Bitcoin Forum
September 23, 2017, 02:53:33 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   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 ... 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 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1980161 times)
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile
June 03, 2015, 05:20:18 AM
 #25341

Gavin is pragmatic and respects his limitations because he values his accomplishments more than his appraisal of his knowledge, i.e. he doesn't have insecurities or is more balanced. Greg is idealistic and doesn't respect his limitations because he values his appraisal of his knowledge more than his accomplishments, i.e. he has some insecurities or is less balanced.

You definitely want Greg to leave your coin and go to the competitor's coin where he can pretty well muck it up. CoinJoin is a great example of that.

Don't get me wrong, Greg is smarter and more knowledgeable than me when it comes to math and crypto. He is a guy you'd love to have for his smarts, but you'd need to be very careful not to hand him the keys. Perhaps you could bring him around with some social engineering. I found that by being more careful about the way I interacted with him in ways that painted his ego well, he was more accommodating. I doubt he wants to leave Bitcoin, because he wouldn't have the same prominence with any other direction. Thus is he ripe to be accommodating.

This seems very plausible.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1506178413
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506178413

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506178413
Reply with quote  #2

1506178413
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 06:11:58 AM
 #25342

How did this go from a gold collapsing bitcoin up thread to a poll about Gavin?

frap.doc's man crush on gavin the g-man turned into a cheerleading rally session to get the plebes onto the new bitcoin spook-fork.



both frap.doc and karpeles want to frap it up on the blockchain.

Is that even supposed to be funny marcus? Surely you have more imagination than iCELatte?

Of course, you're not man enough  to admit you always throw the first stone are you?:

http://reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/381ygv/who_is_in_favour_of_reducing_the_blocksize_limit/crsjw15
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


http://DashNdrink.com


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2015, 06:19:01 AM
 #25343

[gossip about personalities]

This seems very plausible.

It's also irrelevant.

20MB blocks aren't a Gavinista vs Greg issue.  The XT controversy has set the Gavinistas against all our other core devs.

The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Core GUI - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }
MoneroForCash.com  |  Buy and sell XMR near you  |  Easymonero.com  |  Bitsquare.io - Decentralized XMR Exchange  |  Buy XMR with fiat
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014

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


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
majamalu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652



View Profile WWW
June 03, 2015, 06:29:35 AM
 #25344

[gossip about personalities]

This seems very plausible.

It's also irrelevant.

20MB blocks aren't a Gavinista vs Greg issue.  The XT controversy has set the Gavinistas against all our other core devs.

It seems that the gavinistas are the true satoshistas: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=287.msg8810#msg8810

http://elbitcoin.org - Bitcoin en español
http://mercadobitcoin.com - MercadoBitcoin
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 06:34:48 AM
 #25345

How did this go from a gold collapsing bitcoin up thread to a poll about Gavin?

The ongoing Gavinista coup and looming Great Schism are widely considered the most serious and credible threats yet to cypher's bullish "Bitcoin UP" prediction/outlook.

Is not the Chicago boys any of us have to worry about. It's the Monero boys. 
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 06:37:19 AM
 #25346

[gossip about personalities]

This seems very plausible.

It's also irrelevant.

20MB blocks aren't a Gavinista vs Greg issue.  The XT controversy has set the Gavinistas against all our other core devs.

All other core  devs are acting as a block called Blockstream. Wladimir is just temporarily confused over full nodes vs users.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 06:49:42 AM
 #25347

Converted my first node to XT today.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


http://DashNdrink.com


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2015, 07:04:09 AM
 #25348

[gossip about personalities]

This seems very plausible.

It's also irrelevant.

20MB blocks aren't a Gavinista vs Greg issue.  The XT controversy has set the Gavinistas against all our other core devs.

All other core  devs are acting as a block called Blockstream. Wladimir is just temporarily confused over full nodes vs users.

Blockstream hasn't hired "all other core devs."  And let's not even start with Gavin and THE BITCOIN FOUNDATION INC.

