Bitcoin Forum
November 20, 2017, 02:31:28 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 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 2010081 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 02:02:48 PM
 #30921

We have been reminded, by the pretention nodes, that there is always a risk of a largeblock being orphaned, especially the first one, then the next one that is larger, and so on. Not only due to timing, verification of the block, the technical stuff, but also the willingness of others to build on it. In business, the risk transforms directly to cost.

After a block of 2MB for example, the risk is reduced for blocks up to and including that exact size. We will therefore in the future see step increases in the blocksize, with retraction in between due to the varying demand. The typical leg up, stability, another leg up pattern, all market based.





Yes, tip  toeing forward according to fundamentals, both technical and economic.

Spammers can try to influence that progression but it will cost them.
1511188288
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511188288

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511188288
Reply with quote  #2

1511188288
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511188288
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511188288

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511188288
Reply with quote  #2

1511188288
Report to moderator
Paashaas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1121



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 02:08:56 PM
 #30922

The 1MB'ers are happy watching that adoption isn't growing anymore. Stupidity at its best.

I agree, it's always the same story; ppl dont like to come out of there comfort zone.

To much noob bitching all over the place, i'll take a Bitcoin break, everything will be all fine.
Zarathustra
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 02:18:55 PM
 #30923

Quote of the Year (2012): "I lean towards Anarchism"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Theymos
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 03:40:23 PM
 #30924

Hey Guys,

I'm thinking it's time for me to leave /r/bitcoin (or at least begin making an exit).  There seem to be three good migration choices:

/r/bitcoin_uncensored        1,403 subscribers

/r/bitcoinxt                      2,390 subscribers
 
/r/btc                              625 subscribers

On a strictly "what is the best name?" basis, I prefer /r/btc.  Bitcoin_uncensored will come across as dramatic and childish when this ordeal blows over and bitcoinxt will appear too tightly-coupled to a particular implementation of bitcoin (the very problem we are trying to avoid). 

So, I think I prefer /r/btc; however, it has the smallest readership at the moment.  What are other peoples' thoughts?

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

Activity: 722



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 03:55:25 PM
 #30925

All of the above, Multis ftw.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:19:39 PM
 #30926

564
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:33:52 PM
 #30927

Hey Guys,

I'm thinking it's time for me to leave /r/bitcoin (or at least begin making an exit).  There seem to be three good migration choices:

/r/bitcoin_uncensored        1,403 subscribers

/r/bitcoinxt                      2,390 subscribers
 
/r/btc                              625 subscribers

On a strictly "what is the best name?" basis, I prefer /r/btc.  Bitcoin_uncensored will come across as dramatic and childish when this ordeal blows over and bitcoinxt will appear too tightly-coupled to a particular implementation of bitcoin (the very problem we are trying to avoid). 

So, I think I prefer /r/btc; however, it has the smallest readership at the moment.  What are other peoples' thoughts?

I unsubscribed from /r/bitcoin and subscribed to all of the above. Not sure which is the right path, but they are all better than thermos' Stalinist utopia. 
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:35:26 PM
 #30928

Hey Guys,

I'm thinking it's time for me to leave /r/bitcoin (or at least begin making an exit).  There seem to be three good migration choices:

/r/bitcoin_uncensored        1,403 subscribers

/r/bitcoinxt                      2,390 subscribers
 
/r/btc                              625 subscribers

On a strictly "what is the best name?" basis, I prefer /r/btc.  Bitcoin_uncensored will come across as dramatic and childish when this ordeal blows over and bitcoinxt will appear too tightly-coupled to a particular implementation of bitcoin (the very problem we are trying to avoid). 

So, I think I prefer /r/btc; however, it has the smallest readership at the moment.  What are other peoples' thoughts?

