Bitcoin Forum
September 20, 2017, 05:59:42 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   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 ... 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 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 [1533] 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1977263 times)
vokain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


Nexchange.IO ∥ Exchange BTC, LTC, ETH & DOGE


View Profile WWW
August 16, 2015, 12:07:05 AM
 #30641

The real Satoshi has never signed anything.

Can more people corroborate this? I am not familiar with his public history too much.

That writing is not Satoshi it lack understand of how Bitcoin works. If anything Satoshi would just clarify how he though his imposed limit should be dealt with.

You seem so sure.

In any case, I think the messenger supported the block increase if and only if full consensus for such a fork was achieved meritoriously.

I'm confidant with the information I have, my mine is flexible on the subject. If there is information I don't have the people supporting limiting the block size should present it.

This Satoshi email dose not reflect an understanding of the issue being debated.


I'm happy to hear.

Well, to me, personally, the issue the past recent while is not concerning the block size fork but rather the manner of implementing such a fork.

1505887182
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1505887182

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1505887182
Reply with quote  #2

1505887182
Report to moderator
1505887182
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1505887182

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1505887182
Reply with quote  #2

1505887182
Report to moderator
1505887182
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1505887182

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1505887182
Reply with quote  #2

1505887182
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1505887182
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1505887182

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1505887182
Reply with quote  #2

1505887182
Report to moderator
1505887182
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1505887182

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1505887182
Reply with quote  #2

1505887182
Report to moderator
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:08:09 AM
 #30642

Ken Friece bitcoin-dev:

What are you so afraid of, Eric? If Mike's fork is successful, consensus is reached around larger blocks. If it is rejected, the status quo will remain for now. Network consensus, NOT CORE DEVELOPER CONSENSUS, is the only thing that matters, and those that go against network consensus will be severely punished with complete loss of income.

I'm not sure who appointed the core devs some sort of Bitcoin Gods that can hold up any change that they happen to disagree with. It seems like the core devs are scared to death that the bitcoin network may change without their blessing, so they go on and on about how terrible hard forks are. Hard forks are the only way to keep core devs in check.

Despite significant past technical bitcoin achievements, two of the most vocal opponents to a reasonable blocksize increase work for a company (Blockstream) that stands to profit directly from artificially limiting the blocksize. The whole situation reeks. Because of such a blatant conflict of interest, the ethical thing to do would be for them to either resign from Blockstream or immediately withdraw themselves from the blocksize debate. This is the type of stuff that I hoped would end with Bitcoin, but alas, I guess human nature never changes.

Personally, I think miners should give Bitcoin XT a serious look. Miners need to realize that they are in direct competition with the lightning network and sidechains for fees. Miners, ask yourselves if you think you'll earn more fees with 1 MB blocks and more off-chain transactions or with 8 MB blocks and more on-chain transactions...

The longer this debate drags on, the more I agree with BIP 100 and Jeff Garzik because the core devs are already being influenced by outside forces and should not have complete control of the blocksize. It's also interesting to note that most of the mining hashpower is already voting for 8MB blocks BIP100 style.



1. LN - it is not a protocol change. It was (and ever will be) possible to use LN.  It is win-win  b/c
 a) it saves network resources
 b) it brings more anonymity

2. SC - it does not move transaction fees to Blockstream. Same miners who lose fees from MC can earn this fees from SC. It is again win-win strategy
 a) miners can earn fees by mining more chains
 b) those who are not interested in mining bloat-chain are not forced to keep all the world transactions forever.

That's definitely an English first language response. ;-)

Your understanding is only true if you can prevent the bugs that exist in Bitcoin from being fixed. If a fork like XT is possible then you loose the ability to lock the code needed to make LN and SC possible. The idea of the underlying protocol being subject to change is a threat to your dear project.

Shame on you holding us hostage.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:08:19 AM
 #30643

It feels to me like a major shift occurred today.  It was caused in part by Gavin and Mike completing the patch to support larger block sizes, but I think it was actually caused more so by a foolish move made on the battlefield-that-was-reddit today.  In an act of desperation, the mods at /r/bitcoin threw their swords.  

What do I mean by "throwing one's sword?"  I'll have to explain it with a story about my childhood…

...The town I grew up in (about an hour outside of Vancouver) seemed perfectly normal to me as a kid, but when I look back now, it was actually pretty rough.  It was home to hundreds of Hell's Angels and it served as a sort of distribution center in the drug trade.  