Converted my first node to XT today.

Frap.doc is empowering kids in Africa to buy their frosty blended coffee beverages with the tool Satoshi intended to destroy TBTF banks.

Heartwarming.  I'm sure there won't be any trade-offs or problems you'll expect gmax to fix.   Roll Eyes

The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Core GUI - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }
MoneroForCash.com  |  Buy and sell XMR near you  |  Easymonero.com  |  Bitsquare.io - Decentralized XMR Exchange  |  Buy XMR with fiat
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014

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


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
majamalu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652



View Profile WWW
June 03, 2015, 07:20:25 AM
 #25349

Satoshi's own words: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.msg15366#msg15366

http://elbitcoin.org - Bitcoin en español
http://mercadobitcoin.com - MercadoBitcoin
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
 #25350

I remain largely neutral about whether Bitcoin, Monero, or any future cryptocurrency will actually succeed on a large scale.

Does that include all potential Butterfly effects?

No, I have no idea of the possible range of outcomes.

hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 07:29:27 AM
 #25351



satoshi left us  Cry
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile
June 03, 2015, 07:48:20 AM
 #25352

Meni Rosenfeld proposes an elastic block cap where miners are penalized progressively for blocks bigger than whatever the limit is.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1078521.msg11517847

The idea is to avoid a "crash landing" at 1MB or even at 8 or 20MB. Bitcoin adoption is known to come in order-of-magnitude spurts, so even 20MB isn't immune to a crash landing scenario; and think how much harder another order-of-magnitude increase will be from 20MB, or from 200MB.

We need a way to turn these brick walls into gentle hills, not just lengthen the road leading to them. (To be clear, I think we should do both. Actually having no limit probably does both.)
dEBRUYNE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


View Profile
June 03, 2015, 11:52:49 AM
 #25353

Meni Rosenfeld proposes an elastic block cap where miners are penalized progressively for blocks bigger than whatever the limit is.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1078521.msg11517847

The idea is to avoid a "crash landing" at 1MB or even at 8 or 20MB. Bitcoin adoption is known to come in order-of-magnitude spurts, so even 20MB isn't immune to a crash landing scenario; and think how much harder another order-of-magnitude increase will be from 20MB, or from 200MB.

We need a way to turn these brick walls into gentle hills, not just lengthen the road leading to them. (To be clear, I think we should do both. Actually having no limit probably does both.)

Relevant and interesting comment from Reddit on this subject:

Quote from: Tacotime
As I noted in the thread, this is similar to the block sizing algorithm for Monero and other CryptoNote coins. A quadratic penalty is imposed such that block subsidy = base subsidy * ((block size / median size of last 400 blocks) - 1)2, with the penalty being applied after you build a block larger than the median size. The maximum block size is 2*median size. Because subsidy is based around the number of coins in existence, the 'burned' subsidy is deferred to be paid out to future blocks.

Unlike Meni's proposal, burned block subsidy is simply deferred to all future miners. So far, this has worked in CryptoNote coins without issue.

I am unsure of the incentives of the rollover fee pool method -- it seems like a way to smooth out and evenly distribute fees among miners, but I'm not sure if it work exactly the way it is intended to. For instance, it may disincentivize the inclusion of some larger fee transactions because the miner will fail to immediately benefit from them, and indeed, if the miner is small and only occasionally gets blocks, may never benefit from them. In this case, fees will end up being paid to the miner out of band, thus defeating the entire fee pool mechanism.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/389pq6/elastic_block_cap_with_rollover_penalties_my/crts1do

Privacy matters, use Monero - A true untraceable cryptocurrency
Why Monero matters? http://weuse.cash/2016/03/05/bitcoiners-hedge-your-position/
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 12:55:05 PM
 #25354

Meni Rosenfeld proposes an elastic block cap where miners are penalized progressively for blocks bigger than whatever the limit is.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1078521.msg11517847

The idea is to avoid a "crash landing" at 1MB or even at 8 or 20MB. Bitcoin adoption is known to come in order-of-magnitude spurts, so even 20MB isn't immune to a crash landing scenario; and think how much harder another order-of-magnitude increase will be from 20MB, or from 200MB.

