Bitcoin Forum
November 21, 2017, 04:23:54 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 [1170] 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2010808 times)
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
May 04, 2015, 01:23:12 AM
 #23381

I wonder how many of those who voted for a graduated increase realize that the blocksize limit isn't actually limiting anything right now. It's a limit that will eventually become a factor. Right now if it were removed nothing special would happen.

That's a bit overstated. It already slows things down when there are long (random) block times because all the accumulated transactions can't fit in the first block. Allowing all (or at least more) of the transactions into the first block doesn't increase bandwidth or storage requirements at all, but does improve service. There is a small centralizing effect though (rewards miners with higher bandwidth).
 
This has happened to me twice. I have the worst luck on block times. Both were close to an hour.
1511281434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511281434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511281434
Reply with quote  #2

1511281434
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now Coinlancer is Disrupting the Freelance marketplace!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511281434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511281434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511281434
Reply with quote  #2

1511281434
Report to moderator
1511281434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511281434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511281434
Reply with quote  #2

1511281434
Report to moderator
1511281434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511281434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511281434
Reply with quote  #2

1511281434
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 04, 2015, 01:28:15 AM
 #23382

just in case anyone is interested in what one of my full nodes is using.  it's remarkably consistent across all of them.  note the minimal bandwidth usage.  i have 1GB of RAM with 100GB of disk:

Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 01:28:23 AM
 #23383

you're right that it isn't limiting anything right now.  but if the market gets the sense that Gavin is going to get his way (and i think he will) it could unleash the next wave of speculation into the market, and along with it, a new wave of tx volume simply from everyone piling in frontrunning.

the way the charts are lining up it seems to me that the market is looking for any reason at all to rally hard.

That would be a welcome development. I do get the sense that some investors have developed misgivings because of the blocksize issue, and if that's the case certainly a step toward solving that should spur some investment.

I still say just let exchanges arbitrage the two forks so that skeptics of "GavinCoin" (Roll Eyes) can put their money where their mouth is and see if anyone agrees with them - that is, if they are really willing to take, oh, say a 95% devaluation of their holdings if the market rejects them (and that's the optimistic case where their little group lasts as an altcoin; otherwise they can ride it all the way to zero). I suspect very few people will actually take this bet.

To quote the enigmatic Mr. Sztorc again, "Predictions markets make cheap talk expensive." Fork arbitrage functions as a prediction market for which fork will succeed.
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 01:29:06 AM
 #23384

I wonder how many of those who voted for a graduated increase realize that the blocksize limit isn't actually limiting anything right now. It's a limit that will eventually become a factor. Right now if it were removed nothing special would happen.

That's a bit overstated. It already slows things down when there are long (random) block times because all the accumulated transactions can't fit in the first block. Allowing all (or at least more) of the transactions into the first block doesn't increase bandwidth or storage requirements at all, but does improve service. There is a small centralizing effect though (rewards miners with higher bandwidth).
 
This has happened to me twice. I have the worst luck on block times. Both were close to an hour.

Hmm, that's interesting. Thanks for the correction.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 04, 2015, 02:23:10 AM
 #23385

i'm going to lock this poll by tomorrow and put up a new one given Gavin's "announcement" so get your voting in now.
thezerg
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 02:40:01 AM
 #23386

i'm going to lock this poll by tomorrow and put up a new one given Gavin's "announcement" so get your voting in now.

How about all of the above, stop wasting gavin's precious time, and do it sooner to give ppl some confidence that micropayments will be economically viable so we can get on with building stuff on the blockchain. Stuff that actually delves into areas where fiat cannot go rather then merely providing small benefits to those who have already set up wallets and little to no benefit to those who must do the whole education thing and then the time inefficient fiat btc xfer btc fiat circus.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834


[LOL2X]


View Profile WWW
May 04, 2015, 03:02:16 AM
 #23387

i'm going to lock this poll by tomorrow and put up a new one given Gavin's "announcement" so get your voting in now.

How about all of the above, stop wasting gavin's precious time, and do it sooner to give ppl some confidence that micropayments will be economically viable so we can get on with building stuff on the blockchain. Stuff that actually delves into areas where fiat cannot go rather then merely providing small benefits to those who have already set up wallets and little to no benefit to those who must do the whole education thing and then the time inefficient fiat btc xfer btc fiat circus.

If Bitcoin's precious blockchain has no greater destiny than to be used for an eternal record of inconsequential "micropayments" the project has no future.

Stop trying to enable the fluffy VC daydream of 'enabling tipping economies' and worry about macropayments.

This is revolution against the BIS, etc. and a chance to evolve past gold as humanity's default store of value, not a call to replace Reddit gold/Dogecoin/TipBot.

The places "where fiat cannot go" that matter are brain/paper/hardware wallets, multi-sig, and realtime auditing, not giving some Redditard 0.000000001 BTC for confirming your bias with a snarky comment.