Anyways, there were lots of fights between groups of boys when I was growing up.  I was never really a part of it, but I was fascinated and paid attention to the dynamics of the process.  One strange behaviour I witnessed was that the last act of the losing faction of boys was always to throw their weapons.  It was such a stupid thing to do, because the baseball bat or hockey stick would rarely hit the intended target, and in the few times that it did, it would be travelling at such a reduced velocity that the impact imparted to the victim was superficial at best.  

And then the weaponless boys would get their butts kicked.

It turns out that this is a sort of a natural human reaction to severe stress.  As a last resort, we throw whatever we have left and hope for the best.  In the movies, it always works; in real life, the opposite is true.  

Of course the weapon of a mod is censorship.  Today was the day that the mods at /r/bitcoin threw their weapons.  

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:15:28 AM
 #30644

[..]

In the remote possiblity XT becomes a matter of more importance than the hype, mirth, and scorn it generates at present, MPex and other 1MBer Elder Whales are prepared to use substantial (possibly exhaustive) portions of their extraordinarily massive war chests to repel 8MBer attacks.  To them, this is Holy War, with barbarian Gavinista hordes clamouring for a Free Shit Junta at the gates of their bespoke civilization.  They are more of a mood to impale heads atop spikes than reward with compromise Hearn's attacks on decentralization, Tor, and the consensus process.

[...]

So you suggest the Elder Whales will buy up bitcoins from their stash of xtcoins? Just like a central bank would do? Well that is going to be interesting. But there is a risk of losing it all, so I would not bet that it plays out that way.


What are you smoking, crack?  Elder Whales exercising their GavinCoin Short option is nothing like what central banks do.  Your confused, sketchy understanding of the situation continues to surprise and baffle me with its surreal assumptions and bizarre conclusions.   Cheesy

So how do they defend the cripplecoin. Pitchforks?


This is one way to defend Bitcoin from XTcoin: The GavinCoin Short.

That's FTLDR.


Are you smoking crack? It's like a few paragraphs.

It's about 20 pagedowns on my screen. The word short is nowhere to be found. What do you take me for? It is an insult. Not that I care. Anyway it is UFTLDR. (Utterly fucking too long, didn't read).



lol only with a crack-addled attention span...
I'm on an iPhone in landscape mode and the post itself is 3-4 page downs.

Since you are that persevering; found on a link on that page:

"The fate of this fork will be exactly the fate of all attempted forks to date : the savvy Bitcoin holders will sell their fake-Bitcoins on the fake network, while double-spending (and thus invalidating) their sale on the actual network, thereby keeping their actual Bitcoin safe.iv The proceeds of this "victimless"v crime will be used to purchase more legitimate Bitcoins on the legitimate network, thus draining away value from the holders of Bitcoin fakes, into the pockets of the legitimate Bitcoin holders."

How is this not selling gavincoin and buying cripplecoin?

Still the link provided had nothing but svada, the above text is from a link in the link.


brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:15:50 AM
 #30645

It feels to me like a major shift occurred today.  It was caused in part by Gavin and Mike completing the patch to support larger block sizes, but I think it was actually caused more so by a foolish move made on the battlefield.  In an act of desperation, the small blockers threw their swords.  

What do I mean by "throwing one's sword?"  I'll have to explain it with a story about my childhood…

...The town I grew up in (about an hour outside of Vancouver) seemed perfectly normal to me as a kid, but when I look back now, it was actually pretty rough.  It was home to hundreds of Hell's Angels and it served as a sort of distribution center in the drug trade.  

Anyways, there were lots of fights between groups of boys when I was growing up.  I was never really a part of it, but I was fascinated and paid attention to the dynamics of the process.  One strange behaviour I witnessed was that the last act of the losing faction of boys was always to throw their weapons.  It was such a stupid thing to do, because the baseball bat or hockey stick would rarely hit the intended target, and in the few times that it did, it would be travelling at such a reduced velocity that the impact imparted to the victim was superficial at best.  

And then the weaponless boys would get their butts kicked.

It turns out that this is a sort of a natural human reaction to severe stress.  As a last resort, we throw whatever we have left and hope for the best.  In the movies, it always works; in real life, the opposite is true.  

Of course the weapon of a mod is censorship.  Today was the day that the mods at /r/bitcoin threw their weapons.  

TIL theymos represents and speak for all "small blockers"

Meanwhile you can have a look here at the reaction of actual "small blockers" : http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/

hint : not a care in the world

"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
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:16:49 AM
 #30646

TIL theymos represents and speak for all "small blockers"

Sorry, you quoted my text before I changed it to "r/bitcoin mods" to be more accurate.

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:18:56 AM
 #30647

TIL theymos represents and speak for all "small blockers"

Sorry, you quoted my text before I changed it to "r/bitcoin mods" to be more accurate.

