Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell

[traincarswreck]

I invested in bitcoin before these so called "founders of bitcoin".       
   
And no matter if they're smarter then me or not, that doesn't mean I should trust them.       
   
Smart people can be evil too, and Adam Back is demonstrably evil. I don't care if he's smart or not.   

In fact, Smart Evil persons are even worse because they're more creative in their scams.     

A lot of successful con artists are very smart, and they usually benefit from dumb people. By blindly following people just because you're smart you're setting yourself up for scams.

Right so we should ignore the smart people and just be dumb, do dumb things, and say dumb things and that will be the smart thing to do?!

[Alex.BTC]

I haven't talked ANY shit at all, just expressed an opinion.  If you don't like my opinion, well, fuck you.  You don't have to like it.

I expressed my impression of people's motivations.  How, pray tell, can I mathematically represent those motivations?

I have no intention of re-arguing the technical arguments that have been already argued to death on this forum and elsewhere.  I will just say that if you think you are actually smarter than people whose work formed the foundation of Bitcoin, like Nick Szabo and Adam Back then you are just an idiot.

Just look at this bullshit:

I think you have here revealed the 'core' of your outrage...  My impression is that most (all?) of the members of the 'bigger blocks now, at any cost' crowd are people who ultimately view Bitcoin as their get-rich-quick scheme, and have no real concern at all for the long-term technological success of Bitcoin.

You are entitled to your opinion, but when you're in public, you're only entitled to your informed opinion, if you say stupid shit in public long enough you will eventually get bitchslapped by someone who knows what he's talking about.

Don't make stupid uninformed baseless accusations then pretend it's just your opinion when called out on, research before you spew bullshit, then you won't get bitchslapped, simple as that.

It's my impression as well as opinion that you talked a lot of shit, and I just scientifically proved it.

Respect goes both ways, so either respect your own rules, that is, also respect other people's opinion, or prove me wrong, or shut the fuck up.

[jonald_fyookball]

m.       
   
Smart people can be evil too, and Adam Back is demonstrably evil. I don't care if he's smart or not.   
 

its really not fair that Greg's been getting all the attention here in this thread    Glad you brought this up.

Can you explain more?

[xyzzy099]

I haven't talked ANY shit at all, just expressed an opinion.  If you don't like my opinion, well, fuck you.  You don't have to like it.

I expressed my impression of people's motivations.  How, pray tell, can I mathematically represent those motivations?

I have no intention of re-arguing the technical arguments that have been already argued to death on this forum and elsewhere.  I will just say that if you think you are actually smarter than people whose work formed the foundation of Bitcoin, like Nick Szabo and Adam Back then you are just an idiot.

Just look at this bullshit:

I think you have here revealed the 'core' of your outrage...  My impression is that most (all?) of the members of the 'bigger blocks now, at any cost' crowd are people who ultimately view Bitcoin as their get-rich-quick scheme, and have no real concern at all for the long-term technological success of Bitcoin.

You are entitled to your opinion, but when you're in public, you're only entitled to your informed opinion, if you say stupid shit in public long enough you will eventually get bitchslapped by someone who knows what he's talking about.

<MORE BLAH BLAH BLAH>

Are you 8 years old?  The fact that you think you have 'scientifically demonstrated' anything just proves your your almost unfathomable ignorance.

[traincarswreck]

You are entitled to your opinion, but when you're in public, you're only entitled to your informed opinion, if you say stupid shit in public long enough you will eventually get bitchslapped by someone who knows what he's talking about.

Don't make stupid uninformed baseless accusations then pretend it's just your opinion when called out on, research before you spew bullshit, then you won't get bitchslapped, simple as that.

It's my impression as well as opinion that you talked a lot of shit, and I just scientifically proved it.

Respect goes both ways, so either respect your own rules, that is, also respect other people's opinion, or prove me wrong, or shut the fuck up.

The only thing you proved is you don't know what the word science means, you are under 20 years old, and you have nothing of value to add to this dialogue or any dialogue about bitcoin.

[Alex.BTC]

The fact that you think you have 'scientifically demonstrated' anything just proves your your almost unfathomable ignorance.