I unsubscribed from /r/bitcoin and subscribed to all of the above. Not sure which is the right path, but they are all better than thermos' Stalinist utopia. 

use this:  https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3ha129/thoughts_on_normalizing_this_new_sub_and_killing/cu5ufhl
lunarboy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 544



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:36:03 PM
 #30929

The 1MB'ers are happy watching that adoption isn't growing anymore. Stupidity at its best.


Stupidity is pretending that "adoption" and "growth" is all about users & transactions.

Probably one of your more stupid posts.

brg444 is correct.  EG:



Closed minded stubbornness it pretending it's not.

The reason for these phenomenal VC investments has nothing to do with the 'block size debate'  this false cause fallacy, is yet another desperate attempt to argue some hidden agenda  and self interest, in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence.
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:37:47 PM
 #30930

564

Still no blocks though apparently. There needs to be statements from the pool operators telling miners how they are voting. Right now I think most are being neutral to not lose anyone (either way), but at some point miners will want to know what the pools plan to do so they can migrate to pools aligned with them.  
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:42:10 PM
 #30931

amazing:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin_uncensored/comments/3haocj/a_few_of_the_posts_deleted_on_rbitcoin_yesterday/
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:42:53 PM
 #30932

Hey Guys,

I'm thinking it's time for me to leave /r/bitcoin (or at least begin making an exit).  There seem to be three good migration choices:

/r/bitcoin_uncensored        1,403 subscribers

/r/bitcoinxt                      2,390 subscribers
 
/r/btc                              625 subscribers

On a strictly "what is the best name?" basis, I prefer /r/btc.  Bitcoin_uncensored will come across as dramatic and childish when this ordeal blows over and bitcoinxt will appear too tightly-coupled to a particular implementation of bitcoin (the very problem we are trying to avoid). 

So, I think I prefer /r/btc; however, it has the smallest readership at the moment.  What are other peoples' thoughts?

There is always cryptocrypt.org https://cryptocrypt.net/ it's what this website should have been iCE and cypher may be band after a single interaction, it was born from a similar conflict with theymos. I think it's still run by one of cyphers favorites the Goat.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:44:00 PM
 #30933

564

Still no blocks though apparently. There needs to be statements from the pool operators telling miners how they are voting. Right now I think most are being neutral to not lose anyone (either way), but at some point miners will want to know what the pools plan to do so they can migrate to pools aligned with them.  

i've counted 3 pools so far.  it's early:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3hbbxz/two_new_p2pools_you_can_join_mining_on_xt/
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:46:33 PM
 #30934

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/3hbmxz/theymos_is_breaking_3_rules_of_the_moddiquette_is/cu5xuaw
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:52:21 PM
 #30935

564

Still no blocks though apparently. There needs to be statements from the pool operators telling miners how they are voting. Right now I think most are being neutral to not lose anyone (either way), but at some point miners will want to know what the pools plan to do so they can migrate to pools aligned with them.  

i've counted 3 pools so far.  it's early:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3hbbxz/two_new_p2pools_you_can_join_mining_on_xt/

The reason P2Pool never took off is because it's performance and rewards are sub-optimal and pay out less than other pools (only slightly but it's been enough to keep P2Pool from having wide adoption. )

So far as I can tell none of the major pools have committed either way and no mined XT blocks have been found.
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
August 17, 2015, 04:57:26 PM
 #30936

People taking action at reddit against thermos

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/3hbmxz/theymos_is_breaking_3_rules_of_the_moddiquette_is/

It seems he has pretty clearly broken several basic rules for moderators. But reddit rarely takes action in these situations. I personally have only used reddit for /r/bitcoin. This is enough to make me simply delete my account and leave reddit entirely.

