Bitcoin Forum
August 18, 2019, 10:08:13 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Happy 2nd Anniversary, SEGWIT!  (Read 486 times)
Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190
Merit: 792


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
August 07, 2019, 11:30:27 AM
 #41


just because you didnt get it, doesnt mean i didnt "show anything/offer" and doesnt mean "there's nothing"


You "get it", OK. Or you claim you get it. But it doesn't mean there's "something", especially from your history, your anti-Core bias, and your pro-increase-block-size-or-die-propaganda.


▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄██████████████████████▄
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
   ███████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
███████
BTC  ◉PLAY  ◉XMR  ◉DOGE  ◉BCH  ◉STRAT  ◉ETH  ◉GAS  ◉LTC  ◉DASH  ◉PPC
     ▄▄██████████████▄▄
  ▄██████████████████████▄        █████
▄██████████████████████████▄      █████
████ ▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄ ████     ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██
████ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ████ ▄██████▄
████████████████████████████ ████████
███████▀            ▀███████ ▀██████▀
█████▀                ▀█████
▀██████████████████████████▀
  ▀▀████████████████████▀▀ 
✔️DICE           
✔️BLACKJACK
✔️PLINKO
✔️VIDEO POKER
✔️ROULETTE     
✔️LOTTO
1566122893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566122893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566122893
Reply with quote  #2

1566122893
Report to moderator
1566122893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566122893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566122893
Reply with quote  #2

1566122893
Report to moderator
1566122893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566122893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566122893
Reply with quote  #2

1566122893
Report to moderator
PLAY NOW
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1566122893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566122893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566122893
Reply with quote  #2

1566122893
Report to moderator
1566122893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566122893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566122893
Reply with quote  #2

1566122893
Report to moderator
1566122893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566122893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566122893
Reply with quote  #2

1566122893
Report to moderator
DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1329


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile WWW
August 07, 2019, 01:07:50 PM
 #42

people on this forum dont want to know only the fluffy positive propaganda which they will get from adverts and people promoting bitcoin. people want the real information which includes the negative.. remember to be on this forum they must have already heard of bitcoin. so there is no need to be trying to positively sell people on the fluffy cloud features. because they have already been introduced.. instead they want proper and real information

instead of trying to hide the negatives.. you should also be highlighting them.
a great currency is one that recognises its flaws and fixes them. not works around/hides them
if you actually cared for bitcoin then you would have the old mindset of the original devs that actually wanted people to try to find the flaws and try to break bitcoin so that bugs can be fixed.

How about you actually wait to see how it's implemented before you completely jump the gun with your alarmist 'sky-is-falling' nonsense, where you insinuate we're locked into a course where SegWit transactions will be malleable?

You could have phrased it that if the feature was implemented incorrectly, it had the potential to allow malleability.  But you chose to phrase it in the way that you did, making it sound as though malleability was the only conceivable outcome. 

You just can't help yourself.  Stop pointing the finger at other people when they call you out on the undeniable fact that you bring it all on yourself.  People would stop calling your integrity into question if you stopped giving them every reason to.

If it looked likely that the proposed feature would reintroduce malleability and devs still wanted to push ahead with it, then I would absolutely question that decision, just as I suspect everyone else here would.  Which is precisely why such an outcome is unlikely to ever occur.  But not once in the course of your last few years of your mindless FUD have you ever come close to making a reasonable statement like that.  As such, you deserve all the attacks people make on your character.  I can't even begin to comprehend how you look in a mirror and like what you see.  You are scum.

ETFbitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1972

Use SegWit and enjoy lower fees.


View Profile WWW
August 07, 2019, 04:03:29 PM
 #43

but concentrating just on segwit.. lets list what segwit promised and if it has/hasnt achieved it
1. better transaction capacity: no
    bytes per transaction has got worse since segwit.
    segwit is actually more bloaty.
    even with a 1.3x byte growth compared to ~2015 stats the tx count has not risen by 1.3x
But the reality says otherwise due to max. block size change from 1MB to 4.000.000 weight unit and SegWit have lower transaction weight size.
dang you really are believing the propaganda.
segwit does not have lower transaction BYTE hard drive storage size. it has UNCOUNTED size which they refer to as Virtual byte. these virtual bytes are used to make all the weight of a block appear as 1mb to not break the now outdated1mb rule

but when it comes to WEIGHT which does account for actual bytes. segwit tx actually uses more bytes compared to a legacy tx of same input/output count

maybe best to learn about segwit and how it mis-counts bytes

I didn't say SegWit transaction have smaller size in byte and i know the fact SegWit transaction have bigger size in byte, what i said are :
1. SegWit transaction have far lower weight size
2. SegWit indirectly allow higher TPS because max. block size changed from 1MB to 4 million weight unit

2. fee efficiency: no
    fee's in 2015 where pennies with a top price of 25cents before users complained. fees now are more by averaging 25c
And without SegWit and SegWit adaption, it'd be worse since less transaction would fit info a block which would increase avg transaction fees.

