Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 06:31:37 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [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 ... 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 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1806371 times)
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
June 07, 2015, 05:04:02 AM
 #25821

I don't know, but I'm happy to find out.

i hate to say it, but iCE is right about you guys.

Maybe we're all sort of right about each other :p

What are audiences for, if not to mirror?

What am I right about?  I hope you're not putting words in my mouth again, as when you said blocksize gaming was my #1 concern about GavinCoin.

We three (and gmax too) clearly have far more in common with each other than with the rest of the useless eaters, hence our few points of disagreement are psychosomatically magnified in importance by the phenomenon called narcissism of small differences.

I say we just hug it out.  Except for that weirdo Shelby, he just gets a friendly, semi-patronizing pat on the back.   Cheesy

Doc, did you find the egregious amateur error in this post yet?

actually, there's no way f2pool, Eligius, and BTCPool add to 31% of the network.  i count 10% max and f2pool isn't even on the chart.

C'mon little slugger, I know you can do it!   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
1481221897
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481221897

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481221897
Reply with quote  #2

1481221897
Report to moderator
The forum was founded in 2009 by Satoshi and Sirius. It replaced a SourceForge forum.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 05:14:16 AM
 #25822

I don't know, but I'm happy to find out.

i hate to say it, but iCE is right about you guys.

Maybe we're all sort of right about each other :p

What are audiences for, if not to mirror?

What am I right about?  I hope you're not putting words in my mouth again, as when you said blocksize gaming was my #1 concern about GavinCoin.

We three (and gmax too) clearly have far more in common with each other than with the rest of the useless eaters, hence our few points of disagreement are psychosomatically magnified in importance by the phenomenon called narcissism of small differences.

I say we just hug it out.  Except for that weirdo Shelby, he just gets a friendly, semi-patronizing pat on the back.   Cheesy

Doc, did you find the egregious amateur error in this post yet?

actually, there's no way f2pool, Eligius, and BTCPool add to 31% of the network.  i count 10% max and f2pool isn't even on the chart.

C'mon little slugger, I know you can do it!   Wink

so what if f2pool is Discus fish.  i still say, let them cry.  if the community adopts XT, they will be forced to come along esp if they have inferior connections.  if anything, it's a great opportunity for US mines funded by Wall St to get into the market which is what the USG should encourage to create parity, just like Fred Wilson and i have been recommending.  they should want XT to grow the mkt and enable our mines. 

you really have nothing else to grasp onto do you having contributed nothing to greater understanding in Bitcoin.  i still want to know your handle over on Reddit or are you scared? Wink
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
June 07, 2015, 06:04:17 AM
 #25823

actually, there's no way f2pool, Eligius, and BTCPool add to 31% of the network.  i count 10% max and f2pool isn't even on the chart.

*...180 degrees later...*

so what if f2pool is Discus fish.  i still say, let them cry.  if the community adopts XT, they will be forced to come along esp if they have inferior connections.  if anything, it's a great opportunity for US mines funded by Wall St to get into the market which is what the USG should encourage to create parity, just like Fred Wilson and i have been recommending.  they should want XT to grow the mkt and enable our mines. 

you really have nothing else to grasp onto do you having contributed nothing to greater understanding in Bitcoin.  i still want to know your handle over on Reddit or are you scared? Wink

OMG you finally figured out f2pool *is* DF.  Some BTC guru you are.  Perhaps you should be more charitable, humble, and resourceful before questioning rudely disputing my superior expertise in that domain?   Cheesy

I already told you the "so what" just as the Discus f2pool ops told Gavin how the cow ate the cabbage.

Gavin listened, and backpedaled to 8MB.  You, OTOH, are too stubborn and prideful to admit fault even when >30% of the network is asking us to calm down and stop exaggerating. 

And now we find you making some kind of silly, desperate, profoundly anti-libertarian protectionist argument against Asian Bitcoining.  Excuse me while I indulge in an epic eye roll...



I don't have an account on Reddit or any other Conde Naste organ.  That ant-farm is occasionally amusing, but overall too smug and mid-brow for my taste.  They don't even allow more than one side of the anthropogenic climate change debate to be represented!

