Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 10:36:11 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   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 ... 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 [1257] 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1805720 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 02:50:14 PM
 #25121

take a look at how a rag tag army of volunteers can clog up the network.  we're still stuck at over 23000 unconf tx's, with a peak around 25000, now about 2 hrs later:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/37rwph/stress_test_for_the_next_few_hours_ill_be/

 Angry  Good.  /grumpy cat

This stunt may generate the type of incalculable empirical feedback we need to ascertain how best to modify the max_block_size parameter.

Of course since it is artificial demand in the form of a stress-test that factor must be accounted for.

But in the aggregate, we see here the ecosystem demanding/supplying a required service, so it's not completely bogus data.

It is critical for Bitcoin to grow up, not out.

Bitcoin's Mother of Blockchains needs skycraper transactions, not sprawl.

Bitcoin and its Blockchain must develop like a culture, not merely grow like cancer.

Full block pressure catalyzes development of optimal strategies for using the limited space; subsidizing artificially sparse blocks retards that process.

It's not possible to build a currency on misanthropy.

Au contraire, misanthropy is the only rational basis on which to build a currency.

That is why Bitcoins trustless Satoshi-Consensus mechanism disrupted and made obsolete all manner of weighted-trust-node-network Rube Goldberg schemes.

Bitcoin is the only currency still works like gold and silver when about half of humanity is an adversary.

btw, this stress test is also an example of how anyone (not just large miners} actively supporting a >1MB network like XT will circle back around and flood Core with small TX's in hopes of breaking what is perceived to be a competitor.

hell, i might even do that.  it's so easy.
1481150171
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481150171

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481150171
Reply with quote  #2

1481150171
Report to moderator
1481150171
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481150171

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481150171
Reply with quote  #2

1481150171
Report to moderator
1481150171
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481150171

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481150171
Reply with quote  #2

1481150171
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481150171
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481150171

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481150171
Reply with quote  #2

1481150171
Report to moderator
1481150171
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481150171

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481150171
Reply with quote  #2

1481150171
Report to moderator
1481150171
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481150171

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481150171
Reply with quote  #2

1481150171
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 03:01:13 PM
 #25122

lol, the network is STILL choked off after all this time.  i don't blame the short sightedness of the guy who just sold us off down to $232 given how strident iCE and his buddies have been about making any progress whatsoever on this block size issue.  i think it's a big mistake as it just gives the rest of us cheaper coins to accumulate as i think a block size increase is inevitable and soon as a result of the stress test:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 03:05:10 PM
 #25123

hey Mom, look!  creative destruction at work!:



cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 03:11:18 PM
 #25124

the problem with core devs deciding any block size limit is that they essentially become central bankers, ie, unilaterally determining everyone's cost of accessing the network. by what metric can they ever determine what size is appropriate given most of Bitcoin's incentives are economically and game theoretically driven? better to let the free mkt of miners and users work that out via mutually determined fees.
adamstgBit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904


Trusted Bitcoiner


View Profile WWW
May 30, 2015, 03:13:27 PM
 #25125

lol, the network is STILL choked off after all this time.  i don't blame the short sightedness of the guy who just sold us off down to $232 given how strident iCE and his buddies have been about making any progress whatsoever on this block size issue.  i think it's a big mistake as it just gives the rest of us cheaper coins to accumulate as i think a block size increase is inevitable and soon as a result of the stress test:



Is this a TX spam attack?

iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
May 30, 2015, 03:22:15 PM
 #25126

it's called Metcalfe's Law.  "value" of the network is squared by every new user.  iCE would rather keep it strangled down to him and his Myrcea buddies.


Not every new user needs direct access to the Mother Blockchain:

Quote
The true value that Bitcoin brings to the table is not "everyone gets to write into the holy ledger", it is instead "everyone gets to benefit from sane and non-inflationary financial instutions whose sanity and honesty are ensured by the holy blockchain".
-davout

"Strangled?"

Typical of you to invoke a violent metaphor, which entails me ruthlessly killing poor baby bitcoin asleep in its little crib.  How scary!  Quelle horrour!   Roll Eyes

I keep explaining your politics of fear have no power here, yet you persist in framing the 1mb limit as a death sentence despite having spent the last 4 years hyping Bitcoin's antifragility.

