Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 05:11:21 AM *
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 ... 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 [1372] 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1807509 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 05:46:51 PM
 #27421

as i said earlier this morning, you're getting to watch the Transports go off the next cliff:

1481346681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481346681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481346681
Reply with quote  #2

1481346681
Report to moderator
1481346681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481346681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481346681
Reply with quote  #2

1481346681
Report to moderator
1481346681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481346681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481346681
Reply with quote  #2

1481346681
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481346681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481346681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481346681
Reply with quote  #2

1481346681
Report to moderator
1481346681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481346681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481346681
Reply with quote  #2

1481346681
Report to moderator
1481346681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481346681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481346681
Reply with quote  #2

1481346681
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 06:01:13 PM
 #27422


I've come to see a single core as being the single greatest threat to Bitcoin out of all of this. A better situation to me would be a bitcoin P2P network with several separately developed cores that adhere to a common set of rules. The upgrade path is then always put to a vote. Any one core could then propose a change simply by implementing it (with a rule that after x% of blocks back the change it becomes active).

Then if people like the change, more will move to that core. This in turn would cause the other core to adopt the change or lose their users, and that is how consensus is achieved. If a majority did not like the change, they would not move to that core, and the change would never be accepted.

At no point in this do any set of gatekeepers get to dictate terms. Since no core has a majority of users captured, change would always have to come through user acceptance and adoption, and developers would simply be proposers of options.

Yes, in the long run a network composed of many parallel implementations would be the most robust and anti-fragile.

It strikes me that contentious consensus decisions such as this could serve as impetus for these parallel implementations. If miners and node operators "vote" on various hard- and soft-fork decisions by choosing to run different forks of the main client, then a more diverse software ecosystem could emerge. This should also be a less contentious way of coming to consensus, everyone simply choosing the client that will implement the policy they favor once a supermajority of the network agrees.

This would probably also require something better than "version number" for clients to communicate the consensus rules they are willing to follow. If several consensus changes are being considered simultaneously, then some sort of more fine-grained indication would be needed.

yes, when viewed this way the prospect of XT becomes much less frightening despite the best efforts of the 1MB'ers to try and scare everyone.

what i'm not convinced of is that there can be many different implementations existing at any one time.  i don't mean the difference btwn btcd and Bitcoin Core; i mean btwn chains with say 1MB and 8MB block sizes.  if and when 8MB blocks catch on with say 75% majority of users, miners, and merchants, there will be tremendous incentives for participants to attack the competing chain in both directions.  personally, i feel the 1MB will be the weaker of the two unsurprisingly.  a persistent spamming attack to fill up the 1MB blocks seems to me to be the much easier and less expensive attack to perform.  after all, it didn't take many BTC to clog us up for the last two Stress Tests.  there are existing players with lots and lots of BTC that could be employed for this use as they would have a great incentive to shut down the 1MB chain.  on the flipside, an MP could try to attack the 8MB block similarly but it would cost him 8x the BTC along with the risk of orphans that miners won't allow.  guess who wins in the long run?  but there are many other reasons not to use SC's as i have gone on about ad nauseum, so maybe the above attack isn't even necessary.  i doubt the market will even want to use them in aggregate.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 06:06:41 PM
 #27423

my favorite silver mining proxy SLW going off the cliff and leading:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 06:12:37 PM
 #27424

both $DJI & $DJT accelerating to the downside now.

get yourself some Gavincoin.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 06:23:17 PM
 #27425

i smell desperation from the 1MB'ers.  

they love to flap their lips don't they?

btw, my poll is back over 73%.  tisk, tisk.

My much more accurate poll is running 40/60 at the moment.



such a ridiculously loaded question for a poll is insulting.

the fact that XT is favored given how the question is framed, to me indicated that the majority of people see past the FUD supporting the proponents of limiting block-size for now.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 06:32:15 PM
 #27426

if Chevron ain't making money now, what does that say for the rest of the real economy?:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 06:38:33 PM
 #27427

i smell desperation from the 1MB'ers.  

they love to flap their lips don't they?

btw, my poll is back over 73%.  tisk, tisk.

My much more accurate poll is running 40/60 at the moment.



such a ridiculously loaded question for a poll is insulting.

the fact that there XT is favored given how the question is framed, to me indicated that the majority of people see past the FUD supporting the proponents of limiting block-size for now.

precisely.  and they're gaining a better understanding of all the financial conflicts as well.  just watch Reddit; theymos got destroyed this morning touting the 1MB FUD story.  mercilessly too, all with great arguments, not just financial but technical too.

the only thing that has helped them recently is the all out effort using character assasination against everyone and even little 'ol me.  good for a few initial points but then over time a doomed strategy which ppl can see right thru and which eventually turns them off.  

bottom line is that they are out of ammo.  Mike & Gavin just need to sit back and watch them self destruct.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 06:48:38 PM
 #27428

i smell desperation from the 1MB'ers.  

they love to flap their lips don't they?

btw, my poll is back over 73%.  tisk, tisk.