If I posted at Reddit you would have recognized my writing style.  But I will not contribute free content to any such lumpen bastion of preening, asinine normativity.  I'm shocked and disappointed you fit in so well over there, but alas, so goes the Gavinista movement...

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
June 07, 2015, 06:12:27 AM
 #25824

oh iCE, you're impossible  Wink

btw, you didn't answer phoenix this morning:

Good morning!!

Would any of you guys care to comment on these two articles that assert that :

1) We are already hitting the 1MB block limit "an average of more than four times per day so far in 2015"

and

2) The 'real' speed of the Bitcoin network is only 2.8 TPS - "largely a result of increasingly complex transactions, often using multiple inputs and outputs"

https://tradeblock.com/blog/bitcoin-network-capacity-analysis-part-1-macro-block-trends

https://tradeblock.com/blog/bitcoin-network-capacity-analysis-part-2-macro-transaction-trends

Thanks!
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 06:19:54 AM
 #25825

Would any of you guys care to comment on these two articles that assert that :

1) We are already hitting the 1MB block limit "an average of more than four times per day so far in 2015"

I haven't had time to read the articles (links at quoted post above) but my initial response to the claim is that is suggests the "hard crash" theory is wrong. If we are already hitting the limit regularly, then the system is able to handle that. People will learn to use higher tx fees to prioritize urgent transactions, just as they learned to stop using zero fee for urgent transactions a year or two ago, and slightly longer term probably a bunch of spam will get forced off the network altogether. The market mechanism is working.

I've personally run into very slow confirms of low-fee-paying transactions twice, but it wasn't he end of the world (with a ten minute avg block time you have to be prepared for slow confirms anyway). The next time I do a transaction if I care about urgency I'll probably increase the fee a little above the default.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 06:26:04 AM
 #25826

I don't have an account on Reddit or any other Conde Naste organ.  That ant-farm is occasionally amusing, but overall too smug and mid-brow for my taste.  They don't even allow more than one side of the anthropogenic climate change debate to be represented!

If I posted at Reddit you would have recognized my writing style.  But I will not contribute free content to any such lumpen bastion of preening, asinine normativity.  I'm shocked and disappointed you fit in so well over there, but alas, so goes the Gavinista movement...

first you claim gmax is schooling me over on Reddit, then i give you a link showing i'm schooling him based on upvotes, you then tell me you're going to take over for him, and now you're telling me you don't go over there?

can you be any more misleading?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 06:32:28 AM
 #25827

Would any of you guys care to comment on these two articles that assert that :

1) We are already hitting the 1MB block limit "an average of more than four times per day so far in 2015"

I haven't had time to read the articles (links at quoted post above) but my initial response to the claim is that is suggests the "hard crash" theory is wrong. If we are already hitting the limit regularly, then the system is able to handle that. People will learn to use higher tx fees to prioritize urgent transactions, just as they learned to stop using zero fee for urgent transactions a year or two ago, and slightly longer term probably a bunch of spam will get forced off the network altogether. The market mechanism is working.

I've personally run into very slow confirms of low-fee-paying transactions twice, but it wasn't he end of the world (with a ten minute avg block time you have to be prepared for slow confirms anyway). The next time I do a transaction if I care about urgency I'll probably increase the fee a little above the default.

this just tells me we'll never reach an agreement.  and i'm sure you fully believe what you're saying.  i'm sure if fees hit $100/tx you'd probably say it's fine, it will just settle out with time.  the problem is, many ppl are going to quit using Bitcoin well before then and adoption won't go anywhere and probably will go into reverse.

but it's useless debating this anymore b/c opinions are entrenched.  those of us who want to fork off will just have to do so for us to realize our vision of a more widespread network effect.  and that will be ok.  you can do what you want.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 06:35:32 AM
 #25828

Would any of you guys care to comment on these two articles that assert that :

1) We are already hitting the 1MB block limit "an average of more than four times per day so far in 2015"

I haven't had time to read the articles (links at quoted post above) but my initial response to the claim is that is suggests the "hard crash" theory is wrong. If we are already hitting the limit regularly, then the system is able to handle that. People will learn to use higher tx fees to prioritize urgent transactions, just as they learned to stop using zero fee for urgent transactions a year or two ago, and slightly longer term probably a bunch of spam will get forced off the network altogether. The market mechanism is working.