Too bad we have to wait an entire year to watch Mircea shit all over GavinCoin.  It's worse than waiting for the next season of Walking Dead!


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
HeliKopterBen
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 622



View Profile
May 04, 2015, 03:11:30 AM
 #23388

I voted graduated limit but if things go well over time eventually remove the limit.

Counterfeit:  made in imitation of something else with intent to deceive:  merriam-webster
shmadz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498


@theshmadz


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 03:38:45 AM
 #23389

just in case anyone is interested in what one of my full nodes is using.  it's remarkably consistent across all of them.  note the minimal bandwidth usage.  i have 1GB of RAM with 100GB of disk:



Umm, bandwidth numbers without time are meaningless.

Are you using 23 GB per day? Per hour? Per second?

Please clarify, thanks.



"You have no moral right to rule us, nor do you possess any methods of enforcement that we have reason to fear." - John Perry Barlow, 1996
shmadz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498


@theshmadz


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 03:57:20 AM
 #23390

i'm going to lock this poll by tomorrow and put up a new one given Gavin's "announcement" so get your voting in now.

How about all of the above, stop wasting gavin's precious time, and do it sooner to give ppl some confidence that micropayments will be economically viable so we can get on with building stuff on the blockchain. Stuff that actually delves into areas where fiat cannot go rather then merely providing small benefits to those who have already set up wallets and little to no benefit to those who must do the whole education thing and then the time inefficient fiat btc xfer btc fiat circus.

If Bitcoin's precious blockchain has no greater destiny than to be used for an eternal record of inconsequential "micropayments" the project has no future.

Stop trying to enable the fluffy VC daydream of 'enabling tipping economies' and worry about macropayments.

This is revolution against the BIS, etc. and a chance to evolve past gold as humanity's default store of value, not a call to replace Reddit gold/Dogecoin/TipBot.

The places "where fiat cannot go" that matter are brain/paper/hardware wallets, multi-sig, and realtime auditing, not giving some Redditard 0.000000001 BTC for confirming your bias with a snarky comment.

Too bad we have to wait an entire year to watch Mircea shit all over GavinCoin.  It's worse than waiting for the next season of Walking Dead!

Agreed.

Bitcoin is much better suited to the store of value function.

Why do you think Goldman Sachs et all are trying to pigeon-hole bitcoin as merely a "payments network"?

*also, increasing block size does nothing to address the "instant payment" problem.

"You have no moral right to rule us, nor do you possess any methods of enforcement that we have reason to fear." - John Perry Barlow, 1996
lunarboy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 544



View Profile
May 04, 2015, 05:25:46 AM
 #23391

Subspace sounds like an interesting project BIP70

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-startup-subspace-develops-bip70-payment-requests-protocol/

Quote
We should be able to achieve full-node like privacy for lightweight wallets. But on top of that we’ll be able to do things like ‘push’ payment requests to end-users. This could enable monthly billing for services, which we don’t currently have in Bitcoin. We can also attach messages to our transactions and even use it for messages between clients.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 04, 2015, 05:30:56 AM
 #23392

i'm going to lock this poll by tomorrow and put up a new one given Gavin's "announcement" so get your voting in now.

How about all of the above, stop wasting gavin's precious time, and do it sooner to give ppl some confidence that micropayments will be economically viable so we can get on with building stuff on the blockchain. Stuff that actually delves into areas where fiat cannot go rather then merely providing small benefits to those who have already set up wallets and little to no benefit to those who must do the whole education thing and then the time inefficient fiat btc xfer btc fiat circus.

If Bitcoin's precious blockchain has no greater destiny than to be used for an eternal record of inconsequential "micropayments" the project has no future.

Stop trying to enable the fluffy VC daydream of 'enabling tipping economies' and worry about macropayments.

This is revolution against the BIS, etc. and a chance to evolve past gold as humanity's default store of value, not a call to replace Reddit gold/Dogecoin/TipBot.

The places "where fiat cannot go" that matter are brain/paper/hardware wallets, multi-sig, and realtime auditing, not giving some Redditard 0.000000001 BTC for confirming your bias with a snarky comment.

Too bad we have to wait an entire year to watch Mircea shit all over GavinCoin.  It's worse than waiting for the next season of Walking Dead!

Agreed.

Bitcoin is much better suited to the store of value function.

Why do you think Goldman Sachs et all are trying to pigeon-hole bitcoin as merely a "payments network"?

*also, increasing block size does nothing to address the "instant payment" problem.