My much more accurate poll is running 40/60 at the moment.



such a ridiculously loaded question for a poll is insulting.

the fact that there XT is favored given how the question is framed, to me indicated that the majority of people see past the FUD supporting the proponents of limiting block-size for now.

precisely.  and they're gaining a better understanding of all the financial conflicts as well.  just watch Reddit; theymos got destroyed this morning touting the 1MB FUD story.  mercilessly too, all with great arguments, not just financial but technical too.

the only thing that has helped them recently is the all out effort using character assasination against everyone and even little 'ol me.  good for a few initial points but then over time a doomed strategy which ppl can see right thru and which eventually turns them off.  

bottom line is that they are out of ammo.  Mike & Gavin just need to sit back and watch them self destruct.

I had to take a dig at you too ;-), i was feeling sorry for nullc.

what i have noticed though some reddit threads get owned by "bigger block proponents" and the opponents consed and dont venture in. and then there are the "limiting blocks for now" proponent threads and the increase blockers are down voted big time. its all rather polarized and entertaining to watch, not sure how much fundamentalism is brewing v education. but there are folks putting up a solid argument for increasing which is a positive sign.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
June 25, 2015, 06:49:34 PM
 #27429

both $DJI & $DJT accelerating to the downside now.

get yourself some Gavincoin.

but but but...

I heard the financial crisis is over, and soon magical NFLX bearing unicorns will frolic across the globe, bringing fiber to all the deserving children of Ukraine, Africa, Florida, and other formerly impoverished backwaters.  Since all is most assuredly well in fiat-land, it's not clear why we even need Bitcoin, except perhaps as yet another centralized payment rail to act as a retail POS gimmick for the amusement of hipsters/yuppies and profit of VC frat boys.

Of course if that's *not* true and we are headed towards a messy/violent end to the petrodollar's death throes, perhaps preserving and enhancing BTC's diffuse/diverse/defensible/resilient properties is a better idea than forever committing every tip at every coffee shop to the MotherChain.

Forget about Gavincoin because the financial crisis is over, thanks to our brave heroic consumers binge watching Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad:



ATH BITCH!   Grin

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
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 07:02:57 PM
 #27430

Pantera Capital explains the "three buckets" theory, though combining mining and VC as a single bucket: https://panteracapital.com/download/the-five-phases-of-bitcoin-ibnyc-keynote/

Thank you! That is very informative and helpful. It is important to consider that investment capital in the ecosystem is increasing while BTC is falling.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 07:19:25 PM
 #27431

It takes a version of Bitcoin that scales to the point that every person on the planet can interact with it directly, to achieve the status that gold once held. To get there requires that bitcoin scales, while maintaining it's decentralized and thus independent nature.

One option to get there is to let the blockchain scale to accommodate everyone, this could look like the following and still be OK...

- ~100 P2P nodes that are independently sponsored and paid for to perform validation (these would be several large institutions such as MIT, remember it only takes 1 node to flag cheating)
- ~10 pools that receive fees from billions of transactions and are located in several regions (or preferably behind tor or something similar)
- ~100,000 small independent miners connected by stratum to pools, the true location of each miner is easily hidden. These miners live off of the massive number of fees generated

Incorrect. It requires 51% of the hashrate to flag cheating. Why do you guys repeatedly forget this Bitcoin 101 lesson?

If you do not understand why 10 pools enforced to be non-colluding by politics of the masses is the antithesis of decentralization, then there is nothing I could possibly write that you would actually try to comprehend.

Ditto if you do not understand why 100 pools permanently cited at home bases of the establishment are the antithesis of decentralization.

Distributed != decentralization.

The only way decentralization remains AUTONOMOUSLY resilient (i.e. without the political expectations which are inherently centralizing due to the Logic of Collective Action), is for the full nodes to be the small miners with no proxies such as pools as middle men. There is absolutely no way to achieve this within existing PoW consensus algorithms. I know the solution, but I am not revealing it today.

Another option to get there is to take transactions off-chain. This is the SC / lighting network path.

If I am not mistaken, the LN paradigm is only for setting up reused payment channels between a spender and a recipient, so it is inapplicable to a myriad of micropayments between all N possible participants in the system, because each setup has to go on the block chain. Thus it really isn't a general solution for micropayments, but rather a very specific solution for REAL TIME payments. I invented LN in 2014 also, and my application for it remains REAL TIME payments.

