Bitcoin Forum
January 19, 2019, 03:17:36 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
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 ... 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 [1275] 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2028311 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
June 04, 2015, 06:05:23 PM
 #25481

latest poll results "should the blocksize be raised?".
http://www.poll-maker.com/results329839xee274Cb0-12#tab-2:

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1547867856
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1547867856

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1547867856
Reply with quote  #2

1547867856
Report to moderator
1547867856
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1547867856

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1547867856
Reply with quote  #2

1547867856
Report to moderator
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 1001


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 06:05:55 PM
 #25482

Seeing a little about HayekGold from Anthem, ... uses Counterparty.  
http://news.anthemvault.com/hayekcoin-becomes-hayekgold

http://www.businessinsider.com/hayek-cryptocurrency-backed-by-gold-2015-5

Once I have bought through Anthem, does this let me sell or transfer on my own?  (i.e., over-the-counter, using a counterparty wallet)?  Or am I simply only able to sell back to Anthem?

Unichange.me

            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █


TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 06:07:02 PM
Last edit: June 04, 2015, 06:23:59 PM by TPTB_need_war
 #25483

if one's fundamental unit is the full node andis not the user, i think you're doing it wrong

I corrected that for you to stop violating the End-to-End Principle of networks.

i doubt that any cryptocoin can ever be on auto pilot as the crypto evolves as computerization advances.  what is secure today won't be secure tomorrow thus requiring continual updating.

The voters are the nodes, some developers want to keep centralized control over the majority of the nodes, some developers realize this is bad, - maintaining control its either explicit, subconscious, or subverted.

this is why Satoshi talked about a slow progressive "versioning" update with the final features only being enabled after 8-12 mo or so when it's clear thru monitoring that most everyone has updated

i think it's really disingenuous for Greg to say so

if it CAN be done in 1 month, that speaks pretty negatively about decentralization...  They are all marchin in step to the same drummer.

An ideal crypto-coin would not violate Tim Berners-Lee's Principle of Least Power as Bitcoin egregiously does.

It would do the minimum necessary and leave as much autonomy as possible to the nodes. Ideally the nodes could even disagree about the issues you all are squabbling about and the minimum requirement would still be met.

It would be decentralized at any scale. It would scale to any level of transaction volume. It would not require any specific choice of crypto algorithm (nodes would be free to choose).

Anyone guessed my paradigm shift yet?

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
June 04, 2015, 06:07:30 PM
 #25484

latest poll results "should the blocksize be raised?".
http://www.poll-maker.com/results329839xee274Cb0-12#tab-2:



looks where all the voters come from.  does THIS look decentralized to you?:

Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 04, 2015, 06:17:43 PM
 #25485

i doubt that any cryptocoin can ever be on auto pilot as the crypto evolves as computerization advances.  what is secure today won't be secure tomorrow thus requiring continual updating.

The voters are the nodes, some developers want to keep centralized control over the majority of the nodes, some developers realize this is bad, - maintaining control its either explicit, subconscious, or subverted.

this is why Satoshi talked about a slow progressive "versioning" update with the final features only being enabled after 8-12 mo or so when it's clear thru monitoring that most everyone has updated

i think it's really disingenuous for Greg to say so

if it CAN be done in 1 month, that speaks pretty negatively about decentralization...  They are all marchin in step to the same drummer.

An ideal crypto-coin would not violate Tim Berners-Lee's Principle of Least Power as Bitcoin egregiously does.

It would do the minimum necessary and leave as much autonomy as possible to the nodes. Ideally the nodes could even disagree about the issues you all are squabbling about and the minimum requirement would still be met.

It would be decentralized at any scale. It would scale to any level of transaction volume. It would not require any specific choice of crypto algorithm (nodes would be free to choose).

Anyone guessed my paradigm shift yet?

fiat 2.0, SDR's come on.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 06:21:25 PM
Last edit: June 05, 2015, 06:05:40 AM by TPTB_need_war
 #25486

fiat 2.0, SDR's come on.

Hehe. Bitcoin is centralized, you are only obfuscating to yourself if you claim that it isn't.

The centralization was put in the wrong place in Bitcoin's design. Move it then the decentralization can control the centralization.

Natalia_AnatolioPAMM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 294
Merit: 100


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 06:39:01 PM
 #25487

latest poll results "should the blocksize be raised?".
http://www.poll-maker.com/results329839xee274Cb0-12#tab-2:



quite obvious
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 06:41:01 PM
 #25488

if one's fundamental unit is the full node andis not the user, i think you're doing it wrong

I corrected that for you to stop violating the End-to-End Principle of networks.

...

An ideal crypto-coin would not violate Tim Berners-Lee's Principle of Least Power as Bitcoin egregiously does.

It would do the minimum necessary and leave as much autonomy as possible to the nodes. Ideally the nodes could even disagree about the issues you all are squabbling about and the minimum requirement would still be met.

It would be decentralized at any scale. It would scale to any level of transaction volume. It would not require any specific choice of crypto algorithm (nodes would be free to choose).

Anyone guessed my paradigm shift yet?

How do you create a network topology that is decentralized at any scale?
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2015, 06:43:26 PM
 #25489

Anyone guessed my paradigm shift yet?