My "Myrcia buddies" include all the core devs, minus Gavin (who barely contributes code these days).  Gavin has successfully created rough consensus among them w/r/t 20mb blocks.  But it's not the consensus he wanted, so now he's staging a coup.

Gavin is mad with power and has gone completely Even Duffield. He wants to infect BTC with supernodes!  You are both welcome to bugger off to the altcoin ghetto with Gavin's bloated XT fork, but please leave the rest of us (who want to keep Bitcoin diffuse/diverse/defensible/resilient) out of it.

Perhaps it would be better for the pointy-haired boss to listen to the coders and engineers responsible for fixing Bitcoin when the GigaBlocks break it?

The network isn't "choking" under this stress test.  "Choking" means no air can enter the lungs, and the choking victim dies.  Nothing analogous is happening here; tx are still being confirmed as usual but with some delay depending on the fee paid.  If nothing was being confirmed, that would be "choking."  All that happened is free tx take longer.

"Strangle?"  "Choking?"

WTF is it with you stealing metaphors which portray the non-Gavin core devs as murdering their own baby?  Nobody "strangling" or "choking" Bitcoin.  If and when Bitcoin chokes or is strangled, please rest assured it will emerge from the conflict more resilient than before.

Why can't you take Szabo's advice to calm down and stop exaggerating?

Get a grip Doc.  Your "zomg Bitcoin is literally going to dieeeeee" panic attacks are becoming unseemly.

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
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Wallets - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }


Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016
Blocks must necessarily be full for the Bitcoin network to be able to pay for its own security.  davout 2015
Blocksize is an intentionally limited resource, like the 21e6 BTC limit.  Changing it degrades the surrounding economics, creating negative incentives.  Jeff Garzik 2013


"I believed @Dashpay instamine was a bug & not a feature but then read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13017231#msg13017231
I'm not against people making money, but can't support questionable origins."
https://twitter.com/Tone_LLT/status/717822927908024320


The raison d'être of bitcoin is trustlessness. - Eric Lombrozo 2015
It is an Engineering Requirement that Bitcoin be “Above the Law”  Paul Sztorc 2015
Resiliency, not efficiency, is the paramount goal of decentralized, non-state sanctioned currency -Jon Matonis 2015

Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016

Technology tends to move in the direction of making surveillance easier, and the ability of computers to track us doubles every eighteen months. - Phil Zimmerman 2013

The only way to make software secure, reliable, and fast is to make it small. Fight Features. - Andy Tanenbaum 2004

"Hard forks cannot be co
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 03:23:00 PM
 #25127

lol, the network is STILL choked off after all this time.  i don't blame the short sightedness of the guy who just sold us off down to $232 given how strident iCE and his buddies have been about making any progress whatsoever on this block size issue.  i think it's a big mistake as it just gives the rest of us cheaper coins to accumulate as i think a block size increase is inevitable and soon as a result of the stress test:



Is this a TX spam attack?

essentially yes. 

a handful of Reddit dudes decided to stress test the network by sending thousands of smallish tx's with fees across the network.  predictably, everyone's full/mining node mempools clogged up with unconfirmed tx's.  at the max yesterday, my full nodes even 1.5-2 hours after the stress test completed were clogged up with 24000 unconf tx's which usually are at around 3000-4000 iirc.  the max hit was 26000 during the test.

what you're seeing in the chart is the default settings for block size for miners left at 750MB meaning full blocks are happening right now as we speak.
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 03:24:06 PM
 #25128

Bitcoin is the only currency still works like gold and silver when about half of humanity is an adversary.

it won't work like gold when only 0.0000001% of the world's population think like us or have any exposure to Bitcoin due to the strangulation by 1MB blocks.

This point is crucial, as others also have said. Bitcoin can compete now, with this low penetration, and for every new user the liquidity increases. That is in my view, a guarantee of success.

Compare this to just about any investment project that have a threshold of sales to be a success. Some succeed, but most don't.


it's called Metcalfe's Law.  "value" of the network is squared by every new user.  iCE would rather keep it strangled down to him and his Myrcea buddies.

As you know, I am for the upgrade, but I don't think the alternative is catastrophic, only inconvenient and slows us down. Naysayers can always find limits and reasons to downplay this extraordinary invention. The size of the UTXO set is a recent example.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 03:27:03 PM
 #25129

it's called Metcalfe's Law.  "value" of the network is squared by every new user.  iCE would rather keep it strangled down to him and his Myrcea buddies.