I don't just think that, I know that, and I am sick and tired of you people's endless bullshit, I've already dumbed it down 10 notches, removed all the tech jargon and skipped explaining all the exceptions, so why don't you try and prove me wrong instead of making childish comebacks.

[traincarswreck]

I don't just think that, I know that, and I am sick and tired of you people's endless bullshit, so why don't you try and prove me wrong instead of making childish comebacks.

You haven't said anything for anyone to prove wrong, you are just spouting nonsense, changing words like segwit to fukwit, and starting slinging monkey poo at people.  

Why don't you try NOT dumbing it down so very very far and so many notches and then you might be able to fit in to an actual conversation where people understand you because you aren't being a childish idiot?

[xyzzy099]

The fact that you think you have 'scientifically demonstrated' anything just proves your your almost unfathomable ignorance.

I don't just think that, I know that, and I am sick and tired of you people's endless bullshit, so why don't you try prove me wrong instead of making childish comebacks.

I didn't make a comeback, I underlined your ignorance for others to see.  Arguing with idiots just serves to work up the idiots and accomplishes nothing, since idiots are, by definition, ineducable - so I will just walk away from you now.  Do feel free to continue ranting though.

[Alex.BTC]

Judging from this wall of:
"traincarswreck - This user is currently ignored."

I am going to assume he is trying to get my attention like a little puppy again.
I don't think he even knows he've been ignored by most people a long time ago.

[RawDog]

m.       
   
Smart people can be evil too, and Adam Back is demonstrably evil. I don't care if he's smart or not.   
 

its really not fair that Greg's been getting all the attention here in this thread    Glad you brought this up.

Can you explain more?

Don't forget vain.  Adam Back is vain too.  He thinks his HashCash is more or less Bitcoin.  Whadda fucker.  These Blockstream pieces of garbage have to be stopped. 

[Alex.BTC]

I didn't make a comeback, I underlined your ignorance for others to see.  Arguing with idiots just serves to work up the idiots and accomplishes nothing, since idiots are, by definition, ineducable - so I will just walk away from you now.  Do feel free to continue ranting though.

Ok you're getting into a loop here, so I'll keep it real simple, I am going to assume you have no ability to prove me wrong, because you don't actually know how Bitcoin works, but you want to keep telling me you're hurt and you hate me for calling you out.

Do you want a hug or what?

I mean I don't know what you expected, if I walk in to a room full of people and start making baseless accusation to 'most people', on a subject I know nothing about, I expect to get bitchslapped, and when I do, I'd actually feel embarrassed and apologize for being that stupid, instead of blaming other people for not respecting my stupidity.

[traincarswreck]

Judging from this wall of:
"traincarswreck - This user is currently ignored."

I am going to assume he is trying to get my attention like a little puppy again.
I don't think he even knows he've been ignored by most people a long time ago.

The problem with ignoring and blocking out people that point out you are wrong is you end up a whinny idiot that is frustrated because you don't understand anything. You start to you think your opinion is right because you keep high-fiving yourself and you end up spending your time on a forum telling nobody that is listening how a multi-billion dollar software project, you don't have a hope of understanding, should be run.

[BustyKuroNeko]

I hate the fact that my investment in Bitcoin appears to be getting fucked.

I think you have here revealed the 'core' of your outrage...  My impression is that most (all?) of the members of the 'bigger blocks now, at any cost' crowd are people who ultimately view Bitcoin as their get-rich-quick scheme, and have no real concern at all for the long-term technological success of Bitcoin.

That's fine by me - I have nothing against people striving to promote their own enlightened self-interest - but you should at least be honest about it and quit pretending that your concerns are technical ones.

You sure talk a lot of shit for someone who knows next to nothing about the actual problem, if you do, you wouldn't use 'my impression', you would use actual numbers and basic math.

Here is the technical details on why Blockstream/Core is a bunch of lying fucks, I just fact slapped another shill in another thread, so I'll just copy it here (already translated to layman terms):

The 1MB limit IS causing the spam problem, and Blockstream/Core continue to do nothing about it.

