Bitcoin Forum
August 16, 2017, 01:26:40 PM *
News: ALL CLEAR: You can now use Bitcoin as you were previously. For more info, including how to claim your BCH (optional), see here.
 
   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 ... 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 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1950407 times)
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
July 27, 2015, 06:01:33 PM
 #29361

Community and major stakeholders vote for a blocksize increase

Hmmm where did that ever happen  Huh

I sure hope by community and "major stakeholders" you are not referring to reddit and bitcointalk.org

I know! It's only a valid vote if it's conducted under the rules as sanctioned by central control.

Giveen our understand of the situation it could never happen.

The major stakeholders vote for a blocksize increase is just a prediction of the fork to a more distributed code base that supports the original vision of Bitcoin. It is yet to happen it's my opinion that it's a forgone conclusion, we'll have bigger blocks, the vote is just around the corner so you don't need to do much if you feel you have this one in the bag.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
1502890000
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1502890000

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1502890000
Reply with quote  #2

1502890000
Report to moderator
1502890000
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1502890000

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1502890000
Reply with quote  #2

1502890000
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 27, 2015, 06:09:55 PM
 #29362

this looks good:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 27, 2015, 06:45:53 PM
 #29363

this looks good:



i guess it was indeed good.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 27, 2015, 07:13:36 PM
 #29364

this looks good too:

impulse
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 151


View Profile
July 27, 2015, 07:40:18 PM
 #29365

this looks good too:



Looking even better now, I have not seen the ask side look this thin in quite some time, it will be interesting to see how it fills in.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736


Support SEGWIT on 8/1/17 https://github.com/UASF


View Profile WWW
July 27, 2015, 09:46:48 PM
 #29366

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

Oh yeah? So adding complicated stuff like sidechains and lightning network is making bitcoin code smaller?

To the extent those build on top of Bitcoin they aren't adding features to it or making the the core code bigger. If they require changes to the core code or adding new features to it, that's a different matter that needs to be considered carefully.

But if the claim is that sidechains are the 'solution' to the 'problem'. Then you are saying they are part of bitcoin [the ecosystem] whether they are part of core or not.

Increasing block size does not add features *and* it 'solves' the 'problem'. Without introducing any other layers of complexity, or attempting to artificially manipulate the fee economy that is growing organically just as it was always intended.

What frightens me is that the whole thing seems to have turned into a pissing contest.

The fee market isn't a problem right now, the block size is. So why are people trying to pre-emptively fix the fee market in an ass backwards way to address the block size problem.

Nobody is claiming to have predetermined that sidechains (or LN) are necessarily the ENTIRETY of the solution to the scaling problem, only that they are potentially part of it.  Bitcoin is an ongoing bleeding-edge experiment, and we are working with intuition, educated guesses, hypotheses, and prototypes, not off-the-shelf kit in neat little boxes.

Increasing block size does add features (and/or bugs), in the form of higher tps and whatever concomitant other new auto/adaptive regulation mechanisms come along with the eventual solution.  100k max tx size is probably only the first such required adjustment.

And thus, the 100k max tx adjustment neatly destroys your claim that larger blocks do not introduce additional complexity.  More is different; the dose makes the poison...

The Red Queen interpretation, whereby we must change Bitcoin ASAP for the sake of keeping it the same, is absurd.  Moving the tx supply curve with the goal of controlling the range where it intersects that of demand is prima facie centralized market manipulation.  As long as tx fees are absurdly underpriced, in terms of their cost and what users are willing to pay, the fee market is completely broken.  Bitoin's 'free sample/loss leader' viral marketing campaign phase ended with the emergence of omnipresent 'cosmic background spam.'

The "pissing contest" which "frightens" your delicate sensibilities is exactly the "fight" to which Tannenbaum exhorts us, because the "adversarial process is valuable in assuring [features] do not compromise security or reliability."

The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Core GUI - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }
MoneroForCash.com  |  Buy and sell XMR near you  |  Easymonero.com  |  Bitsquare.io - Decentralized XMR Exchange  |  Buy XMR with fiat
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014

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


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
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736


Support SEGWIT on 8/1/17 https://github.com/UASF


View Profile WWW
July 27, 2015, 09:59:55 PM
 #29367

"After 5 years is the 1MB hard-limit the best anti-DoS mechanism that Bitcoin dev can come up with?"
Answer no, because the real anti-DoS protection comes from the consensus dust-limit and fee policy.

False. The dust limit and fee policy are not part of the consensus code (which the 1 MB limit is).

So the answer is in fact yes: There is no other anti-DoS mechanism in the consensus code after 5 years.

Proposing to add one is one possibility. Have at it.

consensus dust-limit and fee policy.

