e-coinomist
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2380
Merit: 1085
Money often costs too much.
|
 |
September 30, 2015, 03:47:39 AM |
|
This is an automatic update. Do not reply/quote this message.
I am tired of the trolldom spreading FUD about this great project. My trollbuster algorithms have detected the forbidden use of the word GUI in your post. Welcome to my ignore list. This is an automatic update. Do not reply/quote this message.
I am tired of the trolldom spreading FUD about this great project. My trollbuster algorithms have detected the forbidden use of the word GUI in your post. Welcome to my ignore list. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even if you use Bitcoin through Tor, the way transactions are handled by the network makes anonymity difficult to achieve. Do not expect your transactions to be anonymous unless you really know what you're doing.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Hueristic
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3808
Merit: 4898
Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it
|
|
September 30, 2015, 04:41:13 AM |
|
This is an automatic update. Do not reply/quote this message.
I am tired of the trolldom spreading FUD about this great project. My trollbuster algorithms have detected the forbidden use of the word GUI in your post. Welcome to my ignore list. This is an automatic update. Do not reply/quote this message.
I am tired of the trolldom spreading FUD about this great project. My trollbuster algorithms have detected the forbidden use of the word GUI in your post. Welcome to my ignore list.
I am tired of the trolldom spreading FUD about this great project. My trollbuster algorithms have detected the forbidden use of the word GUI in your post. Welcome to my ignore list.  |
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
|
|
|
e-coinomist
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2380
Merit: 1085
Money often costs too much.
|
|
September 30, 2015, 06:06:33 AM |
|
can't no more read mah own postings ... how can I unmute myself  |
|
|
|
|
|
americanpegasus
|
|
September 30, 2015, 06:15:38 AM |
|
can't no more read mah own postings ... how can I unmute myself Dude, are you serious right now? Your "bot" auto-muted yourself for quoting....  nevermind, just enjoy your own limbo. Go Monero.  Enjoy the cheap prices while they last, and don't worry about a GUI. It will come when it is time. All things arrive exactly when they are supposed to, and not a moment earlier. |
Account is back under control of the real AmericanPegasus.
|
|
|
|
americanpegasus
|
|
September 30, 2015, 06:35:42 AM |
|
Also, one of you asked Andreas Antonopoulos about the fungibility of bitcoin at this Rotterdam presentation. Good job: https://youtu.be/ak1iojpiHpM?t=33m6s |
Account is back under control of the real AmericanPegasus.
|
|
|
dnaleor
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1000
Want privacy? Use Monero!
|
|
September 30, 2015, 09:42:34 AM |
|
it was me  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
dEBRUYNE
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1141
|
|
September 30, 2015, 12:24:03 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
luigi1111
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1105
Merit: 1000
|
|
September 30, 2015, 03:56:06 PM |
|
Who has an opinion on increasing the blocktime to 2 (or even 4) minutes as part of the next hard fork?
|
|
|
|
|
binaryFate
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1003
Still wild and free
|
|
September 30, 2015, 04:01:27 PM |
|
Who has an opinion on increasing the blocktime to 2 (or even 4) minutes as part of the next hard fork?
Would be ok for 2, not 4. |
Monero's privacy and therefore fungibility are MUCH stronger than Bitcoin's. This makes Monero a better candidate to deserve the term "digital cash".
|
|
|
luigi1111
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1105
Merit: 1000
|
|
September 30, 2015, 04:07:55 PM |
|
Who has an opinion on increasing the blocktime to 2 (or even 4) minutes as part of the next hard fork?
Would be ok for 2, not 4. I am also in favor of 2 for a variety of reasons. |
|
|
|
|
dEBRUYNE
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1141
|
|
September 30, 2015, 04:27:40 PM |
|
Who has an opinion on increasing the blocktime to 2 (or even 4) minutes as part of the next hard fork?
Would be ok for 2, not 4. I am also in favor of 2 for a variety of reasons. Could you elaborate a bit on the reasons? Also, I think AEON uses 4 minute blocks and didn't encounter any problems/issues. |
|
|
|
exciter0
Member
Offline
Activity: 115
Merit: 10
|
|
September 30, 2015, 04:39:56 PM |
|
AEON sometimes see a variance of over 40 mins for next block! Have fun waiting fir confirmations... I vote to stick with 1 min, i.e. please dont muck with the block time and reward. Who has an opinion on increasing the blocktime to 2 (or even 4) minutes as part of the next hard fork?