We need a way to turn these brick walls into gentle hills, not just lengthen the road leading to them. (To be clear, I think we should do both. Actually having no limit probably does both.)

Relevant and interesting comment from Reddit on this subject:

Quote from: Tacotime
As I noted in the thread, this is similar to the block sizing algorithm for Monero and other CryptoNote coins. A quadratic penalty is imposed such that block subsidy = base subsidy * ((block size / median size of last 400 blocks) - 1)2, with the penalty being applied after you build a block larger than the median size. The maximum block size is 2*median size. Because subsidy is based around the number of coins in existence, the 'burned' subsidy is deferred to be paid out to future blocks.

Unlike Meni's proposal, burned block subsidy is simply deferred to all future miners. So far, this has worked in CryptoNote coins without issue.

I am unsure of the incentives of the rollover fee pool method -- it seems like a way to smooth out and evenly distribute fees among miners, but I'm not sure if it work exactly the way it is intended to. For instance, it may disincentivize the inclusion of some larger fee transactions because the miner will fail to immediately benefit from them, and indeed, if the miner is small and only occasionally gets blocks, may never benefit from them. In this case, fees will end up being paid to the miner out of band, thus defeating the entire fee pool mechanism.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/389pq6/elastic_block_cap_with_rollover_penalties_my/crts1do

How are they using the term out of band in this context?
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


http://DashNdrink.com


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2015, 01:38:41 PM
 #25355


Yes, I've seen that quote from 2010 before and am still against 20mb blocks at this time.  My turn:

Satoshi's own words:

Quote
https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4
Jun 1
Bitcoin is a global currency. Good thread on int'l bandwidth & other threats to interconnectivity of Bitcoin miners: https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg08010.html

Nick Szabo retweeted
Peter Todd ‏@petertoddbtc May 30

FYI: @gavinandresen's (optimistic) 20MB block analysis had an arithmetic error, and actually supports 8MB blocks https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/37vg8y/is_the_blockstream_company_the_reason_why_4_core/crqgtgs

TL;DR Gavin's own math (when corrected) shows 8MB, not 20, is the right answer, so now he's willing to accept 8.

The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Core GUI - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }
MoneroForCash.com  |  Buy and sell XMR near you  |  Easymonero.com  |  Bitsquare.io - Decentralized XMR Exchange  |  Buy XMR with fiat
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014

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


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
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 02:06:55 PM
 #25356

Gavin's strength is his maturity and calm demeanor, imo.  he'll win if it comes down to a battle.

Nope.  Szatoshi will back Back and Maxwell.  The cypherpunks will stick together (or hang separately).

You should change your handle to 'FrappuccinoDoc.'   Grin

Bitcoin XT is a poison pill for all the newbs and unwary, certain bug fix commits that went into Core have already been omitted. Both Hearn and Andresen have been covertly anti-privacy from day zero, paying it only lip service when pressed. Don't trust it or them. Not to mention it is poorly maintained and totally untested. I can't believe I'm reading such a mad approach being championed on these pages ... it's like a twilight zone episode wtf are you people thinking !!! following Pied Pipers now?

I asked you once to support these serious allegations. Because you're calling Mike and Gavin liars otherwise.

You need to prove this now so that we can confirm or more likely dispense with you as a liar.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 05:53:41 PM
 #25357

Meni Rosenfeld proposes an elastic block cap where miners are penalized progressively for blocks bigger than whatever the limit is.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1078521.msg11517847

The idea is to avoid a "crash landing" at 1MB or even at 8 or 20MB. Bitcoin adoption is known to come in order-of-magnitude spurts, so even 20MB isn't immune to a crash landing scenario; and think how much harder another order-of-magnitude increase will be from 20MB, or from 200MB.