Not every new user needs direct access to the Mother Blockchain:

Quote
The true value that Bitcoin brings to the table is not "everyone gets to write into the holy ledger", it is instead "everyone gets to benefit from sane and non-inflationary financial instutions whose sanity and honesty are ensured by the holy blockchain".
-davout

"Strangled?"

Typical of you to invoke a violent metaphor, which entails me ruthlessly killing poor baby bitcoin asleep in its little crib.  How scary!  Quelle horrour!   Roll Eyes

I keep explaining your politics of fear have no power here, yet you persist in framing the 1mb limit as a death sentence despite having spent the last 4 years hyping Bitcoin's antifragility.

My "Myrcia buddies" include all the core devs, minus Gavin (who barely contributes code these days).  Gavin has successfully created rough consensus among them w/r/t 20mb blocks.  But it's not the consensus he wanted, so now he's staging a coup.

Gavin is mad with power and has gone completely Even Duffield. He wants to infect BTC with supernodes!  You are both welcome to bugger off to the altcoin ghetto with Gavin's bloated XT fork, but please leave the rest of us (who want to keep Bitcoin diffuse/diverse/defensible/resilient) out of it.

Perhaps it would be better for the pointy-haired boss to listen to the coders and engineers responsible for fixing Bitcoin when the GigaBlocks break it?

The network isn't "choking" under this stress test.  "Choking" means no air can enter the lungs, and the choking victim dies.  Nothing analogous is happening here; tx are still being confirmed as usual but with some delay depending on the fee paid.  If nothing was being confirmed, that would be "choking."  All that happened is free tx take longer.

"Strangle?"  "Choking?"

WTF is it with you stealing metaphors which portray the non-Gavin core devs as murdering their own baby?  Nobody "strangling" or "choking" Bitcoin.  If and when Bitcoin chokes or is strangled, please rest assured it will emerge from the conflict more resilient than before.

Why can't you take Szabo's advice to calm down and stop exaggerating?

Get a grip Doc.  Your "zomg Bitcoin is literally going to dieeeeee" panic attacks are becoming unseemly.

c'mon iCE.  i'm just elevating my rhetoric to meet yours. Wink  if you doubt that, simply go back and look at your posts on entry to this topic. 

if you don't want to receive it, don't dish it out.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
May 30, 2015, 03:35:54 PM
 #25130

it's called Metcalfe's Law.  "value" of the network is squared by every new user.  iCE would rather keep it strangled down to him and his Myrcea buddies.

As you know, I am for the upgrade, but I don't think the alternative is catastrophic, only inconvenient and slows us down. Naysayers can always find limits and reasons to downplay this extraordinary invention. The size of the UTXO set is a recent example.

cypherdoc is invoking the catastrophic Death Of Bitcoin BS with wild melodramatic claims of the network "choking" and being "strangled" when it is merely relatively busy or at worst bogged down.

That kind of artificial deadline based nonsense is an aggressive high-pressure promotion technique called the "hard sell."  It's manipulative, dishonest, and usually indicates lack of a better argument.

Quote
"Act now before it's too late!  Demand GavinCoins from your local miners today!  OR WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE."

-every GavinCoin apologist ever

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
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Wallets - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }


Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016
Blocks must necessarily be full for the Bitcoin network to be able to pay for its own security.  davout 2015
Blocksize is an intentionally limited resource, like the 21e6 BTC limit.  Changing it degrades the surrounding economics, creating negative incentives.  Jeff Garzik 2013


"I believed @Dashpay instamine was a bug & not a feature but then read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13017231#msg13017231
I'm not against people making money, but can't support questionable origins."
https://twitter.com/Tone_LLT/status/717822927908024320


The raison d'être of bitcoin is trustlessness. - Eric Lombrozo 2015
It is an Engineering Requirement that Bitcoin be “Above the Law”  Paul Sztorc 2015
Resiliency, not efficiency, is the paramount goal of decentralized, non-state sanctioned currency -Jon Matonis 2015

Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016

Technology tends to move in the direction of making surveillance easier, and the ability of computers to track us doubles every eighteen months. - Phil Zimmerman 2013

The only way to make software secure, reliable, and fast is to make it small. Fight Features. - Andy Tanenbaum 2004

"Hard forks cannot be co
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 03:38:04 PM
 #25131

it's called Metcalfe's Law.  "value" of the network is squared by every new user.  iCE would rather keep it strangled down to him and his Myrcea buddies.

