Bitcoin Forum
November 18, 2017, 02:48:10 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 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 1423 1424 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2008959 times)
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
June 25, 2015, 11:59:19 PM
 #27461


Heh, the Gavinistas are having a very bad day week.   Cool

First, Frap.doc was put upon to explain...


Actually it's been a bad 18 months and counting for Mr. 'bitcoin up' fap.doc.


1511016490
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511016490

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511016490
Reply with quote  #2

1511016490
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511016490
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511016490

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511016490
Reply with quote  #2

1511016490
Report to moderator
1511016490
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511016490

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511016490
Reply with quote  #2

1511016490
Report to moderator
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834


[LOL2X]


View Profile WWW
June 26, 2015, 12:08:31 AM
 #27462

The way to generate resiliency for Bitcoin is to get to the point that each block generates $10M in fees.

Today each block generates around $4,500 in fees on average.

That is not resilient, that is weak and easy for any state to attack.

This idea that using fee pressure on a low # of transactions is a way to get to high value blocks from fees is absurd. The way to get to high value blocks is tons of transactions paying minimum fees.

Agree with the first 3 sentences, but only in a superficial way.  The fourth is just more absurd, Frappuccino Doc-esque bloviating.

As fee pressure rises, "attacking" (IE filling up) blocks becomes more expensive.  An attacker would have to pay higher fees than anyone else to stop tx propagation.  And PT's replace-by-fee makes that already unworkable strategy obsolete.

Your naive $4.5k/block figure illustrates the fact GavinCoin won't fix this so-called problem; 20 (or eight) times $4.5k is still nothing to any semi-resourceful attacker (much less TLA national statists).

The only way to densely pack "tons of transactions paying minimum fees" into the extremely scarce resource of the blockchain is to use LN/SC/alt/off-chain mechanisms to aggregate payments and settle on the MotherChain.  Even on a cluster of 24-core Xeons, blockchain tech cannot verify tx fast enough to *DIRECTLY* compete with centralized/specialized Visa-scale infrastructure.

As others have already noted,

Quote
Bitcoin's value comes from its decentralization, not low tx tees. If u don't value that, centralized systems can meet ur needs

and

Quote
"universal payments" is both a laudable goal and a
shopworn bitcoin marketing slogan.

The fundamental engineering truths diverge from that misty goal:
Bitcoin is a settlement system, by design.

The process of consensus "settles" upon a timeline of transactions,
and this process -- by design -- is necessarily far from instant.
Alt-coins that madly attempt 10-second block times etc. are simply a
vain attempt to paper over this fundamental design attribute:
consensus takes time.

As such, the blockchain can never support All The Transactions, even
if block size increases beyond 20MB.  Further layers are -- by design
-- necessary if we want to achieve the goal of a decentralized payment
network capable of supporting full global traffic.


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

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

Activity: 49


View Profile
June 26, 2015, 12:18:52 AM
 #27463

Next two years of blockbloat on a fingernail:

iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834


[LOL2X]


View Profile WWW
June 26, 2015, 12:20:35 AM
 #27464

Heh, the Gavinistas are having a very bad day week.   Cool

First, Frap.doc was put upon to explain...
Actually it's been a bad 18 months and counting for Mr. 'bitcoin up' fap.doc.

OK sure, but the recent one-two wombo combo of Gavin declaring

A. "the financial crisis is over"

and

B. "The sky will not fall if the block size stays at 1MB"

can't be easy for poor old Doctor Frappy to explain away with his usual hand-waving assclown routine.

By ignoring gainsaying and insulting the expertise of Nick Szaboshi, Adam Bakomoto, Bram Cohen, and ALL THE CORE DEVS, he's really painted himself into a corner.   Cheesy


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

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

Activity: 2324


View Profile
June 26, 2015, 12:22:41 AM
 #27465

Next two years of blockbloat on a fingernail:



Thank Satoshi and his silent 1MB patch for that.  Accident?  Design?  We may never know.

It'll be interesting to find out if the applicability of such a storage device spans the inevitable 'bail-in'.


TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 26, 2015, 12:30:12 AM
 #27466

The only way to densely pack "tons of transactions paying minimum fees" into the extremely scarce resource of the blockchain is to use LN/SC/alt/off-chain mechanisms to aggregate payments and settle on the MotherChain.  Even on a cluster of 24-core Xeons, blockchain tech cannot verify tx fast enough to *DIRECTLY* compete with centralized/specialized Visa-scale infrastructure.

There is another way.

iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834


[LOL2X]


View Profile WWW
June 26, 2015, 12:33:19 AM
 #27467

Next two years of hurr durr cheep hard drives :

[argumentum ad Amazon]

That is one data point.  The trend, however, is not blockbloat's friend:



Perhaps you recall this lesson from Economics 101: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminishing_returns

Unlike Nielsen, Moore, and Kryder's so-called Laws, diminishing returns is an actual a priori Law of nature, not merely an artifact of a cherry-picked sample range.   Wink


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

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

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 26, 2015, 12:40:44 AM
 #27468

Edit:  Oh ya, and another thing (again.)  The reason why you cannot get the 1MB filled up with coffee purchase after 6 years of trying and a lot of help from the media and regulators is this:  Bitcoin SUCKS BALLS as an exchange currency.  It is simply not competitive in this capacity and never will be.  Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but you need to come to terms with this eventually.

