Bitcoin Forum
December 05, 2016, 06:55:22 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 ... 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 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 [1442] 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1804727 times)
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
July 15, 2015, 03:49:15 PM
 #28821

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

it's idiots like you that will get Bitcoin into trouble.  i can't help you if you don't understand the technicals behind what is going on.  bigger blocks would allow clearing of the mempool:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3db7qr/mycelium_servers_down/ct3mbjj

Then why aren't every nodes down?

The problem is clearly shoddy backend implementation on Mycelium part, as is clearly explained in the reddit thread you have linked by Mycelium devs themselves. Moreover, any user not relying on outdate wallet models with centralized server dependent on 3!!! nodes is not experiencing any of these problems.

Bitcoin isn't to blame for amateur software. Everytime you cling on to any minor, user-defined issue to promote your FUD makes you look more pathetic and desperate.


"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
1480964122
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480964122

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480964122
Reply with quote  #2

1480964122
Report to moderator
1480964122
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480964122

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480964122
Reply with quote  #2

1480964122
Report to moderator
1480964122
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480964122

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480964122
Reply with quote  #2

1480964122
Report to moderator
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
July 15, 2015, 03:50:38 PM
 #28822

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

Have mercy on poor befuddled old Frap.doc.

So paltry is his understanding of Bitcoin technology, he believes Mycelium's issues in some way supervene upon Bitcoin itself!

So great is his ignorance of Bitcoin affairs, he fails to notice core devs addressing the spam attack on several fronts, including community reach-out to educate on best practices, code improvements/optimizations, and BIP submissions addressing his beloved 'bigger blocks.'

We should feel sorry for him, instead of committing cruelty to dumb animals.

thank you for paying me such great homage.

it's a flattering tribute when thug trolls like you follow me around the forums trying so hard to counter my messages.  you may kiss my feet now.

and yes, keep pushing this thread up to the top so everyone can read what i write while having you on ignore.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 03:56:01 PM
 #28823

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

it's idiots like you that will get Bitcoin into trouble.  i can't help you if you don't understand the technicals behind what is going on.  bigger blocks would allow clearing of the mempool:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3db7qr/mycelium_servers_down/ct3mbjj

Then why aren't every nodes down?

The problem is clearly shoddy backend implementation on Mycelium part, as is clearly explained in the reddit thread you have linked by Mycelium devs themselves. Moreover, any user not relying on outdate wallet models with centralized server dependent on 3!!! nodes is not experiencing any of these problems.

Bitcoin isn't to blame for amateur software. Everytime you cling on to any minor, user-defined issue to promote your FUD makes you look more pathetic and desperate.



Mycelium has been the most popular of all the android wallets.  ignoramus's like you are quick to blame them when in fact all the congestion problems are a result of full blocks and bloated mempools as a result of false "fee market" delusions from core dev worshippers like you.

let's flip this around.  just what kinda trouble would actually make you agree that blocks are too small?  i suspect there aren't any that you would dare to admit to since you are stuck on your position no_matter_what.

let me remind everybody what Bitcoin was meant to be:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg11625671#msg11625671
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:04:15 PM
 #28824

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

it's idiots like you that will get Bitcoin into trouble.  i can't help you if you don't understand the technicals behind what is going on.  bigger blocks would allow clearing of the mempool:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3db7qr/mycelium_servers_down/ct3mbjj

Then why aren't every nodes down?

The problem is clearly shoddy backend implementation on Mycelium part, as is clearly explained in the reddit thread you have linked by Mycelium devs themselves. Moreover, any user not relying on outdate wallet models with centralized server dependent on 3!!! nodes is not experiencing any of these problems.

Bitcoin isn't to blame for amateur software. Everytime you cling on to any minor, user-defined issue to promote your FUD makes you look more pathetic and desperate.



Mycelium has been the most popular of all the android wallets.  ignoramus's like you are quick to blame them when in fact all the congestion problems are a result of full blocks and bloated mempools as a result of false "fee market" delusions from core dev worshippers like you.

let's flip this around.  just what kinda trouble would actually make you agree that blocks are too small.  i suspect there aren't any that you would dare to admit to since you are stuck on your position no_matter_what.

let me remind everybody what Bitcoin was meant to be:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg11625671#msg11625671

Your ignorance and disingenuity transpires through your tendency to rely on a variety of argumentum ad populum

I don't care if 100% of Bitcoin users use Mycelium it doesn't change the fact that it is amateur software and should be treated as such.

Maybe you should read again ICEBreaker post about supervenience?


