[SHOCK] Core dev and Blockstream employee tells bitcoin users to use fiat!

[European Central Bank]

it's a crappy answer, but the guy who started that thread is trying to move 71 inputs all at once. that's gonna create a headline fee even when things are calmer.

i could see the writing was on the wall with fees a while back. i consolidated everything before they got to the current levels. i hope the fee situation recovers but i addressed it for myself before this could've happened.

[1715038668]

1715038668

[1715038668]

1715038668

[1715038668]

1715038668

[1715038668]

1715038668

[1715038668]

1715038668

[franky1]

Some guy said something!!!! OMG, this must be huge!!!?  
 

"some guy"
the Bips tower guard who refuses entry to anything not friendly with king blockstream tell you if you dont like the direction king blockstream is going use fiat....

shows how controlled bitcoin is.
bitcoin meant to have no barriers of entry and if the bips tower guard is so arrogant to not want opposition. then he should not be the guard.

replace him
get someone else in control of the bips that wont shut down idea's purely because they do not lead to the blockstream emerald city via their roadmap

imagine it this way.
1990's microsoft make word '95. someone suggests a new feature.. and bill gates shouts if you dont like it my way then go use a marker pen...
 microsoft word would hav not grown to be as useful as it is now. it would have just been notepad

[25hashcoin]

it's a crappy answer, but the guy who started that thread is trying to move 71 inputs all at once. that's gonna create a headline fee even when things are calmer.

i could see the writing was on the wall with fees a while back. i consolidated everything before they got to the current levels. i hope the fee situation recovers but i addressed it for myself before this could've happened.

Acting like common tx prices are reasonable...He would have given the same answer to any amount. and you wonder why you haven't used bitcoin lately?

[European Central Bank]

Acting like common tx prices are reasonable....have you even used bitcoin lately?

they are not. and i have. and that's why i emptied all of the high input addresses before this happened.

and i still think you're a bot.

[deisik]

Now try to address the dilemma I stated

If increasing block size is so urgent as you say, why miners don't just hard fork Bitcoin (given their mining monopoly)?

because consensus (real consensus) not the reddit propaganda crap the fudsters script... REAL consensus doesnt work by pools simply making bigger blocks.
those bigger blocks would get rejected in 3 seconds

Then you should understand what it comes down to

If you fail somehow, I can help. It pretty much means that those miners allegedly screaming about larger blocks for so many years are outright liars. If there were real necessity in larger blocks (as Larger Blocks advocates seem to claim), forking Bitcoin would be an inevitable outcome greeted and welcomed by virtually everyone (and his fucking dog). But given that miners are not going to fork Bitcoin any time soon, it proves as well that they are up to something else, something different from what they are so vocal about

[25hashcoin]

Some guy said something!!!! OMG, this must be huge!!!?  
 

"some guy"
the Bips tower guard who refuses entry to anything not friendly with king blockstream tell you if you dont like the direction king blockstream is going use fiat....

shows how controlled bitcoin is.
bitcoin meant to have no barriers of entry and if the bips tower guard is so arrogant to not want opposition. then he should not be the guard.

replace him
get someone else in control of the bips that wont shut down idea's purely because they do not lead to the blockstream emerald city via their roadmap

imagine it this way.
1990's microsoft make word '95. someone suggests a new feature.. and bill gates shouts if you dont like it my way then go use a marker pen...
 microsoft word would hav not grown to be as useful as it is now. it would have just been notepad

QFT and spot on analogy.

[25hashcoin]

they are not. and i have. and that's why i emptied all of the high input addresses before this happened.

and i still think you're a bot.

I'm just saying the specific amount of this tx fee isn't the point. I'm saying the mentality held by someone who's part of a group with much perceived power in bitcoin has a completely negative, toxic, and counterproductive outlook on the whole thing, and it should be clear to anyone and everyone that further motives are indeed involved.