Side chains don't help you with micropayments unless you accept that micropayments will be done centralized on a special centralized SC. In other words, the decentralization of the consensus network design has to be accomplished no matter if you put it on a SC or in Bitcoin Core.

The problem with this option is the bitcoin main chain is starved for fees, and so the mining security mechanism is too small to effectively secure the network.

This is another reason that doing micropayments in a centralized SC is death for Core.

This thought process that small blocks will cause fee pressure and that will support a large mining community is just wrong. What will happen is bitcoin will not be used to the extent that it needs to be used to be secure.

That is true also. That is why I said it doesn't matter which direction you go on the block size issue, all paths lead to eating from my hand on the consensus network redesign (and when it is open sourced then everyone can copy it and refine it).

The argument for not increasing the block size is that it is better to move more slowly towards centralization and when it is clear that 1MB (or 8MB w/o automatic exponential scaling) has been too constricting, then consensus can increase it again. This allows time for real solutions to take form, such as mine. Whereas, if you open up the size to exponential scaling, then it is quite possible that the Coinbases, Circles, Paypals, 21 Incs, etc.. will be incentivized to flood the block chain with spam to force it to centralized before we get the chance to experiment (via pegged side chains) to find the optimum solution for scaling.

This is the way engineers think.

A bitcoin with 10s of billions of transactions a day each generating 1 penny in minimum transaction fee, will be much more secure than a bitcoin with a small number of transactions and slight fee pressure (at best) and where most fees are captured by SCs.

Not if it is centralized, and centralization is guaranteed with the current PoW consensus design as Bitcoin scales.

rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1153


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 07:56:58 PM
 #27432

It takes a version of Bitcoin that scales to the point that every person on the planet can interact with it directly, to achieve the status that gold once held. To get there requires that bitcoin scales, while maintaining it's decentralized and thus independent nature.

One option to get there is to let the blockchain scale to accommodate everyone, this could look like the following and still be OK...

- ~100 P2P nodes that are independently sponsored and paid for to perform validation (these would be several large institutions such as MIT, remember it only takes 1 node to flag cheating)
- ~10 pools that receive fees from billions of transactions and are located in several regions (or preferably behind tor or something similar)
- ~100,000 small independent miners connected by stratum to pools, the true location of each miner is easily hidden. These miners live off of the massive number of fees generated

Incorrect. It requires 51% of the hashrate to flag cheating. Why do you guys repeatedly forget this Bitcoin 101 lesson?

...

Lots of words that only demonstrate you do no understand what you are pontificating about.

Let me try to spell this out in very simple terms for you. Let's say in the future we had 100 full nodes, 10 pools and everyone else used SPV like wallets, and then 99 full nodes together with 9 pools decided to collude in order to cheat and allocate to themselves coins beyond the 21M limit.

In this scenario the corrupt chain would be the longest and yes what is worse is the P2P network would follow the corrupt chain since they are colluding together. Even worse is all bitcoin end-users would not be able to tell this since they only use SPV like wallets.

However as long as there remains one honest full node (let's say an MIT independently funded node, or a libertarian party funded node), that single honest full node would be able to easily generate concrete evidence of the corrupt transactions and easily present that evidence to the world for everyone to verify for themselves. Since this honest node monitors the network in real time, it could easily flag corruption in real time.

This in turn would expose the fraud and cause the majority of the 100K miners to switch over to an honest pools to rebuild on the valid chain. The pool could even be super honest about it and also include valid transactions from the corrupt chain to protect people not involved.

So yes, it only takes 1 single honest full node to expose to the whole world (including both users and miners) any corruption in the system.

This is the advantage of having every node capable of fully validating every aspect of the blockchain, and why that aspect allows the P2P network to centralize while still providing a robust system.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:00:27 PM
 #27433

However as long as there remains one honest full node (let's say an MIT independently funded node, or a libertarian party funded node), that single honest full node would be able to easily generate concrete evidence of the corrupt transactions and easily present that evidence to the world for everyone to verify for themselves. Since this honest node monitors the network in real time, it could easily flag corruption in real time.

The masses will ignore such evidence. They won't switch from their existing systems, e.g. Circle, Coinbase, Paypal, 21 Inc, etc..

How many times have I tried to explain the Logic of Collective Action upthread, but if you are determined to ignore reality, I can not force you to comprehend.

Politics is inherently centralizing. Duh! Look out the window and observe society now.

How smug are you now Smartypants.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:02:18 PM
 #27434

ugly ending to the day.  $DJT clearly has broken down.  get your Gavincoins while you can:

tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:09:51 PM
 #27435

both $DJI & $DJT accelerating to the downside now.

get yourself some Gavincoin.

but but but...