"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1974


View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:04:27 PM
 #28825

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

Think of finally starting to develop a transaction fee market as Tough Actin' Tinactin for some of the maladies that have increasingly infected Bitcoin.

If Mycelium cannot handle Bitcoin, they should look into a dedicated pegged sidechain which functions in the way they need it do in order to make their software work.  Sounds like they already have a decent sized userbase.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:07:29 PM
 #28826

valuable perspective on why 0confs have not been a problem until now that we have full blocks and bloated mempools.  now, businesses like his have to scramble for work arounds and core dev just keeps compensating for the fundamental mistake of not removing the 1MB choke.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ddkhy/bitcoindev_significant_losses_by_doublespending/ct474kh
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:12:43 PM
 #28827

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

it's idiots like you that will get Bitcoin into trouble.  i can't help you if you don't understand the technicals behind what is going on.  bigger blocks would allow clearing of the mempool:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3db7qr/mycelium_servers_down/ct3mbjj

Then why aren't every nodes down?

The problem is clearly shoddy backend implementation on Mycelium part, as is clearly explained in the reddit thread you have linked by Mycelium devs themselves. Moreover, any user not relying on outdate wallet models with centralized server dependent on 3!!! nodes is not experiencing any of these problems.

Bitcoin isn't to blame for amateur software. Everytime you cling on to any minor, user-defined issue to promote your FUD makes you look more pathetic and desperate.



Mycelium has been the most popular of all the android wallets.  ignoramus's like you are quick to blame them when in fact all the congestion problems are a result of full blocks and bloated mempools as a result of false "fee market" delusions from core dev worshippers like you.

let's flip this around.  just what kinda trouble would actually make you agree that blocks are too small.  i suspect there aren't any that you would dare to admit to since you are stuck on your position no_matter_what.

let me remind everybody what Bitcoin was meant to be:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg11625671#msg11625671

Your ignorance and disingenuity transpires through your tendency to rely on a variety of argumentum ad populum

I don't care if 100% of Bitcoin users use Mycelium it doesn't change the fact that it is amateur software and should be treated as such.

Maybe you should read again ICEBreaker post about supervenience?



spoken like a true noob unfamiliar with the history and evolution of the space.

Mycelium, once Bitcoin Spinner, has been a MAJOR force in bringing Bitcoin to the masses thru a highly usable and clever programming team.  w/o them, Bitcoin would not be what it is today in terms of how far along we've progressed.  you're demonstrating a classic case of "everyone else is the problem but not me".  the damage to new user adoption from this problem of double spending cannot be measured. 

it's too bad your head is up your ass.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:15:05 PM
 #28828

what we're witnessing is Blockstream core dev forcing Bitcoin into their vision of what it should be.  not Satoshi's vision. 

nor the vast majority of the community's vision.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:18:33 PM
 #28829

this is good from flix1 just now on bitcoin-dev:

@gavinandresen Actually over the past weeks I've given this a lot of thought and I've come around to see your solution as the best. A purely mathematical rule keeps it simple. Targeting Moore's law is reasonable.

It will also be easier to reach a very broad consensus for something straightforward.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:25:19 PM
 #28830

this is some pretty crazy stuff from Pieter:

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Me via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

>Have you talk to them? If not, how can you be sure they don’t run large number of standard nodes and actually make the network >stronger? Personally I never bring claims like this if I just assume. A lot of people in the community really trust you, do you realize you >potentially hurt them for no reason?


Running normal full nodes only provides extra service to nodes synchronizing and lightweight clients. It does not "make the network stronger" in the sense that it does not reduce the trust the participants need to have in each other.

It's such a misconception that running many nodes somehow helps. It's much better that you run and control one or a few full nodes which you actually use to validate your transactions, than to run 1000s of nodes in third party datacenters. The latter only looks more decentralized.

--
Pieter


i maybe understand his argument that datacenters are vulnerable to state attack but when thousands of datacenters running full nodes are themselves distributed across the planet in jurisdictions that disagree with say the US, i can't see how those don't help decentralization.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1974


View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:30:21 PM
 #28831

what we're witnessing is Blockstream core dev forcing Bitcoin into their vision of what it should be.  not Satoshi's vision.  

nor the vast majority of the community's vision.

Unsurprisingly, a vast majority of the 'community's vision' is free shit.

Far from destroying that vision, what the Blockstream dudes are doing is making it not only practical but likely.  This because an infinite number of entities will develop and subsidize their own pegged sidechains.  They'll do this in order to tap other value streams inherent in the use of customized currency solution.