As you know, I am for the upgrade, but I don't think the alternative is catastrophic, only inconvenient and slows us down. Naysayers can always find limits and reasons to downplay this extraordinary invention. The size of the UTXO set is a recent example.

cypherdoc is invoking the catastrophic Death Of Bitcoin BS with wild melodramatic claims of the network "choking" and being "strangled" when it is merely relatively busy or at worst bogged down.

That kind of artificial deadline based nonsense is an aggressive high-pressure promotion technique called the "hard sell."  It's manipulative, dishonest, and usually indicates lack of a better argument.

Quote
"Act now before it's too late!  Demand GavinCoins from your local miners today!  OR WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE."

-every GavinCoin apologist ever

and you're not with all the FUD and personal Gavin attacks you've been slinging around?  i haven't heard any counter arguments to all the points i've made to your FUD.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 03:38:29 PM
 #25132

Ironically, when the wheels fall off of GavinCoin because of UXTO assplosions or whatever, these spurned core devs will be the ones Gavin and everyone else will turn to for solutions.  Typical "Oops I broke it, now you fix it" pointy-headed boss behavior!   Cheesy

If persistent full 1mb blocks turn out to be an insurmountable problem, consensus to modify that limit would not need to be manufactured with lobbying and tales of impending dooom.

This stunt may generate the type of incalculable empirical feedback we need to ascertain how best to modify the max_block_size parameter.

Of course since it is artificial demand in the form of a stress-test that factor must be accounted for.

1. You seem to not be aware that $billions in capital (a lot of it not invested in BTC but rather VC investments in the space) is invested on the future of Bitcoin, and to make the future uncertain causes capital to become risk adverse. Gavin can't wait, because capital has to plan out the future.

2. You seem to assume centralization[1] can't solve every technical issue of scaling higher transaction rates. Wasn't Visa scale the initial goal? Is Visa not centralized? ("Damn it, but we want decentralization and we will early adopters will fork and short NWOcoin" is not a logical retort)

Come on man, come back to reality.

You seem to have developed an overconfidence from your early adopter decision, which you are projecting as correct analysis of the future. But where is the logic?

The utility of early adopters to Larry Summers has now diminished. He has used you successfully and is moving on. You can be discarded now.

You early adopters were bought at a very small cost by the banksters to help them launch the NWOcoin trojan horse. You are now expendable. They have already the inertia they need.

[1] IBLT is a fancy sugar coating on centralization to make geeks wet their pants again (see their Jesus) and be fooled, as they were with the original DEEP STATE whitepaper.

Money creation is the tool that allows the 0.1% to subvert the work of the 99%. Redistribution of money to the people who understand this mechanism, and want to change it because they understand the consequences, will result in a new model, even if bitcoin was NWOcoin it would upset the system enough to change it.

In your analogy I'm think if Gavin forks with Bitcoin XT that Bitcoin Core will be the NWO coin.

This fork will force Venture capital to buy Bitcoin XT as the money invested in changing Bitcoin Core will not necessary render results.

Still this is fun to watch.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
May 30, 2015, 03:50:51 PM
 #25133

it's called Metcalfe's Law.  "value" of the network is squared by every new user.  iCE would rather keep it strangled down to him and his Myrcea buddies.

As you know, I am for the upgrade, but I don't think the alternative is catastrophic, only inconvenient and slows us down. Naysayers can always find limits and reasons to downplay this extraordinary invention. The size of the UTXO set is a recent example.

cypherdoc is invoking the catastrophic Death Of Bitcoin BS with wild melodramatic claims of the network "choking" and being "strangled" when it is merely relatively busy or at worst bogged down.

That kind of artificial deadline based nonsense is an aggressive high-pressure promotion technique called the "hard sell."  It's manipulative, dishonest, and usually indicates lack of a better argument.

Quote
"Act now before it's too late!  Demand GavinCoins from your local miners today!  OR WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE."

-every GavinCoin apologist ever

and you're not with all the FUD and personal Gavin attacks you've been slinging around?  i haven't heard any counter arguments to all the points i've made to your FUD.