I heard the financial crisis is over, and soon magical NFLX bearing unicorns will frolic across the globe, bringing fiber to all the deserving children of Ukraine, Africa, Florida, and other formerly impoverished backwaters.  Since all is most assuredly well in fiat-land, it's not clear why we even need Bitcoin, except perhaps as yet another centralized payment rail to act as a retail POS gimmick for the amusement of hipsters/yuppies and profit of VC frat boys.
...

Several years ago I would not have guessed that Bitcoin's fundamental operational parameters would have been modulated by instantaneous NFLX stock quotes.  Even less so that this would make sense to the putative 'chief scientist' and half of the ecosystem participants (at least here on trolltalk.)  But there it is.


TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:15:29 PM
 #27436

And those who argued that USG and its derivative tentacles OECD have no power to enforce in far flung jurisdictions...and notice it happens precisely on the day that Armstrong had been predicting (since 1985) for the Sovereign Debt Big Bang (2015.75 = October 1, 2015)...

http://armstrongeconomics.com/archives/33889

Cayman Islands to Begin Reporting Everyone on October 1, 2015

The Cayman Islands’ Department of International Tax Compliance (DITC) has notified Cayman financial institutions of its intention to move forward with implementing the OECD’s Common Reporting Standard (CRS), with the introduction of local regulations by the Economic Confidence Model turning point – October 1, 2015. This of course will end banking in the Cayman Islands and will impact many hedge funds as well.

Like Switzerland, the Cayman Islands has surrendered its sovereignty to the tyranny of global taxation. The West is imploding all for taxation because those in power will NEVER reform; all they will ever do is raise taxes to line their own pockets while destroying the world economy.

The Cayman Islands is among 50 “early adopters” of the CRS that will begin the automatic exchange of tax information starting in 2017. Eleven other countries will start tax information exchange in 2018.

Under the CRS, as of September 2017, tax authorities in over 50 jurisdictions — in addition to the U.S. and U.K. — will be entitled to information on accounts that individuals or entities hold in a Reportable Jurisdiction, under the tax laws of that jurisdiction.

A Reportable Jurisdiction is one that has a multilateral or bilateral Competent Authority Agreement with other jurisdictions to provide information under the CRS and is on the OECD’s list of such jurisdictions.

iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
June 25, 2015, 08:17:15 PM
 #27437

ugly ending to the day.  $DJT clearly has broken down.  get your Gavincoins while you can:

Enough of your silly FUD.  The financial crisis is over.  Our benevolent telecom overlords will, any second now, embark upon unprecedented roll outs of retail broadband infrastructure, all thanks to their massive post-Bernanke/Obamanomics budget surpluses.

NFLX and APPL are at all-time-highs, so stop moaning just because you picked the wrong horse.



GavinCoin is stagnating and doesn't even pay dividends!

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 25, 2015, 08:18:55 PM
 #27438

we're not even under attack yet blocks continue to fill up:

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:22:26 PM
 #27439

we're not even under attack yet blocks continue to fill up:

Unless you correlate it with transaction fees paid, that is meaningless data because we don't know how much is spam.

Also if the owner of the coinbase for the block is the one inserting the spam, then the data would be meaningless even with transaction fees correlated (because the spam could be paying itself).

Non-engineers pontificate.

rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1153


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 08:23:52 PM
 #27440

However as long as there remains one honest full node (let's say an MIT independently funded node, or a libertarian party funded node), that single honest full node would be able to easily generate concrete evidence of the corrupt transactions and easily present that evidence to the world for everyone to verify for themselves. Since this honest node monitors the network in real time, it could easily flag corruption in real time.

The masses will ignore such evidence. They won't switch from their existing systems, e.g. Circle, Coinbase, Paypal, 21 Inc, etc..

How many times have I tried to explain the Logic of Collective Action upthread, but if you are determined to ignore reality, I can not force you to comprehend.

Politics is inherently centralizing. Duh! Look out the window and observe society now.

How smug are you now Smartypants.

So from your response it seems you acknowledge that yes my statement that it only takes a single honest full node to identify and communicate any corruption in the system to the world, is in fact correct and you were grossly incorrect in that long winded nonsense post of yours.

So you then fall back and say "but no one will care and thus you're wrong". First that is a different argument, second that position itself is absurd for numerous and obvious reasons.

God you really are a fucking child aren't you. Back to ignore.

BTW in the example I laid out Coinbase, Circle, Paypal, etc are not full node operators but light client users, they will want to work with honest systems because their users will expect them to work with honest system.
Pages: « 1 ... 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 [1372] 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 ... 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!