Besides, using cents rather than satoshi makes your comparison useless because because Bitcoin price in 2019 is higher than 2015
same could be said about the other way, using satoshi's instead of cents. less people are transacting as often because the cost is so high

Fair point, but the fact average transaction fees would be higher without SegWit remains true

the grand debate of bitcoins purpose WAS about a open currency without borders. yet the tx fee of bitcoin has ruled out utility to many countries of unbanked people

I agree with your opinion, but few people also argue that's the cost of decentralization.

Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2464
Merit: 1835



View Profile
August 07, 2019, 05:26:51 PM
Merited by squatter (1)
 #44

i know the fact SegWit transaction have bigger size in byte

nested segwit inputs are a little bigger than old style inputs, but bech32 (i.e. native segwit) inputs are a little smaller

Vires in numeris
ETFbitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1972

Use SegWit and enjoy lower fees.


View Profile WWW
August 07, 2019, 06:03:38 PM
 #45

i know the fact SegWit transaction have bigger size in byte

nested segwit inputs are a little bigger than old style inputs, but bech32 (i.e. native segwit) inputs are a little smaller

I totally forget that since as far as i can remember, overall transaction size difference is only about 1-3 bytes smaller (by comparing 2 identical transaction, expect using different input for comparison).

franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2478
Merit: 1451



View Profile
August 07, 2019, 07:57:08 PM
 #46

How about you actually wait to see how it's implemented before you completely jump the gun

some moral following devs have also highlighted the flaws.. you seem to be someone that wants things to break and then say "oh well X did say it was an experiment"

you love the idea of getting people off the network, you love the idea of increased fee's to deter usage, you love the idea of promoting positives to get newb's in. but then lack care about what happens when users actually want to use it

if you cared about bitcoin and cared about people in the worlds utility of it, more than your own greed of getting rich from others loses. you would actually see things more clearly.

it appears you are more so the "scum" as you have quite openly shown how much you dont want people to use bitcoin as a currency

good luck with your greedy self indulgent idea's of how you wish bitcoin to be bypassed and users pushed towards other networks. but even with me wishing you luck, im afraid to tell you that your not going to get rich via your LN promoting and utility

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1329


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile WWW
August 07, 2019, 08:44:03 PM
Merited by Paashaas (1)
 #47

if you cared about bitcoin and cared about people in the worlds utility of it, more than your own greed of getting rich from others loses. you would actually see things more clearly.

If you cared about Bitcoin, you'd stop trying to turn it into a shitty BCH/SV clone.  That benefits no one other than the people in charge of those centralised shitcoins.  Now go whine to the devs of your preferred client, BU, to implement all the utterly dismal, imbecilic crap you think would make Bitcoin better.  Most of the devs on this chain just think you're a sad joke.  No wonder they ridicule you.


im afraid to tell you that your not going to get rich via your LN promoting and utility

No, moron, you've got that backwards.  I've already told you.  

franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2478
Merit: 1451



View Profile
August 07, 2019, 08:45:35 PM
Last edit: August 08, 2019, 06:45:54 AM by franky1
 #48

as for ETF and Carltons debate about transaction size

bech32 uses MORE bytes
also nested segwit is also bigger
even funnier part is segwits only real purpose is for a LN gateway which requires bytes for a lock and multisig meaning when segwit does get real active for its true purpose the bytes per transaction will be higher

P.S
there are stupid websites that push the positive propaganda of segwit.. like this one
https://www.buybitcoinworldwide.com/segwit/
celebrating how bitcoin has a 2mb block.. but look closely at the image... number of transactions: 225 (facepalm)

and good old doomad. running out of technical rebuttles so resorts to personal attacks.. how obvious
also trying to make out that i am part of bch team is him scrapping the bottom of the barrel.