I've personally run into very slow confirms of low-fee-paying transactions twice, but it wasn't he end of the world (with a ten minute avg block time you have to be prepared for slow confirms anyway). The next time I do a transaction if I care about urgency I'll probably increase the fee a little above the default.

this just tells me we'll never reach an agreement.  and i'm sure you fully believe what you're saying.  i'm sure if fees hit $100/tx you'd probably say it's fine, it will just settle out with time.  the problem is, many ppl are going to quit using Bitcoin well before then and adoption won't go anywhere and probably will go into reverse.

but it's useless debating this anymore b/c opinions are entrenched.  those of us who want to fork off will just have to do so for us to realize our vision of a more widespread network effect.  and that will be ok.  you can do what you want.

I don't really have a strong opinion on the block size. I'm perfectly comfortable popping some corn and watching Gavin and MP go at it.

If I were king I would increase it modestly (less than 20 MB).

I don't know whether $100/tx would be fine. As a reserve currency it might be fine. As a transactional currency it obviously wouldn't.

I also don't know that $100/tx is a realistic estimate any time soon given that we are now at something like $0.05 to nearly aways get into the next block (and getting into the very next block is not always needed -- for a lower fee you can be still be very confident of getting in the next several blocks).

iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
June 07, 2015, 06:51:47 AM
 #25829

oh iCE, you're impossible  Wink

btw, you didn't answer phoenix this morning:

I'd rather be an impossible person with a clue about the world of mining pools than a protectionist who spouts off about affairs of which they know little.   Grin

My take on phoenix is the same as smooth and lukejr's.  IE:  Full blocks?  Good!

the "hard crash" theory is wrong. If we are already hitting the limit regularly, then the system is able to handle that. People will learn to use higher tx fees to prioritize urgent transactions, just as they learned to stop using zero fee for urgent transactions a year or two ago, and slightly longer term probably a bunch of spam will get forced off the network altogether. The market mechanism is working.

I've personally run into very slow confirms of low-fee-paying transactions twice, but it wasn't he end of the world (with a ten minute avg block time you have to be prepared for slow confirms anyway). The next time I do a transaction if I care about urgency I'll probably increase the fee a little above the default.

You need to accept the existence of trade-offs between security and convenience.  A distributed, profoundly antifragile system designed for settlement cannot be everywhere all the time, instantly.


first you claim gmax is schooling me over on Reddit, then i give you a link showing i'm schooling him based on upvotes, you then tell me you're going to take over for him, and now you're telling me you don't go over there?

can you be any more misleading?

Don't call me a liar.  I admitted to browsing nullc and other core dev commentary when linked from here.  You don't have to have an account or log in to read Reddit.

Once again, if I were posting there you would recognize my inimitable writing style (unless you've gone full paranoid and believe I'd adopt a different persona).

You know full well I've had in the past vicious quarrels with gmax.  But the truth is he has in recent posts been making a fool of you, green arrows notwithstanding.

As for upvotes from Gavinista redditards, it pains me to witness the once-mighty cypherdoc reduced to argumentum ad populum.   Cry

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
June 07, 2015, 06:52:23 AM
 #25830

I don't know whether $100/tx would be fine. As a reserve currency it might be fine. As a transactional currency it obviously wouldn't.

I also don't know that $100/tx is a realistic estimate any time soon given that we are now at something like $0.05 to nearly aways get into the next block (and getting into the very next block is not always needed -- for a lower fee you can be still be very confident of getting in the next several blocks).



$100 was just pulled out of my ass.  but your response illustrates exactly what i was saying the other day.  i contend that lukejr and gmax would say the same thing, they don't know that $100/tx would be fine.  according to them it could be based on whether they see Bitcoin as a reserve currency or b/c they are financially captured and wish to see their SC's benefit.

pt being, there is no sense waiting for the "last minute" b/c no one will agree what the "last minute" is.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 06:56:40 AM
 #25831

oh iCE, you're impossible  Wink

btw, you didn't answer phoenix this morning:

I'd rather be an impossible person with a clue about the world of mining pools than a protectionist who spouts off about affairs of which they know little.   Grin

My take on phoenix is the same as smooth and lukejr's.  IE:  Full blocks?  Good!

the "hard crash" theory is wrong. If we are already hitting the limit regularly, then the system is able to handle that. People will learn to use higher tx fees to prioritize urgent transactions, just as they learned to stop using zero fee for urgent transactions a year or two ago, and slightly longer term probably a bunch of spam will get forced off the network altogether. The market mechanism is working.