For micropayments, then 0-confirmation works, but Bitcoin can't scale decentralized. Even if this is solved for BTC on a SC (such as my design does), there is still the remaining issue that private keys are a pain for users to manage. But this can be solved with hardware keys and M-of-N of them with multi-sig (since users lose things).

So I believe BTC can in theory (vaporware and all) be an exchange currency and decentralized. Do you disagree?

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 26, 2015, 12:55:12 AM
 #27469

Next two years of blockbloat on a fingernail:



Please transport that to me within 10 minutes via my laptop's 3G (often dropping down to 56 kbps) wireless connection.

Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1820



View Profile
June 26, 2015, 12:57:23 AM
 #27470

Next two years of blockbloat on a fingernail:



Heh, the Gavinistas are having a very bad day week.   Cool

First, Frap.doc was put upon to explain...
Actually it's been a bad 18 months and counting for Mr. 'bitcoin up' fap.doc.

OK sure, but the recent one-two wombo combo of Gavin declaring

A. "the financial crisis is over"

and

B. "The sky will not fall if the block size stays at 1MB"

can't be easy for poor old Doctor Frappy to explain away with his usual hand-waving assclown routine.

By ignoring gainsaying and insulting the expertise of Nick Szaboshi, Adam Bakomoto, Bram Cohen, and ALL THE CORE DEVS, he's really painted himself into a corner.   Cheesy

Like so, so much in this debate, both these perspectives are simultaneously true. Storage has been slowing down in areal density growth for years, but 3D NAND is set to outpace mechanical disks in that and every other characteristic except absolute price still of course (3D NAND SSD's start at large capacities). I heard 16 TB and 24 TB will be available early next year. Set to explode as they increase the layers as the manufacturing technique improves (highest commercial density is 32 layers last I heard). Nanotube/graphene takes it 5nm and below before next decade.

The situation with bandwidth being affordable enough given the proposals on the table is a little more uncertain. The political climate now steers the debate on the price of internet bandwidth, that has ominous concerns as to the slow, fine grinding outcome. There's also reason to be more certain; alot of new and alternative delivery channels are set to go live in the next few years (numerous air/space based internet services, evolving meshnet tech, increased leverage of the cartel licensed spectrum). This can't be looked at any other way than a huge spike in bandwidth supply throughput. Not to say there's not corresponding demand, but it's just an instant answer to the age old "what will they do with this insane new capacity range" (use it up with the most valuable purpose). There's so much more to signals tech than I can even remember to put here, so suffice to say that it's set to proliferate and interoperate in so many unexpected, unpredictable, and disruptive ways.

At the same time, we've got a long time to decide much at all about this blocksize debate. We have scalability software designs to consider. We have/will have hardware (and core bitcoin software) that can likely handle most of the outcomes. So there's too much hyperbolic polarisation of this debate altogether. Don't like what Gavin did with the fork, but he's right to point out what he did recently; that an incredibly cheap system for transacting with becomes a fraction more expensive when the blocks start to fill up. It's not going to become unusable overnight, and we're not as close to that point as the hand wavers are suggesting. Relax everybody, it's easier to think it through when there's no empty appeals to urgency.

Vires in numeris
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050



View Profile
June 26, 2015, 01:01:06 AM
 #27471

Isn't the real pressing issue recently the discovery that it takes less than the cost of a Smart car to spam up the system for hours and hours?

I just got back, but



Edit: I don't see how any amount of money would ever be too much to deter bad actors from shitting on our parade for sport. Does blocksize even address this at all?

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834


[LOL2X]


View Profile WWW
June 26, 2015, 01:14:28 AM
 #27472

Isn't the real pressing issue recently the discovery that it takes less than the cost of a Smart car to spam up the system for hours and hours?

The *initial* cost to fill blocks is low, but (assuming actual non-spam/noise demand exists) fee pressure will result in an upward price spiral for the attacker.

However, the more room available in the block, the less effective this free market self-correcting remedy/mechanism becomes.


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

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

Activity: 1050



View Profile
June 26, 2015, 01:19:15 AM
 #27473

Isn't the real pressing issue recently the discovery that it takes less than the cost of a Smart car to spam up the system for hours and hours?

The *initial* cost to fill blocks is low, but (assuming actual non-spam/noise demand exists) fee pressure will result in an upward price spiral for the attacker.

However, the more room available in the block, the less effective this free market self-correcting remedy/mechanism becomes.

So bigger blocks will make this worse?

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 26, 2015, 01:31:19 AM
 #27474

The situation with bandwidth being affordable enough given the proposals on the table is a little more uncertain. The political climate now steers the debate on the price of internet bandwidth, that has ominous concerns as to the slow, fine grinding outcome. There's also reason to be more certain; alot of new and alternative delivery channels are set to go live in the next few years (numerous air/space based internet services, evolving meshnet tech, increased leverage of the cartel licensed spectrum). This can't be looked at any other way than a huge spike in bandwidth supply throughput.