if only he knew more about bitcoin and LN and not so much caring for his own greed, would doomad be singing a different song
by the way. devs do ridicule me. until they realise fixing bitcoin means more then protecting their own reputation. the ridicules end up just being about how i inform the community of flaws rather than be about the flaws. yea i dont spoon feed all details but for good reason. if those who rebuttle cant work it out, its their loss

as shown by doomads link. the devs had to do a workaround for segwit when i started mentioning its flaws in 2015/6.
same with segwits noinput. i mentioned it last year and suddenly they decide after introducing it to then not make it a public release and even a year later they still cant figure out a workaround for it. (but they still want to have it, otherwise they would have dropped it)
seems that doomad and devs have things in common. care more about reputation than bitcoin issues

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
pooya87
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1803



View Profile
August 08, 2019, 03:33:50 AM
Merited by Carlton Banks (3)
 #49

i know the fact SegWit transaction have bigger size in byte

nested segwit inputs are a little bigger than old style inputs, but bech32 (i.e. native segwit) inputs are a little smaller

the bech32 outputs are smaller not as inputs, it is because the ScriptPub (of type P2WPKH in comparison to P2PKH) doesn't have the same OPs otherwise the transactions spending them are bigger.
every SegWit transaction has overhead. there is the 2 byte marker/flag (=0001), there is a 1 byte leftover CompactInt indicating size of ScriptSig being zero, and finally the CompactInt added to witness indicating the number of items in it.
unless i've missed something in transactions, the total size seems to be the same for P2WPKH (smaller previous tx but bigger tx spending it)

Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190
Merit: 792


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
August 10, 2019, 09:35:37 AM
 #50

if you cared about bitcoin and cared about people in the worlds utility of it, more than your own greed of getting rich from others loses. you would actually see things more clearly.

If you cared about Bitcoin, you'd stop trying to turn it into a shitty BCH/SV clone.  That benefits no one other than the people in charge of those centralised shitcoins.  Now go whine to the devs of your preferred client, BU, to implement all the utterly dismal, imbecilic crap you think would make Bitcoin better.  Most of the devs on this chain just think you're a sad joke.  No wonder they ridicule you.


Wait for the next Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and Bitcoin Cash SV halvings. The Miners Of The Forks can't mine at a loss forever. The Forks will either follow Bitcoin's model, or their miners leave and mine Bitcoin.


▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄██████████████████████▄
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
   ███████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
███████
BTC  ◉PLAY  ◉XMR  ◉DOGE  ◉BCH  ◉STRAT  ◉ETH  ◉GAS  ◉LTC  ◉DASH  ◉PPC
     ▄▄██████████████▄▄
  ▄██████████████████████▄        █████
▄██████████████████████████▄      █████
████ ▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄ ████     ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██
████ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ████ ▄██████▄
████████████████████████████ ████████
███████▀            ▀███████ ▀██████▀
█████▀                ▀█████
▀██████████████████████████▀
  ▀▀████████████████████▀▀ 
✔️DICE           
✔️BLACKJACK
✔️PLINKO
✔️VIDEO POKER
✔️ROULETTE     
✔️LOTTO
Red-Apple
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 1344
Merit: 627



View Profile
August 10, 2019, 10:54:56 AM
 #51

if you cared about bitcoin and cared about people in the worlds utility of it, more than your own greed of getting rich from others loses. you would actually see things more clearly.

If you cared about Bitcoin, you'd stop trying to turn it into a shitty BCH/SV clone.  That benefits no one other than the people in charge of those centralised shitcoins.  Now go whine to the devs of your preferred client, BU, to implement all the utterly dismal, imbecilic crap you think would make Bitcoin better.  Most of the devs on this chain just think you're a sad joke.  No wonder they ridicule you.


Wait for the next Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and Bitcoin Cash SV halvings. The Miners Of The Forks can't mine at a loss forever. The Forks will either follow Bitcoin's model, or their miners leave and mine Bitcoin.

or they do another hard fork (5th one?) and manipulate the difficulty again to invent the incentive for miners to mine their shitcoin just like they did in the early days when they were practically giving away 12000-13000 BCH per day to miners and it was worth ~0.24BTC back then so the miners profit was ~3000BTC per day instead of 1800BTC per day.

Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190
Merit: 792


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
August 11, 2019, 06:08:31 AM
 #52

if you cared about bitcoin and cared about people in the worlds utility of it, more than your own greed of getting rich from others loses. you would actually see things more clearly.

If you cared about Bitcoin, you'd stop trying to turn it into a shitty BCH/SV clone.  That benefits no one other than the people in charge of those centralised shitcoins.  Now go whine to the devs of your preferred client, BU, to implement all the utterly dismal, imbecilic crap you think would make Bitcoin better.  Most of the devs on this chain just think you're a sad joke.  No wonder they ridicule you.