Doesn't change anything. You people's insistance on misrepresentating, or outright ignoring, your "enemy",their count and their resources is what may lead you to your downfall.

I expect a smart guy like you to recognize the small, yet powerful and knowledgeable minority that is above or simply don't have time for the childish arguments and posturing of reddit and the seemingly one sided debates occuring on every forums of discussion.

Reddit mob making a lot of noise doesn't make their opinion more valuable

"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
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1778


http://DashNdrink.com


View Profile WWW
August 16, 2015, 12:30:24 AM
 #30648

It feels to me like a major shift occurred today.

That's probably just gas.  Are you getting enough fiber in your diet?


Of course the weapon of a mod is censorship.  Today was the day that the mods at /r/bitcoin threw their weapons.  

Moderation is not censorship.  Can't you win the argument based on facts and logic, without resorting to cheap self-pitying melodrama?

Reddit and bitcointalk are not public places where free speech applies.

I'd love to send you delicate snowflakes to a place with real censorship and watch you beg to be allowed to return to theymos' "epitome of authoritarianism."


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
vokain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


Nexchange.IO ∥ Exchange BTC, LTC, ETH & DOGE


View Profile WWW
August 16, 2015, 12:36:08 AM
 #30649

[..]

In the remote possiblity XT becomes a matter of more importance than the hype, mirth, and scorn it generates at present, MPex and other 1MBer Elder Whales are prepared to use substantial (possibly exhaustive) portions of their extraordinarily massive war chests to repel 8MBer attacks.  To them, this is Holy War, with barbarian Gavinista hordes clamouring for a Free Shit Junta at the gates of their bespoke civilization.  They are more of a mood to impale heads atop spikes than reward with compromise Hearn's attacks on decentralization, Tor, and the consensus process.

[...]

So you suggest the Elder Whales will buy up bitcoins from their stash of xtcoins? Just like a central bank would do? Well that is going to be interesting. But there is a risk of losing it all, so I would not bet that it plays out that way.


What are you smoking, crack?  Elder Whales exercising their GavinCoin Short option is nothing like what central banks do.  Your confused, sketchy understanding of the situation continues to surprise and baffle me with its surreal assumptions and bizarre conclusions.   Cheesy

So how do they defend the cripplecoin. Pitchforks?


This is one way to defend Bitcoin from XTcoin: The GavinCoin Short.

That's FTLDR.


Are you smoking crack? It's like a few paragraphs.

It's about 20 pagedowns on my screen. The word short is nowhere to be found. What do you take me for? It is an insult. Not that I care. Anyway it is UFTLDR. (Utterly fucking too long, didn't read).



lol only with a crack-addled attention span...
I'm on an iPhone in landscape mode and the post itself is 3-4 page downs.

Since you are that persevering; found on a link on that page:

"The fate of this fork will be exactly the fate of all attempted forks to date : the savvy Bitcoin holders will sell their fake-Bitcoins on the fake network, while double-spending (and thus invalidating) their sale on the actual network, thereby keeping their actual Bitcoin safe.iv The proceeds of this "victimless"v crime will be used to purchase more legitimate Bitcoins on the legitimate network, thus draining away value from the holders of Bitcoin fakes, into the pockets of the legitimate Bitcoin holders."

How is this not selling gavincoin and buying cripplecoin?

Still the link provided had nothing but svada, the above text is from a link in the link.



txs are reflected from the original chain to the forked chain, but not necessarily vice versa so unless there is full consensus on the fork to antiquate the original chain there is risk of attack

Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:41:57 AM
 #30650

TIL theymos represents and speak for all "small blockers"

Sorry, you quoted my text before I changed it to "r/bitcoin mods" to be more accurate.

Doesn't change anything. You people's insistance on misrepresentating, or outright ignoring, your "enemy",their count and their resources is what may lead you to your downfall.

I expect a smart guy like you to recognize the small, yet powerful and knowledgeable minority that is above or simply don't have time for the childish arguments and posturing of reddit and the seemingly one sided debates occuring on every forums of discussion.

Reddit mob making a lot of noise doesn't make their opinion more valuable
There is no enemy, just a few egos trying to pick a fight. The facts are there for everyone to review, for the lessor people they can follow loud egos where ever they are.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:43:00 AM
 #30651

TIL theymos represents and speak for all "small blockers"

Sorry, you quoted my text before I changed it to "r/bitcoin mods" to be more accurate.

Doesn't change anything. You people's insistance on misrepresentating, or outright ignoring, your "enemy",their count and their resources is what may lead you to your downfall.