We need a way to turn these brick walls into gentle hills, not just lengthen the road leading to them. (To be clear, I think we should do both. Actually having no limit probably does both.)

Relevant and interesting comment from Reddit on this subject:

Quote from: Tacotime
As I noted in the thread, this is similar to the block sizing algorithm for Monero and other CryptoNote coins. A quadratic penalty is imposed such that block subsidy = base subsidy * ((block size / median size of last 400 blocks) - 1)2, with the penalty being applied after you build a block larger than the median size. The maximum block size is 2*median size. Because subsidy is based around the number of coins in existence, the 'burned' subsidy is deferred to be paid out to future blocks.

Unlike Meni's proposal, burned block subsidy is simply deferred to all future miners. So far, this has worked in CryptoNote coins without issue.

I am unsure of the incentives of the rollover fee pool method -- it seems like a way to smooth out and evenly distribute fees among miners, but I'm not sure if it work exactly the way it is intended to. For instance, it may disincentivize the inclusion of some larger fee transactions because the miner will fail to immediately benefit from them, and indeed, if the miner is small and only occasionally gets blocks, may never benefit from them. In this case, fees will end up being paid to the miner out of band, thus defeating the entire fee pool mechanism.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/389pq6/elastic_block_cap_with_rollover_penalties_my/crts1do

How are they using the term out of band in this context?

That was confusion with Meni's earlier proposal. The out of band issue (where miners change fees in some way other than via the normal Bitcoin fee mechanism, though it may still be in the transaction itself) does not apply to his new proposal.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 05:54:55 PM
 #25358

Gavin's strength is his maturity and calm demeanor, imo.  he'll win if it comes down to a battle.

Nope.  Szatoshi will back Back and Maxwell.  The cypherpunks will stick together (or hang separately).

You should change your handle to 'FrappuccinoDoc.'   Grin

Bitcoin XT is a poison pill for all the newbs and unwary, certain bug fix commits that went into Core have already been omitted. Both Hearn and Andresen have been covertly anti-privacy from day zero, paying it only lip service when pressed. Don't trust it or them. Not to mention it is poorly maintained and totally untested. I can't believe I'm reading such a mad approach being championed on these pages ... it's like a twilight zone episode wtf are you people thinking !!! following Pied Pipers now?

I asked you once to support these serious allegations. Because you're calling Mike and Gavin liars otherwise.

You need to prove this now so that we can confirm or more likely dispense with you as a liar.

marcus, we're still waiting.
mrhelpful
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302



View Profile
June 03, 2015, 06:01:10 PM
 #25359


Yes, I've seen that quote from 2010 before and am still against 20mb blocks at this time.  My turn:

Satoshi's own words:

Quote
https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4
Jun 1
Bitcoin is a global currency. Good thread on int'l bandwidth & other threats to interconnectivity of Bitcoin miners: https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg08010.html

Nick Szabo retweeted
Peter Todd ‏@petertoddbtc May 30

FYI: @gavinandresen's (optimistic) 20MB block analysis had an arithmetic error, and actually supports 8MB blocks https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/37vg8y/is_the_blockstream_company_the_reason_why_4_core/crqgtgs

TL;DR Gavin's own math (when corrected) shows 8MB, not 20, is the right answer, so now he's willing to accept 8.

Sounds better then just 1 mb lol.

And this is something we would have to do every 5 years then? increase the block size? based on transaction volume etc.
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2015, 06:06:06 PM
 #25360

How did this go from a gold collapsing bitcoin up thread to a poll about Gavin?

The ongoing Gavinista coup and looming Great Schism are widely considered the most serious and credible threats yet to cypher's bullish "Bitcoin UP" prediction/outlook.

Is not the Chicago boys any of us have to worry about. It's the Monero boys.  

True.  Monero solved the block size issue on day one with adaptive block sizes and costing.  I'm not in favor of rushing anything and like sipa's list of todos before any increase of Bitcoin block size, but there is some urgency for that.
http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34090896/

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
Pages: « 1 ... 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 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 ... 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!