Three times I have pointed out that you guys ignore statistical variance of the bandwidth at any particular node.

I feel I am talking to concrete.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 26, 2015, 01:32:52 AM
 #27475

Isn't the real pressing issue recently the discovery that it takes less than the cost of a Smart car to spam up the system for hours and hours?

The *initial* cost to fill blocks is low, but (assuming actual non-spam/noise demand exists) fee pressure will result in an upward price spiral for the attacker.

However, the more room available in the block, the less effective this free market self-correcting remedy/mechanism becomes.

So bigger blocks will make this worse?

Did you not read what he wrote.

BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050



View Profile
June 26, 2015, 01:35:38 AM
 #27476

Isn't the real pressing issue recently the discovery that it takes less than the cost of a Smart car to spam up the system for hours and hours?

The *initial* cost to fill blocks is low, but (assuming actual non-spam/noise demand exists) fee pressure will result in an upward price spiral for the attacker.

However, the more room available in the block, the less effective this free market self-correcting remedy/mechanism becomes.


So bigger blocks will make this worse?

Did you not read what he wrote.

I read it like this.

Who are you?

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 26, 2015, 02:45:06 AM
 #27477

Isn't the real pressing issue recently the discovery that it takes less than the cost of a Smart car to spam up the system for hours and hours?

The *initial* cost to fill blocks is low, but (assuming actual non-spam/noise demand exists) fee pressure will result in an upward price spiral for the attacker.

However, the more room available in the block, the less effective this free market self-correcting remedy/mechanism becomes.

such shallow, naive economic thinking.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 26, 2015, 03:42:56 AM
 #27478

Heh, the Gavinistas are having a very bad day week.   Cool

First, Frap.doc was put upon to explain...
Actually it's been a bad 18 months and counting for Mr. 'bitcoin up' fap.doc.

OK sure, but the recent one-two wombo combo of Gavin declaring

A. "the financial crisis is over"

and

B. "The sky will not fall if the block size stays at 1MB"

can't be easy for poor old Doctor Frappy to explain away with his usual hand-waving assclown routine.

By ignoring gainsaying and insulting the expertise of Nick Szaboshi, Adam Bakomoto, Bram Cohen, and ALL THE CORE DEVS, he's really painted himself into a corner.   Cheesy

iCEBlow continues to be lost.

the harder he flaps his lips for Blockstream the worse Monero gets.  his thuggery knows no bounds.  but the harder he thugs for SC's, the faster Monero falls.  and he has no idea why.

meanwhile:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 26, 2015, 03:46:32 AM
 #27479

this is interesting.

maybe a job for 21 Inc's embedded chips for negotiating right of way:

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-two-rival-self-driving-cars-have-close-call-in-california-2015-6
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
June 26, 2015, 04:04:42 AM
 #27480

The way to generate resiliency for Bitcoin is to get to the point that each block generates $10M in fees.

Today each block generates around $4,500 in fees on average.

That is not resilient, that is weak and easy for any state to attack.

This idea that using fee pressure on a low # of transactions is a way to get to high value blocks from fees is absurd. The way to get to high value blocks is tons of transactions paying minimum fees.

Agree with the first 3 sentences, but only in a superficial way.  The fourth is just more absurd, Frappuccino Doc-esque bloviating.

As fee pressure rises, "attacking" (IE filling up) blocks becomes more expensive.  An attacker would have to pay higher fees than anyone else to stop tx propagation.  And PT's replace-by-fee makes that already unworkable strategy obsolete.

Your naive $4.5k/block figure illustrates the fact GavinCoin won't fix this so-called problem; 20 (or eight) times $4.5k is still nothing to any semi-resourceful attacker (much less TLA national statists).

The only way to densely pack "tons of transactions paying minimum fees" into the extremely scarce resource of the blockchain is to use LN/SC/alt/off-chain mechanisms to aggregate payments and settle on the MotherChain.  Even on a cluster of 24-core Xeons, blockchain tech cannot verify tx fast enough to *DIRECTLY* compete with centralized/specialized Visa-scale infrastructure.

What is so boring about this is how none of you one the 1MB side ever say anything factual and instead constantly misrepresent the facts (i.e. lie).

Gavin's proposed change is not $4.5k * 8, instead it is $4.5k * 8 * 2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2 = $36.8M in fees. And that is for one block, it works out to $1B per day in fees. What this means is if bitcoin scales to the point that it regularly fills 8GB blocks, then there is a $1B/day in fees to pay for the network.

As others have already noted,

Quote
Bitcoin's value comes from its decentralization, not low tx tees. If u don't value that, centralized systems can meet ur needs

And as others have constantly noted, but you have ignored, is decentralization comes from miners. The P2P network does not represent the level of decentralization, independent miners do. Today we have tens of thousand of independent miners. If fees pay $1B/day we will have even more.
Pages: « 1 ... 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 1423 1424 ... 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!