Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[sickpig]

the thing that I can't grok at all about arguments contrary to max blk size increase is the "fee-pressure" one.

isn't the fixed and over time decreasing tokens emission already supposed to take care of it?

why do we need to anticipate the time when miners should sustain theirs activity through fees?

When Satoshi designed Bitcoin he expected most users of it to be able to mine using their own full nodes, receiving block rewards, for a lot longer than actually happened, ASIC farms and mining pools hijacked the reward emission to a certain extent. So people who run full nodes are often not mining and not compensated for handling ever larger blocks. So the idea of higher and higher fees is to force tx volumes lower than what the market and ecosystem would like, purely in the theory that it helps the non-mining nodes with less overhead.

The real solution to this is a combination of several things: node services payment channels (like JR has written about), blockchain pruning, Lightning Network type off-chain services, and IBLT which reduces the block propagation bandwidth requirements.

If all these changes were happening then there would be no pressure to try forcing a (misguided) centrally planned fees-market.

So they are trying to solve the ever increasing burden of running a full node for a non miner indirectly, through the mean of a side effect of an anti-DoS mechanism.

Am I right?

if I'm correct, It seems to me a rather convoluted way of thinking, why not just say that instead of use the fee pressure rethoric?

why not embrace JR's free market idea for full node services?

[1500792711]

1500792711

[1500792711]

1500792711

[1500792711]

1500792711

[prodigy8]

I think the gold value will never collapsing, there are many ups and downs of every coin but gold is old

[cypherdoc]

I think the gold value will never collapsing, there are many ups and downs of every coin but gold is old

Yep, you hit it on the head. It's old and soon to be replaced by the new. I think we're going to see gold  parity once again, at the minimum.

[bracek]

what happens after gold price hits 700 or whatever ?
logic says it goes up from the low bound,
but how much, for how long (in case of continuing drop) ?

I can't "justify" it's continuation towards zero.
Won't there be another grand run up over the next 15 years or so ?
is it really "over" because of digital era ?

[inca]

I wouldn't expect to see gold go far below 1000 or touch the 1980's high.

If it does I will probably start buying some gold again. When bitcoin passes gold then it becomes interesting regarding the gold:bitcoin allocation in a portfolio. I dumped all my metals in 2011 but will probably reacquire some when the markets go pop.

[inca]

I cannot wait until we fork this problem away.

Yep.

interesting reddit post that sums up the fork in the road debate nicely. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ef6h1/bitcoin_ideology_do_you_vote_for_a_or_b/

Multiple Choice Question:
Do you see bitcoin in the future as:
A) a scaling peer to peer network with ultra cheap transactions, for anyone globally to use, with bitcoin functioning as internet cash, avoiding financial intermediaries or banks.
B) a settlement layer for banks, fin tech companies and early adopters, with a low volume expensive to transact upon blockchain

The root of the issue is that option "B" Bitcoin as a high-fee high-value settlement layer, without "A" scaling and widespread growing ecosystem usage happening first, is economic illiteracy of the first order. "B" by itself is simply a wet-dream of Blockchain Economics central planner fanbois.
If the 1MB is allowed to crowd out regular user tx, not just spam, then fees will plateau and inexorably decline amid an ongoing PR disaster.

Fortunately rescue from the 1MB4EVR idiocy seems likely.
Gavin is fixing the cpu-intensive bloat-tx attack threat, and then it looks like the change to an 8MB block limit will be offered to the community. I hope that Gavin and Jeff team up for this. When I first learned about Bitcoin it was Satoshi, Gavin, Jeff and Sipa who were commit access Core Dev (though Satoshi was already the Silent One). If it takes just two of them to get Bitcoin back on the track to success - then all power to them!

Hey hey, as early adopter, I resemble that!

Yes that was a good reddit post 

[sickpig]

Garzik Predicts ‘Chaos’ If Changes Made to Both Fee Structure and Block Size

http://cointelegraph.com/news/114966/garzik-predicts-chaos-if-changes-made-to-both-fee-structure-and-block-size

“First, users & market are forced through this period of chaos by ‘let a fee market develop’ as the whole market changes to a radically different economic policy, [one] the network has never seen before. Next, when blocks are consistently full, the past consensus was that block size limit will be increased eventually. What happens at that point? Answer — Users & market are forced through a second period of chaos and disruption as the fee market is rebooted again by changing the block size limit.”

[cypherdoc]

Garzik Predicts ‘Chaos’ If Changes Made to Both Fee Structure and Block Size

http://cointelegraph.com/news/114966/garzik-predicts-chaos-if-changes-made-to-both-fee-structure-and-block-size

“First, users & market are forced through this period of chaos by ‘let a fee market develop’ as the whole market changes to a radically different economic policy, [one] the network has never seen before. Next, when blocks are consistently full, the past consensus was that block size limit will be increased eventually. What happens at that point? Answer — Users & market are forced through a second period of chaos and disruption as the fee market is rebooted again by changing the block size limit.”

I've you conceptualize that core  dev determination of block size is central planning, then  it becomes clear why it doesn't  work.

[Erdogan]

Converted to 0.10.2 XT. Eagerly awaiting the largeblocks version.

[cypherdoc]

Converted to 0.10.2 XT. Eagerly awaiting the largeblocks version.

I have 6 nodes ready and waiting.

[cypherdoc]

Small blocks equal small minds.

[bucktotal]

Converted to 0.10.2 XT. Eagerly awaiting the largeblocks version.

I have 6 nodes ready and waiting.

how much does it cost you per node per month?

also, i asked before but you missed it... where are you getting those hash rate distribution graphs from? they dont match up with blockchain.info and others.