Here's one you missed: you are shrieking about the network "choking" and being "strangled" when it is merely relatively busy or at worst bogged down.  Lukejr doesn't see a problem here and neither do I.

Between vertoe's domination quote and UXTO overflow, the 'we need millions of direct users and MOAR tps, because Metcalfe!' proposition has been thoroughly debunked.

It's all over, except for the shouting.   Wink

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
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Wallets - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }


Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016
Blocks must necessarily be full for the Bitcoin network to be able to pay for its own security.  davout 2015
Blocksize is an intentionally limited resource, like the 21e6 BTC limit.  Changing it degrades the surrounding economics, creating negative incentives.  Jeff Garzik 2013


"I believed @Dashpay instamine was a bug & not a feature but then read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13017231#msg13017231
I'm not against people making money, but can't support questionable origins."
https://twitter.com/Tone_LLT/status/717822927908024320


The raison d'être of bitcoin is trustlessness. - Eric Lombrozo 2015
It is an Engineering Requirement that Bitcoin be “Above the Law”  Paul Sztorc 2015
Resiliency, not efficiency, is the paramount goal of decentralized, non-state sanctioned currency -Jon Matonis 2015

Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016

Technology tends to move in the direction of making surveillance easier, and the ability of computers to track us doubles every eighteen months. - Phil Zimmerman 2013

The only way to make software secure, reliable, and fast is to make it small. Fight Features. - Andy Tanenbaum 2004

"Hard forks cannot be co
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 03:51:13 PM
 #25134

Here is what I think will happen when we reach the limit:

1. A short lived carnage (2 days tops). This is analogous to what happens after a dump, the market price waves a few times before a new relative stability ensues. The effect can not be computed, that is just keynesian sorcery. It's all in the heads of the bitcoin participants. We don't know yet.

2. People will know what fee is necessary to have a reasonable chance of first confirmation in less than one day.

3. The fee will be considerably lower than the current international money transfer plus conversion to and from dollar. That means, considerably less than the 10 - 50 dollar price such transactions currently have. Just guessing: Something like 2 dollars.

4. Zero confirmation payments become more risky. They will be used only for very small transactions and where the traders have a trust relationship (which is the bulk of all trade).

5. Due to high fee, bitcoin can not comfortably be used to buy a cup of coffe, for a period. So what?

6. Publicity a: The fact that fees rise will be all over the internet. Doom will be spelled.

7. Publicity b: "Why do some still use them? Is there something else?" All publicity is good publicity.

Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 04:00:02 PM
 #25135


You can never win with the masses. They will always be wrong, for as long as they demand to organize themselves in collectives.


The Internet is essentially the mass of masses. Extrapolate the audience averaging effect in the popular game show Who Wants to Be a Millionaire:

"But there’s a third option: You can use your “Ask-the-Audience" life line. You can poll the entire studio audience on the four possible answers, and their responses are instantaneously assembled into a bar graph. Invariably, this graph shows one overwhelming choice, and with rare exceptions the audience is right. “I’ll trust the audience,” you tell Regis. “Final answer.”

Good move. But why? No person in the audience is any more likely than you to know where grapes come from, yet the collective intelligence of the group is almost always a better bet than your best guess. Psychologists are very interested in this perplexing statistical phenomenon. If the crowd is always wiser than any individual, what does that say about the way knowledge is stored and arranged in our minds? And can it help us make better choices, even beyond game shows?

...

That’s actually what Vul and Pashler found when they ran the experiment. As reported in the July issue of the journal Psychological Science, the average of two guesses for any individual participant was better than either guess alone, regardless of the time between guesses. So polling the “crowd within” does indeed yield a statistically more accurate answer. What’s more, this internal crowd gets more independent-minded with time: Contestants who were asked to second-guess themselves three weeks later benefited even more by averaging their two guesses than did those who second-guessed themselves immediately. The psychologists speculate that the cognitive pull of the original answer loses its power and allows more mental flexibility over time."
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/onlyhuman/2008/06/polling-crowd-within.cfm

@vokain You have probably seen this already, but in case not: enjoy!
BBC - The Code - The Wisdom of the Crowd
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOucwX7Z1HU

PS. Interesting how every single block size limit poll, since the first one in Feb 2013, has had majority support for the increase.