The only thing Bitcoin needs to retain the SOV function is that it maintains its fixed supply. No one is talking about changing that. What you're forgetting is that thousands of years ago gold coins were in fact used on a daily basis to buy loaves of bread. Increasing usage in day to day TX's would maximize its utility as money and drive it's value much higher. The increase TX volume is clearly necessary to feed miners over the long run via fees.  Bitcoins usage needs to be driven to the far ends of the earth into the hands of a many people as possible to guarantee is safety.
solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 05:51:09 AM
 #23393

Agreed.

Bitcoin is much better suited to the store of value function.

Why do you think Goldman Sachs et all are trying to pigeon-hole bitcoin as merely a "payments network"?

*also, increasing block size does nothing to address the "instant payment" problem.

The only thing Bitcoin needs to retain the SOV function is that it maintains its fixed supply. No one is talking about changing that. What you're forgetting is that thousands of years ago gold coins were in fact used on a daily basis to buy loaves of bread. Increasing usage in day to day TX's would maximize its utility as money and increase  drive it's value much higher. The increase TX volume is clearly necessary to feed miners over the long run via fees.  Bitcoins usage needs to be driven to the far ends of the earth into the hands of a many people as possible to guarantee is safety.

Nailed it.

The SOV function cannot be taken for granted. Gold has the inherent advantage of being physically rare. Bitcoin, while its issuance is capped at 21M, the software can be duplicated thousands of times. Already much duplication is happening in the alts, although they primarily use scrypt which is a very fortuitous accident of history. Lee wanted a coin which would require more memory&cpu  for hashing, hence his Litecoin uses scrypt, and most new altcoins have cloned the Litecoin fork of Bitcoin. This has left the sha256 miners to focus primarily on Bitcoin while the scrypt miners are spread over many alts. Litecoin is being bled to death by all its clones.

So, Bitcoin's SOV is buttressed by two things: the network effect of its ecosystem, and the hardware invested in sha256 hashing-power. Bitcoin needs to keep growing its ecosystem, and the hashing power will follow it. Bitcoin is not being bled by clones - yet - but there is a real risk  if its ecosystem growth is crippled by volume constraints.

*also, increasing block size does nothing to address the "instant payment" problem.
re instant payments, doesn't the lightning network provide a form of it?

shmadz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498


@theshmadz


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 05:55:36 AM
 #23394

i'm going to lock this poll by tomorrow and put up a new one given Gavin's "announcement" so get your voting in now.

How about all of the above, stop wasting gavin's precious time, and do it sooner to give ppl some confidence that micropayments will be economically viable so we can get on with building stuff on the blockchain. Stuff that actually delves into areas where fiat cannot go rather then merely providing small benefits to those who have already set up wallets and little to no benefit to those who must do the whole education thing and then the time inefficient fiat btc xfer btc fiat circus.

If Bitcoin's precious blockchain has no greater destiny than to be used for an eternal record of inconsequential "micropayments" the project has no future.

Stop trying to enable the fluffy VC daydream of 'enabling tipping economies' and worry about macropayments.

This is revolution against the BIS, etc. and a chance to evolve past gold as humanity's default store of value, not a call to replace Reddit gold/Dogecoin/TipBot.

The places "where fiat cannot go" that matter are brain/paper/hardware wallets, multi-sig, and realtime auditing, not giving some Redditard 0.000000001 BTC for confirming your bias with a snarky comment.

Too bad we have to wait an entire year to watch Mircea shit all over GavinCoin.  It's worse than waiting for the next season of Walking Dead!

Agreed.

Bitcoin is much better suited to the store of value function.

Why do you think Goldman Sachs et all are trying to pigeon-hole bitcoin as merely a "payments network"?

*also, increasing block size does nothing to address the "instant payment" problem.

The only thing Bitcoin needs to retain the SOV function is that it maintains its fixed supply. No one is talking about changing that. What you're forgetting is that thousands of years ago gold coins were in fact used on a daily basis to buy loaves of bread. Increasing usage in day to day TX's would maximize its utility as money and drive it's value much higher. The increase TX volume is clearly necessary to feed miners over the long run via fees.  Bitcoins usage needs to be driven to the far ends of the earth into the hands of a many people as possible to guarantee is safety.

Ok, I'll admit I'm still a little torn/undecided on this issue, but I don't think we need the same security model for buying loaves of bread that we use for buying homes,.

As long as the profit motive for miners is kept intact, then I'm fine with whatever method ensures the security of the Blockchain.

*btw, I'm still curious what your full node consumes in bandwidth?

"You have no moral right to rule us, nor do you possess any methods of enforcement that we have reason to fear." - John Perry Barlow, 1996
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 04, 2015, 06:00:04 AM
 #23395

i'm going to lock this poll by tomorrow and put up a new one given Gavin's "announcement" so get your voting in now.

How about all of the above, stop wasting gavin's precious time, and do it sooner to give ppl some confidence that micropayments will be economically viable so we can get on with building stuff on the blockchain. Stuff that actually delves into areas where fiat cannot go rather then merely providing small benefits to those who have already set up wallets and little to no benefit to those who must do the whole education thing and then the time inefficient fiat btc xfer btc fiat circus.