[tvbcof]

Small blocks equal small minds.

Go to your XT fork and get it over with already.  Please! This will be the best thing which ever happened for Bitcoin and more importantly, for distributed crypto-currencies in a general sense.  I do wish you would get with it, but I predict that if it gets enough traction to happen at all it will coincide with an event which would make people otherwise look to Bitcoin as a wealth preservation tool.

[Odalv]

Small blocks equal small minds.

lol, small blocks equal smart minds.   (contrary big and stupid)

[inca]

Small blocks equal small minds.

lol, small blocks equal smart minds.   (contrary big and stupid)

PLease explain how bitcoin will proceed over the next few years with the blocksize fixed at 1mb and continue to be successful Odalv.

[iCEBREAKER]

Multiple Choice Question:
Do you see bitcoin in the future as:
A) a scaling peer to peer network with ultra cheap transactions, for anyone globally to use, with bitcoin functioning as internet cash, avoiding financial intermediaries or banks.
B) a settlement layer for banks, fin tech companies and early adopters, with a low volume expensive to transact upon blockchain

C) all of the above, and more

It's a trick question (false dilemma fallacy), because of the duality of big-B Bitcoin (the first successful e-cash implementation) and small-b bitcoin (blockchain technology).

Small-b bitcoin has already forked, in the form of alts, so as to ensure ultra cheap p2p global tx for all mankind.

Big-B Bitcoin, still in its early life cycle, is in the phase where it distinguishs itself and diverges  from Bitcoin-like blockchains, on the way to becoming the (ultra-secure, expensive, low volume) Mother of All settlement layers and global reserve e-cash.

The commonplace category error plaguing us at the moment results from failing to recognize this bifurcation (and reading Satoshi's Whitepaper in that context), or refusing to countenance the existence of alts (IE small-b bitcoin) because of some nutty Maximalist Monopolist Fundamentalist Supremacist ideological stance.

[iCEBREAKER]

PLease explain how bitcoin will proceed over the next few years with the blocksize fixed at 1mb and continue to be successful Odalv.

Already been explained.  It's called "scaling."

http://cointelegraph.com/news/114945/lightning-network-could-strike-sooner-than-expected

So we'll soon have additional tps capacity in the forms of:

-Sidechains on Mainchain

-Sidechains on Altchains

-Lightning on Mainchain

-Lightning on Altchains

-Lightning on Sidechains(Mainchain)

-Lightning on Sidechains(Altchains)

So much for the 'capacity crunch.'   

Pro tip: bloating is not scaling, bloating is just more of the same (only with negative marginal return).

[inca]

Multiple Choice Question:
Do you see bitcoin in the future as:
A) a scaling peer to peer network with ultra cheap transactions, for anyone globally to use, with bitcoin functioning as internet cash, avoiding financial intermediaries or banks.
B) a settlement layer for banks, fin tech companies and early adopters, with a low volume expensive to transact upon blockchain

C) all of the above, and more

It's a trick question (false dilemma fallacy), because of the duality of big-B Bitcoin (the first successful e-cash implementation) and small-b bitcoin (blockchain technology).

Small-b bitcoin has already forked, in the form of alts, so as to ensure ultra cheap p2p global tx for all mankind.

Big-B Bitcoin, still in its early life cycle, is in the phase where it distinguishs itself and diverges  from Bitcoin-like blockchains, on the way to becoming the (ultra-secure, expensive, low volume) Mother of All settlement layers and global reserve e-cash.

The commonplace category error plaguing us at the moment results from failing to recognize this bifurcation (and reading Satoshi's Whitepaper in that context), or refusing to countenance the existence of alts (IE small-b bitcoin) because of some nutty Maximalist Monopolist Fundamentalist Supremacist ideological stance.

Unless you expect bitcoin to have hundreds of sidechains (not altcoins) performing 'ultra cheap p2p global tx for all mankind' then your argument is flawed.

The bitcoin chain only has value because it is first and because people expect it to retain (or increase) it's value in the future through increased (or continuing) adoption. Early adopters might not see that this is a problem if bitcoin remains limited or crippled by a small blocksize but to those of us who just missed that early boat and joined the party in 2013 or later it is an issue. The reason being that to all non-early adopters the speculative value of bitcoin over alternate blockchains is based in part upon the expectation of a significantly growing userbase and ultimately exchange price of each bitcoin. If it becomes clear that bitcoin is not going to scale or remain the cheapest blockchain out there for new users then it won't just be new users who migrate to alternate chains, it will be the value that early adopters enjoy currently, too.

Edit: Pro-tip: lightning is vapour currently so wind your neck in..

[iCEBREAKER]

Small blocks equal small minds.

Small is beautiful.  Small is defensible.

The only way to make software secure, reliable, and fast is to make it small. Fight Features. - Andy Tanenbaum 2004

We will not allow Bitcoin to succumb to cheap bloating attacks and lazy slouching towards the negative marginal returns, and inevitable extinction, of gigantism.

A comet will eventually hit Planet Bitcoin.  When that happens it needs to still be a nimble mammal, not a bloated dinosaur.

LOL, your 6 SX nodes are 6% of their total and a mighty 1.55% of the network!

Fear the wrath of the Gavinistas!   

[Erdogan]

Converted to 0.10.2 XT. Eagerly awaiting the largeblocks version.

I have 6 nodes ready and waiting.

how much does it cost you per node per month?

also, i asked before but you missed it... where are you getting those hash rate distribution graphs from? they dont match up with blockchain.info and others.

No idea, not much. I have an i7, 12GB machine bought a few years ago, and a 25/25 Mb/s fiber to the home. The node runs in the background, I hardly notice it.