I expect a smart guy like you to recognize the small, yet powerful and knowledgeable minority that is above or simply don't have time for the childish arguments and posturing of reddit and the seemingly one sided debates occuring on every forums of discussion.

Reddit mob making a lot of noise doesn't make their opinion more valuable

I'm getting interested to know what planet you are living on. Is it one of those Earth II's recently found by NASA, or is it a strange alternate reality that you inhabit where economics works in reverse, and the smaller a minority is the more it can rightfully claim the moral and intellectual high ground regardless of any other opinions?

Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:44:56 AM
 #30652

Of course the weapon of a mod is censorship.  Today was the day that the mods at /r/bitcoin threw their weapons.  

Moderation is not censorship.  Can't you win the argument based on facts and logic, without resorting to cheap self-pitying melodrama?

Reddit and bitcointalk are not public places where free speech applies.

I'd love to send you delicate snowflakes to a place with real censorship and watch you beg to be allowed to return to theymos' "epitome of authoritarianism."



Bitcoin is health in those places, let's hope you don't use the current centralized controlled development infrastructure to destroy it.

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

Activity: 798


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:46:16 AM
 #30653

This is great fun for sure!

Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:48:50 AM
 #30654

Gigaboys, cue up here!

brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:52:07 AM
 #30655

TIL theymos represents and speak for all "small blockers"

Sorry, you quoted my text before I changed it to "r/bitcoin mods" to be more accurate.

Doesn't change anything. You people's insistance on misrepresentating, or outright ignoring, your "enemy",their count and their resources is what may lead you to your downfall.

I expect a smart guy like you to recognize the small, yet powerful and knowledgeable minority that is above or simply don't have time for the childish arguments and posturing of reddit and the seemingly one sided debates occuring on every forums of discussion.

Reddit mob making a lot of noise doesn't make their opinion more valuable
There is no enemy, just a few egos trying to pick a fight. The facts are there for everyone to review, for the lessor people they can follow loud egos where ever they are.

I supposed you have censused every Bitcoin owner to be able to present that as fact?

"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
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:56:50 AM
 #30656

BTW: Just curious, and maybe our BIP is not needed anyways, but did you have a look at my comment with regards to not-quite hard forking?

Sorry, I spent most the day watching submissions and comments get deleted from /r/bitcoin.

I think a BIP (or something like it) is very much needed.  We have to get people to stop thinking about "Bitcoin Core" versus "Bitcoin XT," and just thinking in terms of "do I want to run software that supports bigger blocks?"  In that respect, our proposal is ideal because we could show how it would be compatible with both Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT.  The node operator just needs to set his block size limit to, say, 32 MB, and his node will always follow the longest proof-of-work chain composed of valid transactions.  

Moreover, we don't need 75% of the hash power to run Bitcoin XT to activate BIP101.  Instead, we need 75% of the hash power to set that flag bit.  That flag bit could be set with a patched version of Core, or by running the version of Bitcoin that we're proposing.

To answer your question about the not-quite-a-hard-fork idea, I think it's a great!  But like you said earlier, simple is better.  We need to be clear that all we're really proposing is to move the block size limit from the consensus layer to the transport layer.  

The stuff like my signalling idea and your "BSL governor" idea don't need strict consensus.  There could be several competing implementation with various degrees of interoperability.  It would still work fine.  

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:56:56 AM
 #30657

Of course the weapon of a mod is censorship.  Today was the day that the mods at /r/bitcoin threw their weapons. 

Moderation is not censorship.  Can't you win the argument based on facts and logic, without resorting to cheap self-pitying melodrama?

Reddit and bitcointalk are not public places where free speech applies.

I'd love to send you delicate snowflakes to a place with real censorship and watch you beg to be allowed to return to theymos' "epitome of authoritarianism."

You have a point somewhat but it is also fair to say that harping on the admittedly imprecise use of the word censorship isn't the point. When people make the censorship objection, you can reasonably interpret their concern as being over the subreddit banning or even over-aggressively moderating the topic. Either way the substance is the same.

Anyway, I noticed something interesting today. If you read the white paper.

1. There is nothing about block size. According to the white paper, any block (with no reference to size) is valid if the contained transactions are valid.

2. The determination of validity is made by miners, expressed by mining on top of it.

As a corollary of #2, users who see a longest chain they believe to be invalid should simply be fixing/upgrading their software, not claiming that miners are misbehaving.

While perhaps a "good idea", the concept of a longest valid chain as distinct from the longest chain is not part of the design.