If Bitcoin's precious blockchain has no greater destiny than to be used for an eternal record of inconsequential "micropayments" the project has no future.

Stop trying to enable the fluffy VC daydream of 'enabling tipping economies' and worry about macropayments.

This is revolution against the BIS, etc. and a chance to evolve past gold as humanity's default store of value, not a call to replace Reddit gold/Dogecoin/TipBot.

The places "where fiat cannot go" that matter are brain/paper/hardware wallets, multi-sig, and realtime auditing, not giving some Redditard 0.000000001 BTC for confirming your bias with a snarky comment.

Too bad we have to wait an entire year to watch Mircea shit all over GavinCoin.  It's worse than waiting for the next season of Walking Dead!

Agreed.

Bitcoin is much better suited to the store of value function.

Why do you think Goldman Sachs et all are trying to pigeon-hole bitcoin as merely a "payments network"?

*also, increasing block size does nothing to address the "instant payment" problem.

The only thing Bitcoin needs to retain the SOV function is that it maintains its fixed supply. No one is talking about changing that. What you're forgetting is that thousands of years ago gold coins were in fact used on a daily basis to buy loaves of bread. Increasing usage in day to day TX's would maximize its utility as money and drive it's value much higher. The increase TX volume is clearly necessary to feed miners over the long run via fees.  Bitcoins usage needs to be driven to the far ends of the earth into the hands of a many people as possible to guarantee is safety.

Ok, I'll admit I'm still a little torn/undecided on this issue, but I don't think we need the same security model for buying loaves of bread that we use for buying homes,.

As long as the profit motive for miners is kept intact, then I'm fine with whatever method ensures the security of the Blockchain.

*btw, I'm still curious what your full node consumes in bandwidth?

I'll answer this tomorrow when i can log in
shmadz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498


@theshmadz


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 06:04:21 AM
 #23396


*also, increasing block size does nothing to address the "instant payment" problem.
re instant payments, doesn't the lightning network provide a form of it?

I suspect there are several methods of addressing this issue. Increasing block size is not one of them.

"You have no moral right to rule us, nor do you possess any methods of enforcement that we have reason to fear." - John Perry Barlow, 1996
bambou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 346


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 06:38:05 AM
 #23397


*also, increasing block size does nothing to address the "instant payment" problem.
re instant payments, doesn't the lightning network provide a form of it?

I suspect there are several methods of addressing this issue. Increasing block size is not one of them.

Because increasing block size addresses an issue? Or is it just the issue of how USG owns you now?

Dam it how is it possible that 'educated' people here fail to see what Gavin is.



an Agent.

Non inultus premor
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 07:02:13 AM
 #23398

An economic Wiki? So we have to go through all discussions once more, and now with a Wikimaster to worry about?

I didn't have anything like that in mind. I was simply thinking it would be useful if someone or maybe a few people would build some kind of wiki like described above and then some people might copy and expand it if it was agreeable. A wiki in terms of format, not in terms of Wikipedia-style politics (perhaps I am using the wrong term; more like "a FAQ for recurring topics in thread insofar as there is a general loose consensus"). In practice it's probably something mostly one person would probably start, and if they made the foundation solid enough and agreeable enough there would probably be some people copying/adding to it.

More information is better, I agree to that. But I doubt a wiki will get it all correct, with the discussions we see here. Anyway, if someone wants to do it, go ahead.

Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 07:10:23 AM
 #23399

I wonder how many of those who voted for a graduated increase realize that the blocksize limit isn't actually limiting anything right now. It's a limit that will eventually become a factor. Right now if it were removed nothing special would happen.

Seing the arguments, I now think unlimited (that is limited by nature, not artificial) is the best way to go.

Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


View Profile
May 04, 2015, 09:01:39 AM
 #23400

Here is what I think about fees in the future:

There will always be a limit to the number of blockchain transactions. Micropayments will not be possible in the future. (Rather small payments can be done economically now, so use it to buy a cup of coffe, no problem).

We see from other systems, that people are willing to pay 5-10% for transactions (credit cards in foreign currency, m-pesa).

So if the market based fee becomes that high, bitcoins can still compete. Because it is sound money, and holding them will always be inexpensive (feeless, just the cost of management, which is lower than other forms of money).

The fee structure in the market will probably be a minimum fee plus a percentage. With a minimum fee of something like USD 10 (current value) and 2 percent, bitcoin will still be cost effective for transactions of USD 1000 (current value).

It will be interesting to see how the fee structure will develop. Almost like I would like to see scarcity in transaction volume before the block size is lifted, just to get a feel of it.



Pages: « 1 ... 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 [1170] 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 ... 1558 »
  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!