Blockstream is developing ways of doing it which protects end-users via sophisticated pegging (if they choose to protect themselves) and protecting core Bitcoin at the same time.  As a bonus, a wide variety of tunings at the sidechain level are possible providing the end-user a much better experience.  One 'better experience' would be robust '0-conf' function in cases where that is important (and there are many cases where it is not.)

Blockstream seems to have attracted an impressive number of the most dedicated, active, and skilled developers in the crypto-currency space and I'm sure that this is because these people recognize not only the value but the necessity of moving distributed crypto-currencies in this direction in order to have the best hope of meeting the challenges on the horizon.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:30:52 PM
 #28832

so sorry iCEBlow. we all know you're an avid goldbug too.  it sucks losing on all fronts i'm sure:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:35:30 PM
 #28833

actually, we also know that tvbcof loves gold as well.  too bad:









how many thousands of times do i have to tell you guys this?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 04:44:54 PM
 #28834

years ago in the original gold thread, i talked about gold's illiquidity.  i talked about having to haul my gold and silver over to the coin dealer to sell.  almost broke my back.  had to take a 5% hit to the price and immediately fill out forms to ensure i paid taxes, which i gladly did at those elevated prices (lots of you won't though i'm sure).

the problems i foresee involve those when there will be lines of ppl trying to sell.  the illiquidity is going to be stunning given how impractical gold and silver really is in regards to actually functioning as money compared to Bitcoin.  we are in the midst of a huge transition or wealth transfer.  will you be able to cross the rubicon?
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
July 15, 2015, 04:58:37 PM
 #28835

what we're witnessing is Blockstream core dev forcing Bitcoin into their vision of what it should be.  not Satoshi's vision. 

nor the vast majority of the community's vision.

The "vast majority of the community" are not Gavinistas.  That's why your vaunted 20MB plan was #REKT like Stannis at Winterfell.




Since when are Nick Szabo, Matthew Green, and Jon Matois Blockstream core devs?

I suppose in your deranged mind MPEX is also a Blockstream core dev.

Darn those pesky Learned Elders of Blockstream!  Always hiding under my bed and conspiring in my closet!   Angry

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
July 15, 2015, 05:18:11 PM
 #28836

interesting graph:

https://imgur.com/gallery/ml5o2UR/
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
July 15, 2015, 05:41:24 PM
 #28837

BitcoinXT?  More like BitcoinSX...

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org/msg00500.html

Quote
tx1: To merchant, but dust/low-fee/reused-address/large-size/etc. anything that miners don't always accept.


tx2: After merchant gives up valuable thing in return, normal tx without triggering spam protections. (loltasticly a Mike Hearn Bitcoin XT node was used to relay the double-spends)


Example success story: tx1 paying Shapeshift.io with 6uBTC output is not dust under post-Hearn-relay-drop rules, but is dust under pre-Hearn-relay-drop rules

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
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
July 15, 2015, 05:57:57 PM
 #28838

spoken like a true noob unfamiliar with the history and evolution of the space.

Mycelium, once Bitcoin Spinner, has been a MAJOR force in bringing Bitcoin to the masses thru a highly usable and clever programming team.  w/o them, Bitcoin would not be what it is today in terms of how far along we've progressed.  you're demonstrating a classic case of "everyone else is the problem but not me".  the damage to new user adoption from this problem of double spending cannot be measured. 

it's too bad your head is up your ass.

Here is a post from one of the dev fully taking responsibility for the issue:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3dd1az/mycelium_downtime_comeon_guys_you_can_do_better/ct4352s

I really couldn't care less how Mycelium has been a MAJOR force in bringing Bitcoin to the noobs

See this is the problem. "Noobs" preferring user interface and "ease-of-use" in place of robust, well designed software and then crying when the software fails them because of faulty implementation.


"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 06:17:46 PM
 #28839

i think it is very clear that miners and full nodes can handle a bigger block size by what i perceive to be the decreasing # of defensive blocks and the more consistent stream of full blocks. 

PeterR, it would be good to have your colleague run that analysis to see if indeed the #'s of 0-1 tx blocks are decreasing.  that would mean that miners in China are finding out that they can indeed handle the 1MB blocks that i think we are now seeing more frequently as they have figured out that there is no longer a reason to be defensive and instead mine for the tx fees from full blocks:

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
July 15, 2015, 06:19:12 PM
 #28840


Lying won't help you.

I was reading Armstrong's blog daily as of August 2012 when (it was roughly 12,000) he clearly stated that either it would double before October 2015, or it would phase shift and align with private assets and then delay that double or triple until 2017. Indeed the USA stock market did rise to roughly 18,000 and then it phase shifted and so now we await the double or triple in 2017.

Pages: « 1 ... 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 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 [1442] 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 ... 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!