Thanks both of you for that way cook.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
May 30, 2015, 04:05:07 PM
 #25136

i don't blame the short sightedness of the guy who just sold us off down to $232 given how strident iCE and his buddies have been about making any progress whatsoever on this block size issue.
It's equally likely the sell off is related to the impending Goxxing of OKCoin users.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 04:06:03 PM
 #25137

iCE, here's a nice assemblage of your shrieking and it's just scratching the surface:

I wonder how Gavin stabbing his our core devs in their backs will be priced into the market...

That kind of artificial deadline based nonsense is an aggressive high-pressure promotion technique called the "hard sell."  It's manipulative, dishonest, and usually indicates lack of a better argument

Gavin is mad with power and has gone completely Even Duffield. He wants to infect BTC with supernodes!  You are both welcome to bugger off to the altcoin ghetto with Gavin's bloated XT fork, but please leave the rest of us (who want to keep Bitcoin diffuse/diverse/defensible/resilient) out of it.

Typical of you to invoke a violent metaphor, which entails me ruthlessly killing poor baby bitcoin asleep in its little crib.  How scary!  Quelle horrour!

Perhaps it would be better for the pointy-haired boss to listen to the coders and engineers responsible for fixing Bitcoin when the GigaBlocks break it?

I wish cypher, Hearn, and Gavin good luck with Bitcoin XT in the alt subs.

Who does he think he is, Linux Torvalds or Evan Duffield?

So how does Gavin the pointy-headed boss react to being unable to convince his coders and engineers?

By lobbying (*cough, panicking, cough*) the drooling masses in an attempt to overrule the experts with a stampeding mob.

The Gavin tail is trying to wag the core dev dog, which guarantees the predictable "rancor" he's whining about.

Ironically, when the wheels fall off of GavinCoin because of UXTO assplosions or whatever, these spurned core devs will be the ones Gavin and everyone else will turn to for solutions.  Typical "Oops I broke it, now you fix it" pointy-headed boss behavior!

So you are an old fart like cypher.  Big effing deal.  In 10 years, I'll have 30 years of experience in IT.  Drink an Ensure and change your Depends grandpa, because I'm not going to turn down my dubstep nor get off your lawn.

We will not be stampeded into premature hard forks because the pointy-haired boss and his mob of Redditard sycophants demands Action Now.

Gavin's absurd call for <10 minute blocks indicates he has been (internally and/or externally) compromised.  You would do well to abandon that ship (and its fanboys) before it sinks...
hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 04:06:56 PM
 #25138

there's a real danger here that if the other 1MB core devs don't get off their asses and help out Gavin & Mike, their roles as core devs could be relegated to the dustbin of history.  this is a great chance for those talented devs who have felt rejected or humiliated from the likes of current core devs to get their foot in the door.  we clearly know they exist and in great #'s.  core dev is a highly coveted position leading to all sorts of great opportunities as the Blockstream core dev's refusal to step down in the name of conflict of interest very well demonstrates.

from Mike Hearns on Reddit:

[–]mike_hearn 70 points 7 hours ago

Short of some last minute change of heart by Wladimir and the other committers, it looks like Bitcoin XT may soon become more important.
I am looking for someone to help develop a website and logo for it. If you're interested please hop onto the mailing list and let me know:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/bitcoin-xt
Or you can just email me: hearn@vinumeris.com
If things go ahead and running XT becomes the way to express an opt-in to larger blocks, I will also be looking for volunteers to help co-build the binaries with gitian.
Finally I am looking for anyone who has experience with managing patchsets in git. My current workflow of one-branch-per-feature plus one-branch-per-release is fiddly and fragile. I plan to reorganise things at some point. Suggestions for better approaches are welcome.

permalinksavecontextfull comments (499)reportgive gold


gav&mikey doesnt *even* have someone "to help develop a website and logo for it" ?! Grin





Lulz of the Day.
adamstgBit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904


Trusted Bitcoiner


View Profile WWW
May 30, 2015, 04:10:15 PM
 #25139

question: can a miner with a 56K dial up modem connect to a mining pool to contribute hashing power without having to worry about downloading and verifying the TX's?

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 30, 2015, 04:21:20 PM
 #25140

question: can a miner with a 56K dial up modem connect to a mining pool to contribute hashing power without having to worry about downloading and verifying the TX's?

yes, but i doubt you could afford to keep that dial up connection open and connected at all times.
Pages: « 1 ... 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 [1257] 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 ... 1560 »
  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!