Policy which is observed by a super-majority of nodes is effectively a consensus. Also the message size limit is anti-DoS

That's incorrect, and I think someone (Adam?) recently wrote up some good stuff about the role of "nodes"

In order to matter, policies have to be enforced by either:

1. The node you are using, with respect to your own coins (your own node validates your coins, so you can't be fooled). Of course this only matters if others agree with you, or you have created an altcoin with a userbase of one (useless)

2. All nodes, or essentially all nodes.

"A majority of nodes" accomplishes essentially nothing. That is the entire point of the bitcoin design ("majority of nodes" is not sybil-resistant).

I'm amazed there exist Legendary posters who don't understand the assigned roles and limitations of incentive, consensus, and defection in Bitcoin.  They (IE Solex and Frap.doc) need to spend more type reading up on Bitcoin 101, and less time writing 1000s of misinformed posts from positions of ignorance.

I'd expect this kind of derpy mental diarrhea from a noob:

Quote
"After 5 years is Nakamoto Consensus the best governance mechanism that Bitcoin dev can come up with?"

The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Core GUI - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }
MoneroForCash.com  |  Buy and sell XMR near you  |  Easymonero.com  |  Bitsquare.io - Decentralized XMR Exchange  |  Buy XMR with fiat
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014

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


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
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
July 27, 2015, 10:18:42 PM
 #29368

Community and major stakeholders vote for a blocksize increase

Hmmm where did that ever happen  Huh

I sure hope by community and "major stakeholders" you are not referring to reddit and bitcointalk.org

I know! It's only a valid vote if it's conducted under the rules as sanctioned by central control.

Giveen our understand of the situation it could never happen.

The major stakeholders vote for a blocksize increase is just a prediction of the fork to a more distributed code base that supports the original vision of Bitcoin. It is yet to happen it's my opinion that it's a forgone conclusion, we'll have bigger blocks, the vote is just around the corner so you don't need to do much if you feel you have this one in the bag.

Block size has topped this list for as long as.. well, since there was a list.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Hardfork_Wishlist

If it were easy, it would have been done already.  Patience people....

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
ssmc2
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


View Profile
July 27, 2015, 10:19:06 PM
 #29369

EVERYTHING down, Bitcoin UP  Cool
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736


Support SEGWIT on 8/1/17 https://github.com/UASF


View Profile WWW
July 27, 2015, 10:45:32 PM
 #29370

EVERYTHING down, Bitcoin & Monero UP  Cool

^fify

And look, another Monero shill for Frap.doc to expose:

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/commits?author=laanwj   Cool


The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Core GUI - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }
MoneroForCash.com  |  Buy and sell XMR near you  |  Easymonero.com  |  Bitsquare.io - Decentralized XMR Exchange  |  Buy XMR with fiat
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014

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


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
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 27, 2015, 10:50:48 PM
 #29371

EVERYTHING down, Bitcoin & Monero UP  Cool

^fify

And look, another Monero shill for Frap.doc to expose:

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/commits?author=laanwj   Cool



don't hold your breath.  Monero isn't going anywhere.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736


Support SEGWIT on 8/1/17 https://github.com/UASF


View Profile WWW
July 27, 2015, 10:59:20 PM
 #29372

EVERYTHING down, Bitcoin & Monero UP  Cool

^fify

And look, another Monero shill for Frap.doc to expose:

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/commits?author=laanwj   Cool



don't hold your breath.  Monero isn't going anywhere.

In a single year, it's gone from nothing to the #6 legitimate coin by market cap (~$5 million).

What makes you think it's now suddenly going to stop moving up the ranks?

The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Core GUI - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }
MoneroForCash.com  |  Buy and sell XMR near you  |  Easymonero.com  |  Bitsquare.io - Decentralized XMR Exchange  |  Buy XMR with fiat
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014

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


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
I_bitcoin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
July 27, 2015, 11:13:24 PM
 #29373

The Red Queen interpretation, whereby we must change Bitcoin ASAP for the sake of keeping it the same, is absurd.  Moving the tx supply curve with the goal of controlling the range where it intersects that of demand is prima facie centralized market manipulation.  As long as tx fees are absurdly underpriced, in terms of their cost and what users are willing to pay, the fee market is completely broken.  Bitoin's 'free sample/loss leader' viral marketing campaign phase ended with the emergence of omnipresent 'cosmic background spam.'

ICEBREAKER, I am not attributing all of the below to you.   Just using your comment as a springboard for some thinking I have been going through over the past few months as tensions increase on block size.

I have heard this statement "tx fees are underpriced"  and "fee market is broken" several times and I still don't get it.    Mainly because the way it gets portrayed is that we must raise fees now vs. let things develop naturally otherwise miners can't stay in business.   When the block reward halves what do you think happens?   My expectation is that miners will still need to pay the bills in fiat so the fiat per BTC ratio will increase.    This increase, by it's very nature, increases the fiat "profit" per transaction fee.   So, if fiat/BTC increases due to reward changes the fees go up from the perspective of a fiat holder.   Heck, I suspect the block reward will be a major factor in driving fiat/BTC ratio until the block reward gets close to the average transaction fee.  .