Would be ok for 2, not 4. I am also in favor of 2 for a variety of reasons. Could you elaborate a bit on the reasons? Furthermore, I think AEON uses 4 minute blocks and didn't encounter any problems/issues. |
|
|
|
myagui
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1154
Merit: 1001
|
|
September 30, 2015, 04:42:37 PM |
|
FWIW I would also be ok with a blocktime increase to 2 minutes.
Previous poster: variance on AEON has more to do with current hashrate concentration, than it does with the current blocktime per se. I'm not saying that's good or bad though. The greater the blocktime interval, the greater is the absolute result of variance (though percentage-wise it is always the same)...
|
|
|
|
ArticMine
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1050
Monero Core Team
|
|
September 30, 2015, 04:56:59 PM
Last edit: September 30, 2015, 05:15:03 PM by ArticMine |
|
Who has an opinion on increasing the blocktime to 2 (or even 4) minutes as part of the next hard fork?
I am against raising the blocktime. There has to be strong technical reasons against the current 1 min blocktime. Furthermore the argument has to be made that those technical reasons will cause greater rather than lesser problems in the future. The argument against a short blocktime is that it increases the probability of orphan blocks and I do recognize that Monero is close to the practical limit; however as bandwidth increases this negative impact of this issue also decreases. On a related note do we need a repeat of the emission debate of last year? Edit: I propose that we table this issue until other much more pressing matters are resolved, such as the completion of the development goals in https://getmonero.org/design-goals/ |
|
|
|
nioc
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1624
Merit: 1008
|
|
September 30, 2015, 05:13:57 PM |
|
This is nothing at all like the emissions debate.
As far as technical reasons, will increasing the blocktime and thereby decreasing the # of blocks reduce the size of the blockchain to any meaningful degree?
|
|
|
|
|
luigi1111
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1105
Merit: 1000
|
|
September 30, 2015, 05:31:45 PM |
|
This is nothing at all like the emissions debate.
As far as technical reasons, will increasing the blocktime and thereby decreasing the # of blocks reduce the size of the blockchain to any meaningful degree?
Right now with almost no transactions, yes it would. As (if) transactions pick up it would tend toward negligible. |
|
|
|
|
GingerAle
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
|
|
September 30, 2015, 05:34:43 PM |
|
This is nothing at all like the emissions debate.
As far as technical reasons, will increasing the blocktime and thereby decreasing the # of blocks reduce the size of the blockchain to any meaningful degree?
It might. The prevalence of zero transaction blocks is mainly filling the blockchain now. In the future, who knows. So, if we might see a decrease in size of blockchain if transaction levels continue as they are, but hopefully we see more transactions, not less. So I don't think this rationale has weight. I'm with ArcticMine re: tabling this issue until later. However, I do see the rationale in decreasing orphan rate, even though I am not entirely aware of the negative consequences of orphan blocks - I just get the gist that they are not ideal. Thus, I would be fine with a 2 minute blocktime. I did some digging into the original TFT bitmonero thread, and indeed this is an old issue. Back then, the compromise / rationalization was 1 min blocktimes during the solo mining phase, and then 2 minute blocktimes later. |
|
|
|
|
XMRpromotions
|
|
September 30, 2015, 05:50:25 PM |
|
This is nothing at all like the emissions debate.
As far as technical reasons, will increasing the blocktime and thereby decreasing the # of blocks reduce the size of the blockchain to any meaningful degree?
It might. The prevalence of zero transaction blocks is mainly filling the blockchain now. In the future, who knows. So, if we might see a decrease in size of blockchain if transaction levels continue as they are, but hopefully we see more transactions, not less. So I don't think this rationale has weight. I'm with ArcticMine re: tabling this issue until later. However, I do see the rationale in decreasing orphan rate, even though I am not entirely aware of the negative consequences of orphan blocks - I just get the gist that they are not ideal. Thus, I would be fine with a 2 minute blocktime. I did some digging into the original TFT bitmonero thread, and indeed this is an old issue. Back then, the compromise / rationalization was 1 min blocktimes during the solo mining phase, and then 2 minute blocktimes later. Boolberry also has 2 minute blocks but it should be noted there are other reasons why their blockchain is smaller (by pruning the ring-signatures). I am curious to hear what all of the monero devs have to say about block times |
|
|
|
Globb0
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2053
Free spirit
|
|
September 30, 2015, 06:03:12 PM |
|
Is blockchain size even still relevant when moved to DB ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