Then again this seems to work well enough
https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3ha129/thoughts_on_normalizing_this_new_sub_and_killing/cu5t75i
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 05:06:38 PM
 #30937

564

Still no blocks though apparently. There needs to be statements from the pool operators telling miners how they are voting. Right now I think most are being neutral to not lose anyone (either way), but at some point miners will want to know what the pools plan to do so they can migrate to pools aligned with them.  

i've counted 3 pools so far.  it's early:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3hbbxz/two_new_p2pools_you_can_join_mining_on_xt/

The reason P2Pool never took off is because it's performance and rewards are sub-optimal and pay out less than other pools (only slightly but it's been enough to keep P2Pool from having wide adoption. )

So far as I can tell none of the major pools have committed either way and no mined XT blocks have been found.

this is true.  but i'd argue, this is exactly what we want to see and represents creative destruction in process.

disadvantaged p2pools are seeing an opportunity to level the playing field by attracting pro-XT hashers over to their pools to gain marketshare.  if we are correctly surmising the "economic majority" favoring XT, then large traditional pools need to be concerned with this migration if it occurs.  they stand to lose hashers.  of course, the flipside is true as well, by declaring one's use of XT software, they too could lose pro-Core hashers.  i still think XT is on the right side of this ultimately though.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 05:15:59 PM
 #30938

564

Still no blocks though apparently. There needs to be statements from the pool operators telling miners how they are voting. Right now I think most are being neutral to not lose anyone (either way), but at some point miners will want to know what the pools plan to do so they can migrate to pools aligned with them.  

i've counted 3 pools so far.  it's early:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3hbbxz/two_new_p2pools_you_can_join_mining_on_xt/

The reason P2Pool never took off is because it's performance and rewards are sub-optimal and pay out less than other pools (only slightly but it's been enough to keep P2Pool from having wide adoption. )

So far as I can tell none of the major pools have committed either way and no mined XT blocks have been found.

this is true.  but i'd argue, this is exactly what we want to see and represents creative destruction in process.

disadvantaged p2pools are seeing an opportunity to level the playing field by attracting pro-XT hashers over to their pools to gain marketshare.  if we are correctly surmising the "economic majority" favoring XT, then large traditional pools need to be concerned with this migration if it occurs.  they stand to lose hashers.  of course, the flipside is true as well, by declaring one's use of XT software, they too could lose pro-Core hashers.  i still think XT is on the right side of this ultimately though.

one other thing.  if hashers move to p2pool, what we'll get is increasing decentralization of mining, which would be a side effect of this split in ideology.  and not just by hashers moving away from larger pools but by adopting the p2pool concept in general.

that is a good thing.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 17, 2015, 05:17:57 PM
 #30939

573
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
August 17, 2015, 05:40:31 PM
 #30940

564

Still no blocks though apparently. There needs to be statements from the pool operators telling miners how they are voting. Right now I think most are being neutral to not lose anyone (either way), but at some point miners will want to know what the pools plan to do so they can migrate to pools aligned with them.  

i've counted 3 pools so far.  it's early:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3hbbxz/two_new_p2pools_you_can_join_mining_on_xt/

The reason P2Pool never took off is because it's performance and rewards are sub-optimal and pay out less than other pools (only slightly but it's been enough to keep P2Pool from having wide adoption. )

So far as I can tell none of the major pools have committed either way and no mined XT blocks have been found.

this is true.  but i'd argue, this is exactly what we want to see and represents creative destruction in process.

disadvantaged p2pools are seeing an opportunity to level the playing field by attracting pro-XT hashers over to their pools to gain marketshare.  if we are correctly surmising the "economic majority" favoring XT, then large traditional pools need to be concerned with this migration if it occurs.  they stand to lose hashers.  of course, the flipside is true as well, by declaring one's use of XT software, they too could lose pro-Core hashers.  i still think XT is on the right side of this ultimately though.

one other thing.  if hashers move to p2pool, what we'll get is increasing decentralization of mining, which would be a side effect of this split in ideology.  and not just by hashers moving away from larger pools but by adopting the p2pool concept in general.

that is a good thing.

I think what is more likely is a small percentage of miners move to p2pool for this issue and then a larger pool adopts XT to both stop the blead and to capture share. Then the dam breaks
Pages: « 1 ... 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!