If anything, we should get the blocksize to the largest rationally supportable size and allow nature to take it's course.   Fees, from a fiat perspective, will go up even if the miners do nothing to prioritize transactions by fee or increase the bitcoin denominated standard fee.    Miners will still make a profit as scarcity drives the fiat/btc ratio and the fee market will continue to develop as a means of preserving scarce resources and preventing spam.   It seems to have done an adequate job so far and this may be the best possible outcome with respect to keeping bitcoin globally relevant.   One of the biggest drivers of adoption we have at our disposal is the fiat/btc ratio. 

There must be something I have been missing in the arguments I see about this.   Where does the above thinking not work?    Thanks ICEBREAKER for letting me borrow your words.

No matter where you go, there you are.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512



View Profile
July 27, 2015, 11:28:37 PM
 #29374

If anything, we should get the blocksize to the largest rationally supportable size

This is exactly where reasonable people differ.

I_bitcoin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
July 27, 2015, 11:43:01 PM
 #29375

If anything, we should get the blocksize to the largest rationally supportable size

This is exactly where reasonable people differ.



That is a key word right there "reasonable".  I certainly haven't had any great epiphany as to how to choose the correct size or how to make it a reliably updated thing.   Predictability and anything that removes human consensus making from an ongoing process is what I would favor.   

No matter where you go, there you are.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
July 27, 2015, 11:43:32 PM
 #29376

EVERYTHING down, Bitcoin & Monero UP  Cool

^fify

And look, another Monero shill for Frap.doc to expose:

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/commits?author=laanwj   Cool



don't hold your breath.  Monero isn't going anywhere.
I would like to see an altcoin that is sufficiently different from Bitcoin see some real long term success. Healthy competition is good. I know it won't happen though because exchanges.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
wpalczynski
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120


Twitter: @wpalczynski


View Profile
July 27, 2015, 11:46:48 PM
 #29377

EVERYTHING down, Bitcoin & Monero UP  Cool

^fify

And look, another Monero shill for Frap.doc to expose:

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/commits?author=laanwj   Cool



don't hold your breath.  Monero isn't going anywhere.
I would like to see an altcoin that is sufficiently different from Bitcoin see some real long term success. Healthy competition is good. I know it won't happen though because exchanges.

When the user base grows sufficiently exchanges will take notice.

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512



View Profile
July 27, 2015, 11:57:12 PM
 #29378

If anything, we should get the blocksize to the largest rationally supportable size

This is exactly where reasonable people differ.

That is a key word right there "reasonable".  I certainly haven't had any great epiphany as to how to choose the correct size or how to make it a reliably updated thing.   Predictability and anything that removes human consensus making from an ongoing process is what I would favor.   

The only way to remove human consensus from the ongoing process is to leave it exactly the way it is. No changes to the consensus rules ever (MP argument).

That is btw pretty much Wladimir's view. He's not going to back any change that doesn't have human consensus. So you either have human consensus or, removing it from the process, no changes at all.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 28, 2015, 12:21:09 AM
 #29379

If anything, we should get the blocksize to the largest rationally supportable size

This is exactly where reasonable people differ.

That is a key word right there "reasonable".  I certainly haven't had any great epiphany as to how to choose the correct size or how to make it a reliably updated thing.   Predictability and anything that removes human consensus making from an ongoing process is what I would favor.  

The only way to remove human consensus from the ongoing process is to leave it exactly the way it is. No changes to the consensus rules ever (MP argument).

That is btw pretty much Wladimir's view. He's not going to back any change that doesn't have human consensus. So you either have human consensus or, removing it from the process, no changes at all.



i wonder what all those guys will say next year when the Blockstream guys want to change the code for SC's and LN if Gavin objects.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512



View Profile
July 28, 2015, 12:26:09 AM
 #29380

If anything, we should get the blocksize to the largest rationally supportable size

This is exactly where reasonable people differ.

That is a key word right there "reasonable".  I certainly haven't had any great epiphany as to how to choose the correct size or how to make it a reliably updated thing.   Predictability and anything that removes human consensus making from an ongoing process is what I would favor.  

The only way to remove human consensus from the ongoing process is to leave it exactly the way it is. No changes to the consensus rules ever (MP argument).

That is btw pretty much Wladimir's view. He's not going to back any change that doesn't have human consensus. So you either have human consensus or, removing it from the process, no changes at all.



i wonder what all those guys will say next year when the Blockstream guys want to change the code for SC's and LN if Gavin objects.

Sidechains can be done with a soft fork, which means all they need to do is sign up miners (and of course find customers who want to use the side chain). It doesn't require a global consensus.

Pages: « 1 ... 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 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 ... 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!