I've personally run into very slow confirms of low-fee-paying transactions twice, but it wasn't he end of the world (with a ten minute avg block time you have to be prepared for slow confirms anyway). The next time I do a transaction if I care about urgency I'll probably increase the fee a little above the default.

You need to accept the existence of trade-offs between security and convenience.  A distributed, profoundly antifragile system designed for settlement cannot be everywhere all the time, instantly.


first you claim gmax is schooling me over on Reddit, then i give you a link showing i'm schooling him based on upvotes, you then tell me you're going to take over for him, and now you're telling me you don't go over there?

can you be any more misleading?

Don't call me a liar.  I admitted to browsing nullc and other core dev commentary when linked from here.  You don't have to have an account or log in to read Reddit.

Once again, if I were posting there you would recognize my inimitable writing style (unless you've gone full paranoid and believe I'd adopt a different persona).

You know full well I've had in the past vicious quarrels with gmax.  But the truth is he has in recent posts been making a fool of you, green arrows notwithstanding.

As for upvotes from Gavinista redditards, it pains me to witness the once-mighty cypherdoc reduced to argumentum ad populum.   Cry

who just reads reddit w/o posting?  esp someone with your mouth?  you know you wouldn't be able to help yourself.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 06:56:55 AM
 #25832

I don't know whether $100/tx would be fine. As a reserve currency it might be fine. As a transactional currency it obviously wouldn't.

I also don't know that $100/tx is a realistic estimate any time soon given that we are now at something like $0.05 to nearly aways get into the next block (and getting into the very next block is not always needed -- for a lower fee you can be still be very confident of getting in the next several blocks).



$100 was just pulled out of my ass.  but your response illustrates exactly what i was saying the other day.  i contend that lukejr and gmax would say the same thing, they don't know that $100/tx would be fine.  according to them it could be based on whether they see Bitcoin as a reserve currency or b/c they are financially captured and wish to see their SC's benefit.

pt being, there is no sense waiting for the "last minute" b/c no one will agree what the "last minute" is.

Maybe its worth giving them the benefit of the doubt then. I have zero investment in sidechains, and I don't even think that sidechains even work!

Of course you could claim that I just care about sabotaging Bitcoin because Monero, but you'd be wrong about that too.

Maybe it is possible that people who actually understand the technology just have serious doubts about Gavin's approach of scaling it up the way you scale up a web site?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 07:02:39 AM
 #25833

I don't know whether $100/tx would be fine. As a reserve currency it might be fine. As a transactional currency it obviously wouldn't.

I also don't know that $100/tx is a realistic estimate any time soon given that we are now at something like $0.05 to nearly aways get into the next block (and getting into the very next block is not always needed -- for a lower fee you can be still be very confident of getting in the next several blocks).



$100 was just pulled out of my ass.  but your response illustrates exactly what i was saying the other day.  i contend that lukejr and gmax would say the same thing, they don't know that $100/tx would be fine.  according to them it could be based on whether they see Bitcoin as a reserve currency or b/c they are financially captured and wish to see their SC's benefit.

pt being, there is no sense waiting for the "last minute" b/c no one will agree what the "last minute" is.

Maybe its worth giving them the benefit of the doubt them. I have zero investment in sidechains, and I don't even think that sidechains even work!

Of course you could claim that I just care about sabotaging Bitcoin because Monero, but you'd be wrong about that too.

Maybe it is possible that people who actually understand the technology just have serious doubts about Gavin's approach of scaling it up the way you scale up a web site?


i'm sure some do but i think it's also true that Bitcoin can never be safe nor become a true currency unless it experiences "wider" adoption.  with 1MB, i don't think there is any doubt we get stuck where we are in terms of adoption.  i think even the skeptics see this and is why they're "hedging" the argument now by saying they're all in favor of an increase but it's a matter of how much and when.  at least from "our" standpoint, that's some progress.

the "wider" adoption is the question.  i firmly believe that we should push the tech hard to test it's limits.  the further out it spreads to the far ends of the earth, the safer and more successful Bitcoin will be.  that would be the ultimate decentralization which no gvt could reverse.  we'll never know unless we try.  the fall back is we could pull back the block size if we had to. 
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
June 07, 2015, 07:05:01 AM
 #25834

I don't know whether $100/tx would be fine. As a reserve currency it might be fine. As a transactional currency it obviously wouldn't.