[European Central Bank]

I'm just saying the specific amount of this tx fee isn't the point. I'm saying the mentality held by someone who's part of a group with much perceived power in bitcoin has a completely negative, toxic, and counterproductive outlook on the whole thing, and it should be clear to anyone and everyone that further motives are indeed involved.

it was a stupid, unhelpful and arrogant answer i agree. but he is kind of famous for getting out of bed on the wrong side fairly often.

anyway my take is that these guys take no account of economic realities and user experience for the sake of technical safety, perfection and future security. all the while the real users are losing out are may well migrate elsewhere.

neither side is being realistic. core might carry on pontificating until there's nothing left to pontificate. the users might break the whole thing in the rush to get back to the good old days, or walk away.

there's a middle ground in there somewhere.

i don't buy core as the evil empire seeking to drive users into bankster arms. their main issue is lack of pragmatism.

[moviebuff777]

I guess we should start stocking up on litecoin and other altcoins then. Maybe a balanced portfolio is the best solution.

[franky1]

Then you should understand what it comes down to

If you fail somehow, I can help. It pretty much means that those miners allegedly screaming about larger blocks for so many years are outright liars. If there were real necessity in larger blocks (as Larger Blocks advocates seem to claim), forking Bitcoin would be an inevitable outcome greeted and welcomed by virtually everyone (and his fucking dog). But given that miners are not going to fork Bitcoin any time soon, it proves as well that they are up to something else, something different from what they are so vocal about

pools changing the rles without consensus is just them making their own altcoin..

it seems you dont understand consensus..
pools cannot control consensus.
pools can only either stick to consensus or make an altcoin..

devs refuse to make an implemntation for pools, users to have a viable choice to change consensus..
with all the REKT campaigns the tower guarding of bips and even all the moderation of reddit and the tech discussion topic of this forum.. trying to get any change that is not blockstream sanctioned is futile

i actually hope BLOCKSTREAM devs jump over to litecoin. and then the independant BITCOIN devs remain with bitcoin and then open transparent and no barrier changes can happen again.

its gone down hill since 2014

(downhill as in real things that matter, code, control, ethos, direction) - dont reply simply about "price upwards"

[25hashcoin]

I guess we should start stocking up on litecoin and other altcoins then. Maybe a balanced portfolio is the best solution.

Or just wait for the chainsplit if Core won't compromise. If bitcoin is successfully overtaken, then I see little hope for cryptos a whole. That said, nothing against diversification.

[Chin Cheng]

I guess we should start stocking up on litecoin and other altcoins then. Maybe a balanced portfolio is the best solution.

Or just wait for the chainsplit if Core won't compromise. If bitcoin is successfully overtaken, then I see little hope for cryptos a whole. That said, nothing against diversification.

Diversifying your portfolio is well and good if you are in a healthy market,there are a lot of egos and personalities tied in this scaling debate and it is really impossible to find a proper solution,i can understand why they get pissed off and ask others to use fiat,bitcoin being an open source experiment i will enjoy the perks as long as i can trade.

[deisik]

Then you should understand what it comes down to

If you fail somehow, I can help. It pretty much means that those miners allegedly screaming about larger blocks for so many years are outright liars. If there were real necessity in larger blocks (as Larger Blocks advocates seem to claim), forking Bitcoin would be an inevitable outcome greeted and welcomed by virtually everyone (and his fucking dog). But given that miners are not going to fork Bitcoin any time soon, it proves as well that they are up to something else, something different from what they are so vocal about

pools changing the rles without consensus is just them making their own altcoin

Why are you laying yourself out to evade addressing the dilemma I pointed out?

You can call that coin an altcoin or whatever, but this doesn't change anything. If things are as bad in respect to blocksizes as miners are claiming them to be (not actually miners but some dudes here that are pretending that they are), then, as I said, forking Bitcoin (making an altcoin, in your speak) would be inevitable, and it would be welcomed by virtually anyone (since the situation was dire and no longer tolerable or acceptable). If it is in fact "evitable", then the miners are lying, or the dudes who are telling that the miners "have been screaming for years about the blocksize increase" are lying. So who is lying here?