Today Bitcoin tx traffic have already reached 1MB every 10mins, since the blocksize limit is also 1MB and you only get 1 block every 10mins on average, spammers can now easily flood the mempool by generating a small amount of tx.

Once the mempool is flooded, tx takes longer to process, users get impatient, they pay more fees, fees go up, miners process higher fee tx first, all the minimum fee spam stay stuck at the bottom of the mempool, they timeout and get deleted before being processed by miners.

If spammers don't set a minimum fee in their spam, the spam will be dropped by nodes before reaching the mempool, but spammer only pay the fee when the tx is actually processed by miners.

So, once the mempool is full and the fee is high, spammer's spam never get processed, spammer can continue to flood the mempool for days paying zero fee.

Blockstream refused to increase the blocksize, so we get huge 50000tx mempool backlog today, because spammers don't have to pay their fees.

If they increase the blocksize, then for every 1MB blocksize increase, we can fit another 2000 tx per block, at 4MB we can fit 8000tx per block.

If normal traffic is 1M and the limit is 4M, spammer have to pay a very high combined min fee to flood a block (min fee x 8000 per block), then, if they continue to spam, any mishap, such as miners get lucky and mine a few blocks quickly within 10 minutes, 'eating' all the spam, then spammers have to pay the fee for almost the entire 4MB spam block.

At 4MB, it'll be too costly for spammers to spam, until normal traffic reaches 4MB and they can flood without paying fee again.

If we increase the blocksize from 1MB to 2MB or 4MB now, it will give room for Bitcoin to grow as well as reduce spam.

This truth is so simple that's why Blockstream/Core have to create all kinds of red herrings/bullshit excuses/censorships/trolls to justify keeping the blocksize at 1MB. If they stop distracting you from the actual and simple problem for just 1 second, you'll immediately find out they've been lying their asses off for years.

The 1MB limit was added in 2010 because tx fee was 0 at the time, the network was young and was growing slowly, average block size was less than 1k, and Satoshi didn't want to see the blockchain full of 32MB blocks filled with 0 fee spam.

You keep hearing all these fuck face morons talking about how SW/LN will save the day, or that we can't keep increasing the blocksize forever, but at this moment Bitcoin isn't even popular enough for SW/LN, the safety limit is above 4MB, we shouldn't even talk about side chains until we have enough tx to fill 4MB blocks every 10 minutes, or 13tx/sec (we are only at 3tx/sec at the moment).

We are having a tx jam right now, so by not increasing the blocksize limit, Blockstream/Core either have absolutely no idea what they're doing, or they're just pricks blatantly lying their asses off.

Now this was the explanation i was looking for. Thanks

[traincarswreck]

Now this was the explanation i was looking for. Thanks

Really?  This is the one he said he dumbed down times 10 ;p  Its good for you though?

[BustyKuroNeko]

Now this was the explanation i was looking for. Thanks

Really?  This is the one he said he dumbed down times 10 ;p  Its good for you though?

Not for me... This makes it really simple to explain to other people
you are implying something... i can feel it and i don't like it

[traincarswreck]

Not for me... This makes it really simple to explain to other people
you are implying something... i can feel it and i don't like it

I'm just suggesting you might not want to listen to the 10 times dumb version could you might end up thinking and supporting something very very very stupid.

[xyzzy099]

I hate the fact that my investment in Bitcoin appears to be getting fucked.

I think you have here revealed the 'core' of your outrage...  My impression is that most (all?) of the members of the 'bigger blocks now, at any cost' crowd are people who ultimately view Bitcoin as their get-rich-quick scheme, and have no real concern at all for the long-term technological success of Bitcoin.

That's fine by me - I have nothing against people striving to promote their own enlightened self-interest - but you should at least be honest about it and quit pretending that your concerns are technical ones.

You sure talk a lot of shit for someone who knows next to nothing about the actual problem, if you do, you wouldn't use 'my impression', you would use actual numbers and basic math.

<BLAH BLAH BLAH>

I haven't talked ANY shit at all, just expressed an opinion.  If you don't like my opinion, well, fuck you.  You don't have to like it.