Whether this is a good idea is another question entirely, but it seems to me the small block side has skipped a step in their argument.


brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 01:03:40 AM
 #30658

TIL theymos represents and speak for all "small blockers"

Sorry, you quoted my text before I changed it to "r/bitcoin mods" to be more accurate.

Doesn't change anything. You people's insistance on misrepresentating, or outright ignoring, your "enemy",their count and their resources is what may lead you to your downfall.

I expect a smart guy like you to recognize the small, yet powerful and knowledgeable minority that is above or simply don't have time for the childish arguments and posturing of reddit and the seemingly one sided debates occuring on every forums of discussion.

Reddit mob making a lot of noise doesn't make their opinion more valuable

I'm getting interested to know what planet you are living on. Is it one of those Earth II's recently found by NASA, or is it a strange alternate reality that you inhabit where economics works in reverse, and the smaller a minority is the more it can rightfully claim the moral and intellectual high ground regardless of any other opinions?

I live in a place where we are mostly careful about pretending that our own little circlejerk is a just representation of what the world looks like.

The problem in your little zanity is you are convinced that reddit and this forum is a reasonable approximation of the community's opinion.

The barriers of entry here and there being extremely low, everyone and their sheep can voice their "opinion" and claim it to be as valuable as any others when realistically there couldn't be anything further from the truth.

"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
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 01:06:32 AM
 #30659

Of course the weapon of a mod is censorship.  Today was the day that the mods at /r/bitcoin threw their weapons.  

Moderation is not censorship.  Can't you win the argument based on facts and logic, without resorting to cheap self-pitying melodrama?

Reddit and bitcointalk are not public places where free speech applies.

I'd love to send you delicate snowflakes to a place with real censorship and watch you beg to be allowed to return to theymos' "epitome of authoritarianism."

You have a point somewhat but it is also fair to say that harping on the admittedly imprecise use of the word censorship isn't the point. When people make the censorship objection, you can reasonably interpret their concern as being over the subreddit banning or even over-aggressively moderating the topic. Either way the substance is the same.

Anyway, I noticed something interesting today. If you read the white paper.

1. There is nothing about block size. According to the white paper, any block of any size is valid if the contained transactions are valid.

2. The determination of validity is made by miners, expressed by mining on top of it.

As a corollary of #2, users who see a longest chain they believe to be invalid should simply be fixing/upgrading their software, not claiming that miners are misbehaving.

While perhaps a "good idea", the concept of a longest valid chain as distinct from the longest chain is not part of the design.

Whether this is a good idea is another question entirely, but it seems to me the small block side has skipped a step in their argument.

Very nice.  Is it fair then to say:

   "Bitcoin is the longest proof-of-work chain composed of valid transactions"

This is a subtle difference from the phrase that certain personas employ to label Bitcoin-XT and other larger-block clients as "alt-coins":

  "Bitcoin is the longest proof-of-work valid chain"


Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 01:07:35 AM
 #30660

Of course the weapon of a mod is censorship.  Today was the day that the mods at /r/bitcoin threw their weapons. 

Moderation is not censorship.  Can't you win the argument based on facts and logic, without resorting to cheap self-pitying melodrama?

Reddit and bitcointalk are not public places where free speech applies.

I'd love to send you delicate snowflakes to a place with real censorship and watch you beg to be allowed to return to theymos' "epitome of authoritarianism."

You have a point somewhat but it is also fair to say that harping on the admittedly imprecise use of the word censorship isn't the point. When people make the censorship objection, you can reasonably interpret their concern as being over the subreddit banning or even over-aggressively moderating the topic. Either way the substance is the same.

Anyway, I noticed something interesting today. If you read the white paper.

1. There is nothing about block size. According to the white paper, any block of any size is valid if the contained transactions are valid.

2. The determination of validity is made by miners, expressed by mining on top of it.

As a corollary of #2, users who see a longest chain they believe to be invalid should simply be fixing/upgrading their software, not claiming that miners are misbehaving.

While perhaps a "good idea", the concept of a longest valid chain as distinct from the longest chain is not part of the design.

Whether this is a good idea is another question entirely, but it seems to me the small block side has skipped a step in their argument.

Very nice.  Is it fair then to say:

   "Bitcoin is the longest proof-of-work chain composed of valid transactions"

This is a subtle difference from the phrase that certain personas employ to label Bitcoin-XT and other larger-block clients as an "alt-coin":

  "Bitcoin is the longest proof-of-work valid chain"

According to the original design I believe so. Furthermore, I believe that a correct interoperation of the second phrase according to the original design is identical to the first, because the determination of validity is made by miners.
Pages: « 1 ... 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 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 [1533] 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 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!