Wait for the next Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and Bitcoin Cash SV halvings. The Miners Of The Forks can't mine at a loss forever. The Forks will either follow Bitcoin's model, or their miners leave and mine Bitcoin.

or they do another hard fork (5th one?) and manipulate the difficulty again to invent the incentive for miners to mine their shitcoin just like they did in the early days when they were practically giving away 12000-13000 BCH per day to miners and it was worth ~0.24BTC back then so the miners profit was ~3000BTC per day instead of 1800BTC per day.


Plus use Bitcoin.com's mining power to mine Bitcoin Cash without the miners' permission, like the last time. Or pump Bitcoin Cash through their mined Bitcoins, like the last time.

Either of them will not be sustainable.


▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄██████████████████████▄
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
   ███████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
███████
BTC  ◉PLAY  ◉XMR  ◉DOGE  ◉BCH  ◉STRAT  ◉ETH  ◉GAS  ◉LTC  ◉DASH  ◉PPC
     ▄▄██████████████▄▄
  ▄██████████████████████▄        █████
▄██████████████████████████▄      █████
████ ▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄ ████     ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██
████ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ████ ▄██████▄
████████████████████████████ ████████
███████▀            ▀███████ ▀██████▀
█████▀                ▀█████
▀██████████████████████████▀
  ▀▀████████████████████▀▀ 
✔️DICE           
✔️BLACKJACK
✔️PLINKO
✔️VIDEO POKER
✔️ROULETTE     
✔️LOTTO
Khaos77
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 54

Flag Day ☺


View Profile
August 11, 2019, 08:37:03 AM
 #53

Plus use Bitcoin.com's mining power to mine Bitcoin Cash without the miners' permission, like the last time. Or pump Bitcoin Cash through their mined Bitcoins, like the last time.

Either of them will not be sustainable.

The same miners holding up BTC are holding up BCH and BSV,
you may believe them when they say they only support one coin.
But hey , you're kind-of-really stupid.  Cheesy

Nothing about bitcoin is sustainable, exponential energy waste, new asics needed every 2 years, no guarantee that price covers cost, competitors with cheaper fees and faster performance with just as good security.
BTC got problems, I imagine it would die before you noticed them .  Tongue

Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190
Merit: 792


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
August 12, 2019, 06:42:21 AM
 #54

Plus use Bitcoin.com's mining power to mine Bitcoin Cash without the miners' permission, like the last time. Or pump Bitcoin Cash through their mined Bitcoins, like the last time.

Either of them will not be sustainable.

The same miners holding up BTC are holding up BCH and BSV,
you may believe them when they say they only support one coin.
But hey , you're kind-of-really stupid.  Cheesy


Roll Eyes

Try harder troll.

Quote

Nothing about bitcoin is sustainable, exponential energy waste, new asics needed every 2 years, no guarantee that price covers cost, competitors with cheaper fees and faster performance with just as good security.
BTC got problems, I imagine it would die before you noticed them .  Tongue


Many have debated that, yet 10 years later it's still the king. Long live the king! Cool


▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄██████████████████████▄
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
   ███████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
███████
BTC  ◉PLAY  ◉XMR  ◉DOGE  ◉BCH  ◉STRAT  ◉ETH  ◉GAS  ◉LTC  ◉DASH  ◉PPC
     ▄▄██████████████▄▄
  ▄██████████████████████▄        █████
▄██████████████████████████▄      █████
████ ▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄ ████     ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██
████ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ████ ▄██████▄
████████████████████████████ ████████
███████▀            ▀███████ ▀██████▀
█████▀                ▀█████
▀██████████████████████████▀
  ▀▀████████████████████▀▀ 
✔️DICE           
✔️BLACKJACK
✔️PLINKO
✔️VIDEO POKER
✔️ROULETTE     
✔️LOTTO
figmentofmyass
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 849



View Profile
August 12, 2019, 07:03:17 AM
Merited by Carlton Banks (3)
 #55

The same miners holding up BTC are holding up BCH and BSV,
you may believe them when they say they only support one coin.
But hey , you're kind-of-really stupid.  Cheesy

compare their respective hash rates. miners obviously believe in BTC much more than those altcoins.

Nothing about bitcoin is sustainable, exponential energy waste, new asics needed every 2 years, no guarantee that price covers cost, competitors with cheaper fees and faster performance with just as good security.

"just as good security"---no, not with regard to attack cost.

why should there be any guarantee that price covers cost? is that true for gold miners or any other commodity producers? of course not, because that's not how free markets work.

Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190
Merit: 792


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
August 12, 2019, 08:33:37 AM
Merited by Carlton Banks (2)
 #56


Nothing about bitcoin is sustainable, exponential energy waste, new asics needed every 2 years, no guarantee that price covers cost, competitors with cheaper fees and faster performance with just as good security.

"just as good security"---no, not with regard to attack cost.

why should there be any guarantee that price covers cost? is that true for gold miners or any other commodity producers? of course not, because that's not how free markets work.


What anti-Bitcoin newbies like Kahos77 fail to understand, or avoid to understand, is that Bitcoin's model has been very sustainable. It's already right there in front of their eyes for 10 years.

More miners => more secure => more confidence => more users => higher price => more miners => ...


▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄██████████████████████▄
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
   ███████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
███████
BTC  ◉PLAY  ◉XMR  ◉DOGE  ◉BCH  ◉STRAT  ◉ETH  ◉GAS  ◉LTC  ◉DASH  ◉PPC
     ▄▄██████████████▄▄
  ▄██████████████████████▄        █████
▄██████████████████████████▄      █████
████ ▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄ ████     ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██
████ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ████ ▄██████▄
████████████████████████████ ████████
███████▀            ▀███████ ▀██████▀
█████▀                ▀█████
▀██████████████████████████▀
  ▀▀████████████████████▀▀ 
✔️DICE           
✔️BLACKJACK
✔️PLINKO
✔️VIDEO POKER
✔️ROULETTE     
✔️LOTTO
Khaos77
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 54

Flag Day ☺


View Profile
August 13, 2019, 03:08:23 PM
 #57

More miners => more secure => more confidence => more users => higher price => more miners => ...

This is the reality.
BTC Miners => 4 Mining Pool operators = security is dependent on 4 guys with over 51% attack vector.  Cheesy

No matter the energy waste the btc miners give 4 guys a 51% attack potential every day.
LTC also has a mere 4 guys with a 51% attack potential,
which is why coins that have more than 4 guys are more secure than your PoW pooling coins.

FYI:
Wind_Fury is so clueless, he thinks running a non-mining node can earn him money.  Cheesy

Lance203sin
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 63
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
August 13, 2019, 03:12:29 PM
 #58

I like updates of protocols. After segwit im paying much less fees
Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190
Merit: 792


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
August 16, 2019, 08:50:53 AM
 #59

More miners => more secure => more confidence => more users => higher price => more miners => ...

This is the reality.
BTC Miners => 4 Mining Pool operators = security is dependent on 4 guys with over 51% attack vector.  Cheesy

No matter the energy waste the btc miners give 4 guys a 51% attack potential every day.
LTC also has a mere 4 guys with a 51% attack potential,
which is why coins that have more than 4 guys are more secure than your PoW pooling coins.


Misinformation. There's more than 4 mining pools, although I admit that mining has been cartelized into a few players, especially Bitmain, who threw away Jihan Wu in the trash can.

But, the game-theory behind Bitcoin is holding everything together, miners will not dare attack the network. Something that cannot be said of your dead Zeitcoin. Hahaha!

Quote

FYI:
Wind_Fury is so clueless, he thinks running a non-mining node can earn him money.  Cheesy


Try harder, troll. Cool


▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄██████████████████████▄
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
   ███████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
███████
BTC  ◉PLAY  ◉XMR  ◉DOGE  ◉BCH  ◉STRAT  ◉ETH  ◉GAS  ◉LTC  ◉DASH  ◉PPC
     ▄▄██████████████▄▄
  ▄██████████████████████▄        █████
▄██████████████████████████▄      █████
████ ▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄ ████     ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ▄██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██▀
████ █████ ██████ █████ ████    ██
████ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ████ ▄██████▄
████████████████████████████ ████████
███████▀            ▀███████ ▀██████▀
█████▀                ▀█████
▀██████████████████████████▀
  ▀▀████████████████████▀▀ 
✔️DICE           
✔️BLACKJACK
✔️PLINKO
✔️VIDEO POKER
✔️ROULETTE     
✔️LOTTO
DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1329


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile WWW
August 16, 2019, 01:23:38 PM
 #60

This is the reality.
BTC Miners => 4 Mining Pool operators = security is dependent on 4 guys with over 51% attack vector.  Cheesy
your non-mining nodes do nothing to secure the network.

Just so I've got this straight, you want to present the simultaneous argument that Bitcoin is centralised due to a limited number of miners and also that a distributed network of non-mining nodes don't help at all with securing the network?  Is that correct?

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!