[iamTom123]

Some altcoin will take the throne if bitcoin doesn't change. Things change... deal with it or be pushed out of the way.  Pigs get slaughtered.

And Litecoin will most likely be a new king of crypto

Regarding the noise raised by the OP, I have heard many people claiming here that miners have been screaming for years about the necessity of the blocksize increase. If it is really so (I don't know, but let's assume that) and the blocksize increase was (is) as urgent and pressing as they have been screaming, what prevents them from introducing this change on their own (given their hashing power monopoly)? Okay, some dudes would be quick to retort that they want consensus and all that but if there is no consensus may be the bigger blocks are not in fact so urgent as these miners are pretending them to be? As I see it, you can't possibly have it both ways

It is quite sad that there are people whom the Bitcoin community and ordinary users bestowed trust on and yet they seems to be not working for the good of Bitcoin and its many stakeholders. However, I do believe that this is just a temporary setback as soon we can have a robust Bitcoin emerging.

I don't agree that soon LiteCoin will take over the throne of Bitcoin even if all those people manning Bitcoin now will transfer to the former. Having those people transferred can even help Bitcoin in the long run so they can replaced by people who have the PASSION and CARE for Bitcoin.

It is time for them to go somewhere as honestly we don't need these kind of people connected to Bitcoin.

[deisik]

Some altcoin will take the throne if bitcoin doesn't change. Things change... deal with it or be pushed out of the way.  Pigs get slaughtered.

And Litecoin will most likely be a new king of crypto

Regarding the noise raised by the OP, I have heard many people claiming here that miners have been screaming for years about the necessity of the blocksize increase. If it is really so (I don't know, but let's assume that) and the blocksize increase was (is) as urgent and pressing as they have been screaming, what prevents them from introducing this change on their own (given their hashing power monopoly)? Okay, some dudes would be quick to retort that they want consensus and all that but if there is no consensus may be the bigger blocks are not in fact so urgent as these miners are pretending them to be? As I see it, you can't possibly have it both ways

It is quite sad that there are people whom the Bitcoin community and ordinary users bestowed trust on and yet they seems to be not working for the good of Bitcoin and its many stakeholders. However, I do believe that this is just a temporary setback as soon we can have a robust Bitcoin emerging.

I don't agree that soon LiteCoin will take over the throne of Bitcoin even if all those people manning Bitcoin now will transfer to the former. Having those people transferred can even help Bitcoin in the long run so they can replaced by people who have the PASSION and CARE for Bitcoin.

It is time for them to go somewhere as honestly we don't need these kind of people connected to Bitcoin

You seem to be overly obsessed with Bitcoin

It is only a tool, be it a currency or just a speculative asset. The same basically pertains to any other cryptocoin out there as well as money in general. It is certainly not about passion or care, it is about using it, and most people use Bitcoin as a vehicle for speculation. You may like or you may not like it, but if all these people (or just the majority of them) switch to some other coin (not necessarily Litecoin), Bitcoin will be dead, and this is life

[franky1]

Why are you laying yourself out to evade addressing the dilemma I pointed out?

You can call that coin an altcoin or whatever, but this doesn't change anything. If things are as bad in respect to blocksizes as miners are claiming them to be (not actually miners but some dudes here that are pretending that they are), then, as I said, forking Bitcoin (making an altcoin, in your speak) would be inevitable, and it would be welcomed by virtually anyone (since the situation was dire and no longer tolerable or acceptable). If it is in fact "evitable", then the miners are lying, or the dudes who are telling that the miners "have been screaming for years about the blocksize increase" are lying. So who is lying here?

i am not evading anything.
you are evading the drama of the last 2 years+
all the REKT campaigns by the blockstream fanboys.
the censorship army

all the crap to surpress the need and desires of many for more tx capacity onchain(without the cludgy half baked promises of blockstream devs)

EG
community voices a problem.. blockstream solution: cut off tongues until no problems can be voiced. then announce that all problems must have been solved due to no one voicing problems anymore

devs should be coming up with solutions to problems not fairy tale hopes of solutions with promises of dreams coming true if everyone just goes to sleep for a couple years

[soul-impact]

Users complaining about high bitcoin fees....Core dev and Blockstream worker Lukejr mocks them and tells them to "just use fiat". https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6ereib/these_fees_are_unacceptable/dicq95v/

These are the people responsible for stalling bitcoin. These are the people we are trusting to let bitcoin grow into mainstream.