I also don't know that $100/tx is a realistic estimate any time soon given that we are now at something like $0.05 to nearly aways get into the next block (and getting into the very next block is not always needed -- for a lower fee you can be still be very confident of getting in the next several blocks).



$100 was just pulled out of my ass.  but your response illustrates exactly what i was saying the other day.  i contend that lukejr and gmax would say the same thing, they don't know that $100/tx would be fine.  according to them it could be based on whether they see Bitcoin as a reserve currency or b/c they are financially captured and wish to see their SC's benefit.

pt being, there is no sense waiting for the "last minute" b/c no one will agree what the "last minute" is.

We can't agree on an ex nihilo/a priori definition ahead of time, but when the "last minute" comes we will know it.

who just reads reddit w/o posting?  esp someone with your mouth?  you know you wouldn't be able to help yourself.

I read reddit w/o posting.  Have you seen anyone with my mouth there?  No, you have not.

gmax casts his pearls of wisdom before the Redditurd Gavinista cargo-cultist swine; I will not.  This venue is much more well suited to my refined tastes and high expectations of intellect.

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
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 07:07:49 AM
 #25835

I don't know whether $100/tx would be fine. As a reserve currency it might be fine. As a transactional currency it obviously wouldn't.

I also don't know that $100/tx is a realistic estimate any time soon given that we are now at something like $0.05 to nearly aways get into the next block (and getting into the very next block is not always needed -- for a lower fee you can be still be very confident of getting in the next several blocks).



$100 was just pulled out of my ass.  but your response illustrates exactly what i was saying the other day.  i contend that lukejr and gmax would say the same thing, they don't know that $100/tx would be fine.  according to them it could be based on whether they see Bitcoin as a reserve currency or b/c they are financially captured and wish to see their SC's benefit.

pt being, there is no sense waiting for the "last minute" b/c no one will agree what the "last minute" is.

Maybe its worth giving them the benefit of the doubt them. I have zero investment in sidechains, and I don't even think that sidechains even work!

Of course you could claim that I just care about sabotaging Bitcoin because Monero, but you'd be wrong about that too.

Maybe it is possible that people who actually understand the technology just have serious doubts about Gavin's approach of scaling it up the way you scale up a web site?


i'm sure some do but i think it's also true that Bitcoin can never be safe nor become a true currency unless it experiences "wider" adoption.  with 1MB, i don't think there is any doubt we get stuck where we are in terms of adoption.  i think even the skeptics see this and is why they're "hedging" the argument now by saying they're all in favor of an increase but it's a matter of how much and when.  at least from "our" standpoint, that's some progress.

the "wider" adoption is the question.  i firmly believe that we should push the tech hard to test it's limits.  the further out it spreads to the far ends of the earth, the safer and more successful Bitcoin will be.  that would be the ultimate decentralization which no gvt could reverse.  we'll never know unless we try.  the fall back is we could pull back the block size if we had to. 

i don't know man, I kind of feel the opposite, that getting nodes and miners spread out to the corners of the earth is more important to resisting hostile takeover than users. The former is probably helped by keeping the scale of transactions under control, not by increasing it.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
June 07, 2015, 07:08:58 AM
 #25836

I have zero investment in sidechains, and I don't even think that sidechains even work!

Of course you could claim that I just care about sabotaging Bitcoin because Monero, but you'd be wrong about that too.

Maybe it is possible that people who actually understand the technology just have serious doubts about Gavin's approach of scaling it up the way you scale up a web site?


☐ Not REKT
☑ REKT

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
June 07, 2015, 07:09:24 AM
 #25837

I read reddit w/o posting.  Have you seen anyone with my mouth there?  No, you have not.


iCE with his mouth zipped?  my lord, there is a god!

you know from now on whenever i post there slinging shit at the Blockstream guys, i will be smiling to myself knowing you can't say anything. Grin
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 07:14:18 AM
 #25838

I don't know whether $100/tx would be fine. As a reserve currency it might be fine. As a transactional currency it obviously wouldn't.

