will both increase usage and adoption, however BU will stay onchain, which means more fees and profit for the miners. All these talks about Jihan wanting to control BTC are bs, he just wants money. LOL (not blaming him for it though  )

If he wants money, why would he risk his entire ASIC industry in buggy software that can kill bitcoin? (and render him bankrupt as a result)

If he really wants money, lets get segwit + LN so we can reach massive usage. Also LN incentivizes running nodes since you can make money off interesting by running LN channels, which is why Core does a good job by keeping the block size small, so the average guy (us) can also make money by running LN hubs with their hodlings. Conservative block size also gives us the option to counter attack greedy miners with weapons such as UASF. The whole thing makes sense. Counting pros and cons, conservative block size, capacitiy increases (segwit) and layer 2 (LN) is the way to go.

After segwit, future block size increases will be needed anyway.

Onchain scaling will never amount to mainstream bitcoin usage. You can't be buying coffees and doing groceries waiting for the guy next to you in the lane to confirm the transactions. That's just stupid.

A miner wants money , he wont get that if you fight community...
and most important VER does not believe in BCU himself...
He did not respond to a $100.000.000 bet. so this guy is a fake.
abnd yes as a miner you dont want buggy software , trustware is the standard..
you will lose everything if you crash your chain. so miner will go for stabile opensource software without suprises.
there is no escape for ver this time , failing this bet will forever stick on him.

So miners move to pools that support segwit.

[muyuu]

segwit has more blocks then btc-u last 24 hr

Coindance is a bit of a joke, IMO


Why is 1000 blocks relevant? Both Segwit and BU use 2016 block periods for their activation parameters, so the 1000 blocks sample makes zero sense

Meh, they do have their things but 1000 blocks is almost exactly one week (~6.94 days +- hashing variance and adjustment lag). So not that crazy to include it.

I really don't think any of this matters as long as BU stays well under 50%. SegWit is not going to be activated by 95% any time soon if ever, so until they introduce some modification that matters for SegWit activation, nothing of this is news (save for BU getting dangerous).

By the way... longest 48h of my life.

[dejavuboy]

I bet he won't take it

[MemoryDealers]

For the record,  I replied to Loaded on March 24, 2017, 10:29:47 PM.
I still haven't heard back from him yet.

[Carlton Banks]

For the record,  I replied to Loaded on March 24, 2017, 10:29:47 PM.
I still haven't heard back from him yet.

Oh please

You can accept or decline the terms right now, then everyone knows where you both stand


Or do you need more time to think it over

[pinkflower]

  capacitiy increases (segwit) and layer 2 (LN) is the way to go.
 

the main problem with this is that we needed capacity increases yesterday and segwit won't be approved tomorrow...meanwhile bitcoin is losing market share to other cryptos.

So instead of waiting and being patient you would rather have every miner hurry up and do the hardfork to an insecure code base like Bitcoin Unlimited? Is that what you really want?

[Quickseller]

For the record,  I replied to Loaded on March 24, 2017, 10:29:47 PM.
I still haven't heard back from him yet.

Oh please

You can accept or decline the terms right now, then everyone knows where you both stand


Or do you need more time to think it over

The terms that Loaded offered are inherently unfair as they give loaded an easy out of the transaction. The terms of the deal are effectively that loaded gets a free put on BU in the event of a fork.

No one acting rationally would accept the terms that loaded is offering regardless of the asset pair being traded.

[Carlton Banks]

The terms that Loaded offered are inherently unfair as they give loaded an easy out of the transaction. The terms of the deal are effectively that loaded gets a free put on BU in the event of a fork.

No one acting rationally would accept the terms that loaded is offering regardless of the asset pair being traded.

Which is why Roger turned up just now to refuse the bet?

[Quickseller]

The terms that Loaded offered are inherently unfair as they give loaded an easy out of the transaction. The terms of the deal are effectively that loaded gets a free put on BU in the event of a fork.

No one acting rationally would accept the terms that loaded is offering regardless of the asset pair being traded.

Which is why Roger turned up just now to refuse the bet?

Presumably Roger was hoping to negotiate more reasonable terms with loaded

[johnscoin]

  capacitiy increases (segwit) and layer 2 (LN) is the way to go.
 

the main problem with this is that we needed capacity increases yesterday and segwit won't be approved tomorrow...meanwhile bitcoin is losing market share to other cryptos.

I don't think a controversial hard fork is what you want.

As for me, SegWit first, on-chain scaling second. Both must be carried out by Core.

Whether the core shall propose on-chain scaling as an alternative solution when the SegWit is blocked by some ambitious miners. It's an interesting topic academically.

[muyuu]

What about the pooled bet? More proper bitcoiners are looking forward to have your coins in exchange of BTU.

Let's see where each of us stand, and who believes what he says.

[notthematrix]

The terms that Loaded offered are inherently unfair as they give loaded an easy out of the transaction. The terms of the deal are effectively that loaded gets a free put on BU in the event of a fork.

No one acting rationally would accept the terms that loaded is offering regardless of the asset pair being traded.

Which is why Roger turned up just now to refuse the bet?

Presumably Roger was hoping to negotiate more reasonable terms with loaded

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/60ozkh/rogerver_lets_make_a_deal_1_for_1_trade_at_least/

Its not about terms.
If Roger was for real he would have signed wallet ownership like loaded did.
its like a dower.
first you show you are for real then you negotiate the terms.
by signing ownership over this 40.000 btc wallet loaded showed he is for real
Roger never signed anything.
So he lost all credit , and what he says is not worth anything.
he did not put his money were his mouth is.