If you seriously haven't realized the BlockstreamCore is attempting to overthrow bitcoin and constrict the blocksize forever to turn it into a settlement only system then I seriously feel sorry for you.

The BlockstreamCore devs do not understand the purpose of bitcoin which is peer to peer cash. The have been compromised from $55 million from AXA from the former Bilderberg chairman.


Wake Up!!!  

This is something I am worried about, if this continues and there is no suitable direction, the bitcoin may be left behind, and the other altcoin throne. Currently, bitcoin is in the development process, it should not get into any trouble. Conversely, altcoin is growing so quickly, it surprised me.

[franky1]

This is something I am worried about, if this continues and there is no suitable direction, the bitcoin may be left behind, and the other altcoin throne. Currently, bitcoin is in the development process, it should not get into any trouble. Conversely, altcoin is growing so quickly, it surprised me.

firstly, dont worry about price.. or market cap drama. thats all just ups and downs that will always occur, anyone can make an alt with 5 trillion coins premined, sell 1 coin on an exchange for just $1 and cause that altcoin to get a $5trillion market cap.

devs can be ass-hats.. the sooner they change their ways the better. i just wish blockstream would hurry up and jump ship to hyper ledger so the real bitcoin passionate devs can get on with improving bitcoin without the puppet strings holding them up

what does concern most and can significantly change the paradigm is if bitpay/coinbase switched their merchant tools from bitcoin to something else.. which many of the DCG cartel are thinking litecoin would be the option if it came down to it.

in short if you can no longer buy real world items from the thousands of merchants that accept bitcoin currently, because it all switched over to another coin.. then bitcoin will get affected

[deisik]

community voices a problem.. blockstream solution: cut off tongues until no problems can be voiced. then announce that all problems must have been solved due to no one voicing problems anymore

devs should be coming up with solutions to problems not fairy tale hopes of solutions with promises of dreams coming true if everyone just goes to sleep for a couple years

Okay, community voices a problem, miners can solve the problem, as simple as it gets. So what the fuck are you talking about consensus here? And whose consensus miners need, that of developers or that of community after all? Make up you mind finally. If it is community, then you can't possibly say something like "community voices a problem" since that essentially means they are giving miners their consent to fork Bitcoin while the latter don't do anything. Or should I thus conclude that this is not what miners actually want?

And they in fact don't want to solve the problem voiced by community?

[franky1]

community voices a problem.. blockstream solution: cut off tongues until no problems can be voiced. then announce that all problems must have been solved due to no one voicing problems anymore

devs should be coming up with solutions to problems not fairy tale hopes of solutions with promises of dreams coming true if everyone just goes to sleep for a couple years

Okay, community voices a problem, miners can solve the problem, as simple as it gets. So what the fuck are you talking about consensus here? And whose consensus miners need, that of developers or that of community after all? Make up you mind finally. If it is community, then you can't possibly say something like "community voices a problem" since that essentially means they are giving miners their consent to fork Bitcoin while the latter don't do anything. Or should I thus conclude that this is not what miners actually want?

And they in fact don't want to solve the problem voiced by community?

you dont understand consensus

consensus is about making BITCOIN grow in a way the community can unite around..

your posts about miners do x.. is just "well miners can just F**K off and go play in another sandbox"
thats not a community growth.. thats tribal conflict.

native indian: 'you no like chief maxwell, go move herd of horses to other side of mountain'