I also don't know that $100/tx is a realistic estimate any time soon given that we are now at something like $0.05 to nearly aways get into the next block (and getting into the very next block is not always needed -- for a lower fee you can be still be very confident of getting in the next several blocks).



$100 was just pulled out of my ass.  but your response illustrates exactly what i was saying the other day.  i contend that lukejr and gmax would say the same thing, they don't know that $100/tx would be fine.  according to them it could be based on whether they see Bitcoin as a reserve currency or b/c they are financially captured and wish to see their SC's benefit.

pt being, there is no sense waiting for the "last minute" b/c no one will agree what the "last minute" is.

Maybe its worth giving them the benefit of the doubt them. I have zero investment in sidechains, and I don't even think that sidechains even work!

Of course you could claim that I just care about sabotaging Bitcoin because Monero, but you'd be wrong about that too.

Maybe it is possible that people who actually understand the technology just have serious doubts about Gavin's approach of scaling it up the way you scale up a web site?


i'm sure some do but i think it's also true that Bitcoin can never be safe nor become a true currency unless it experiences "wider" adoption.  with 1MB, i don't think there is any doubt we get stuck where we are in terms of adoption.  i think even the skeptics see this and is why they're "hedging" the argument now by saying they're all in favor of an increase but it's a matter of how much and when.  at least from "our" standpoint, that's some progress.

the "wider" adoption is the question.  i firmly believe that we should push the tech hard to test it's limits.  the further out it spreads to the far ends of the earth, the safer and more successful Bitcoin will be.  that would be the ultimate decentralization which no gvt could reverse.  we'll never know unless we try.  the fall back is we could pull back the block size if we had to.  

i don't know man, I kind of feel the opposite, that getting nodes and miners spread out to the corners of the earth is more important to resisting hostile takeover than users. The former is probably helped by keeping the scale of transactions under control, not by increasing it.


if you've been reading my posts recently you'll know i feel that is a fundamental misunderstanding by you devs.  you view the full node as the fundamental unit of the system whereas i feel it is the user.  my view is supported by phenoms like Uber, AirBnb, Facebook and just about every other successful internet company out there who scrambled to scarf up users as fast as they could before regulations kicked in or before their competitors could react.  that way the gvt couldn't very well say no to all their same constituents who voted them in who were also using these new services.  

the way i see it, full nodes are similar to ACH or Swift services which is just the plumbing of the system dominated and driven by users.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
June 07, 2015, 07:48:27 AM
 #25839

I read reddit w/o posting.  Have you seen anyone with my mouth there?  No, you have not.


iCE with his mouth zipped?  my lord, there is a god!

you know from now on whenever i post there slinging shit at the Blockstream guys, i will be smiling to myself knowing you can't say anything. Grin

I can say something and do, but at the venue of my choosing - not yours.

Besides, pwuille, nullc, lukejr, and petertodd don't need my help bending you over and administering corrective spankings.  They're already doing a great job of that.

Funny how when the question was "Sidechains?" your answer was "the simplest and safest approach should be tried first."

But when the question is "GavinCoin?" you answer suddenly changes to "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!"

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
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 09:48:34 AM
 #25840

if you've been reading my posts recently you'll know i feel that is a fundamental misunderstanding by you devs.  you view the full node as the fundamental unit of the system whereas i feel it is the user.  my view is supported by phenoms like Uber, AirBnb, Facebook and just about every other successful internet company out there who scrambled to scarf up users as fast as they could before regulations kicked in or before their competitors could react.  that way the gvt couldn't very well say no to all their same constituents who voted them in who were also using these new services.  

You don't understand the fundamental difference. Uber, AirBnb, etc. want to be regulated businesses that are protectorates of the state. They just want to get big before that happens. The regulations that are written around their businesses (by or in collaboration with their lobbyists) can then be used as a moat to keep others out, protecting their profit margins.

That model doesn't apply to Bitcoin. At all.

Pages: « 1 ... 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 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 ... 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!