I expressed my impression of people's motivations.  How, pray tell, can I mathematically represent those motivations?

I have no intention of re-arguing the technical arguments that have been already argued to death on this forum and elsewhere.  I will just say that if you think you are actually smarter than people whose work formed the foundation of Bitcoin, like Nick Szabo and Adam Back then you are just an idiot.

In all fairness though, your comment did seem to imply that there's not really a technically issue ("blocks aren't really full, bigblockers are just greedy").  Is this not what you intended to say?

I don't know how you could get "There is not really a technical issue" from what I wrote.  I think you just made that up in your head.

For the sake of clarity, I think you and many others like you chose to jump for the low-hanging fruit (bigger blocks) that pretends to be a scaling solution for Bitcoin, just because it is quick and dirty, and stands to potentially net a quick return as (stupid) people are fooled into believing the scaling issue is solved.

There is another solution (for those who believe there is a problem) that is clearly technically superior, and which is a lot more likely to allow Bitcoin to remain decentralized and retain its core value proposition.  The only way anyone can ignore that is if they just don't care.

I am sure you will disagree with the points I make above, but the technical discussion of this stuff has been beat to death here, and if you don't agree with me by now, I'm sure you never will.  I don't expect that you will stop your constant harangue against Blockstream and Core and all the evil you perceive in them.  But I hope you will at least take a second to consider what your motivations really are.

[Killerpotleaf]

I hate the fact that my investment in Bitcoin appears to be getting fucked.

I think you have here revealed the 'core' of your outrage...  My impression is that most (all?) of the members of the 'bigger blocks now, at any cost' crowd are people who ultimately view Bitcoin as their get-rich-quick scheme, and have no real concern at all for the long-term technological success of Bitcoin.

That's fine by me - I have nothing against people striving to promote their own enlightened self-interest - but you should at least be honest about it and quit pretending that your concerns are technical ones.

You sure talk a lot of shit for someone who knows next to nothing about the actual problem, if you do, you wouldn't use 'my impression', you would use actual numbers and basic math.

<BLAH BLAH BLAH>

I haven't talked ANY shit at all, just expressed an opinion.  If you don't like my opinion, well, fuck you.  You don't have to like it.

I expressed my impression of people's motivations.  How, pray tell, can I mathematically represent those motivations?

I have no intention of re-arguing the technical arguments that have been already argued to death on this forum and elsewhere.  I will just say that if you think you are actually smarter than people whose work formed the foundation of Bitcoin, like Nick Szabo and Adam Back then you are just an idiot.

In all fairness though, your comment did seem to imply that there's not really a technically issue ("blocks aren't really full, bigblockers are just greedy").  Is this not what you intended to say?

I don't know how you could get "There is not really a technical issue" from what I wrote.  I think you just made that up in your head.

For the sake of clarity, I think you and many others like you chose to jump for the low-hanging fruit (bigger blocks) that pretends to be a scaling solution for Bitcoin, just because it is quick and dirty, and stands to potentially net a quick return as (stupid) people are fooled into believing the scaling issue is solved.

There is another solution (for those who believe there is a problem) that is clearly technically superior, and which is a lot more likely to allow Bitcoin to remain decentralized and retain its core value proposition.  The only way anyone can ignore that is if they just don't care.

I am sure you will disagree with the points I make above, but the technical discussion of this stuff has been beat to death here, and if you don't agree with me by now, I'm sure you never will.  I don't expect that you will stop your constant harangue against Blockstream and Core and all the evil you perceive in them.  But I hope you will at least take a second to consider what your motivations really are.

are all technically superior solutions orders of magnitude more complex then the dumb quick fix?

[Killerpotleaf]

the small blocker's argument about node centraliztion is invalid!

first of all node count is meaningless when sybil attack is so goddamn CHEAP!
second,  sybil attack is so goddamn CHEAP! sybil attack is so goddamn CHEAP! sybil attack is so goddamn CHEAP!
repeat that a few dozen times
and then tell me 1MB is to big.

[iamnotback]

Lol, wait honey somebody is wrong on the Internet and I can't sleep.