The goal is clear enough, and laudable.  It is the path to that goal that remains occluded.

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
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 06:43:39 PM
 #25490


Yes because almost everyone agrees it should be raised (Greg and Luke excepted, though they agree it should be raised eventually). The poll didn't ask about raising to 20MB.
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2015, 06:47:33 PM
 #25491

Yes because almost everyone agrees it should be raised (Greg and Luke excepted, though they agree it should be raised eventually). The poll didn't ask about raising to 20MB.

The devil is in the details, with no details, its all angels.

I suppose I would vote "NO" to most any change without knowing the details, but not "NO" to change itself.  I think Gavin is getting closer and closer to something that will make sense.  He is down to 8mb now, changed at a particular future block?

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
pinky
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 538
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 04, 2015, 06:56:26 PM
 #25492

latest poll results "should the blocksize be raised?".
http://www.poll-maker.com/results329839xee274Cb0-12#tab-2:



looks where all the voters come from.  does THIS look decentralized to you?:



And what's the point of voting on highly technical question? Democracy doesn't work with this stuff, because majority have holes in their brains and then they lean on opinions of others and marketing campaigns.



████████████▀████▄████████████████▀███▀████████████████▄█
███▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████████████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀███████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████▀█████████████████████▀████████████████████████████
████████▀▀████████████████████▀▀█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████▀███████
      |                  |                  |            
impulse
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 151
Merit: 100


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 07:05:31 PM
 #25493

latest poll results "should the blocksize be raised?".
http://www.poll-maker.com/results329839xee274Cb0-12#tab-2:



Interesting result. If that is truly reflective of the community as a whole then the anti-increase crown are quite disproportionately represented in this debate. Greg, Luke and Peter sure do know how to stir up some serious shit.
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 07:05:55 PM
 #25494

Ironically, if it CAN be done in 1 month, that speaks pretty negatively about decentralization -- in the same sense that all the different central banks don't make the system decentralized.  They are all marchin in step to the same drummer.

I don't see how that's the case. If it's a good idea, and everyone's doing it, then the trade-off becomes attractive for just about everyone, so it can happen pretty fast without any centralization. Marching in lockstep doesn't mean centralized (of course; that's the whole idea of Bitcoin in a way).

Isn't there some kind of alert key that goes to every full node? SPV nodes don't matter since they don't care about blocksize. If the problem is just alerting everyone that a fork is coming and they have to choose sides, then what is the worst that can happen? Can someone even operate a full node without seeing the alert?
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2015, 07:09:08 PM
 #25495

Ironically, if it CAN be done in 1 month, that speaks pretty negatively about decentralization -- in the same sense that all the different central banks don't make the system decentralized.  They are all marchin in step to the same drummer.

I don't see how that's the case. If it's a good idea, and everyone's doing it, then the trade-off becomes attractive for just about everyone, so it can happen pretty fast without any centralization. Marching in lockstep doesn't mean centralized (of course; that's the whole idea of Bitcoin in a way). Isn't there some kind of alert key that goes to every full node? SPV nodes don't matter. If the problem is just alerting everyone that a fork is coming and they have to choose sides, then what is the worst that can happen? Can someone even operate a full node without seeing the alert?

This begs the question.  It presupposes success.
When a fork occurs, you are on one side or the other at the time of the fork.

"If everyone's doing it" means that they have already done it, so there is no longer anything to be attractive to them.  It is an event, not a migration.  Unless you are imagining many many failed forks until one finally succeeds, which would be exceedingly chaotic.

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
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2758
Merit: 1009


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 07:18:59 PM
 #25496


I would have voted with the minority, but I don't go off-site to use some data harvesting bullshit site just to vote in on a silly poll.  People who are not familiar with sample selection (and certain other network sciences) should be careful about interpretation of jokes like this.

My best guess is that by headcount, the split is about 1/4 on the hard fork.  That is much more promising than I'd expected given the makeup of the community.  25% by headcount is easily enough to keep a defensible system healthy.  By actual skin-in-the-game it would not surprise me in the least if a significant majority by HODL both favored the conservative approach and, more importantly, have the skills to protect their asses/assets.  Edit:...and probably exploit many of the other 75% if they so choose.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
June 04, 2015, 07:29:43 PM
 #25497


Yes because almost everyone agrees it should be raised (Greg and Luke excepted, though they agree it should be raised eventually). The poll didn't ask about raising to 20MB.

how ridiculously obtuse can they both get?  they've also gone on record saying that they think the block size should be reduced.  and just recently.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 04, 2015, 07:35:07 PM
 #25498

fiat 2.0, SDR's come on.

Hehe. Bitcoin is centralized, you are only obfuscating to yourself if you claim that it isn't.

The centralization was put in the wrong place in Bitcoin's design. You move it, then you can control it with decentralization.
do you care to explain how it's centralized again.

if the idea you have is correct then it needs to spread, it wont spread if it cant be understood.

can you ELI5.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
June 04, 2015, 07:36:18 PM
 #25499

Ironically, if it CAN be done in 1 month, that speaks pretty negatively about decentralization -- in the same sense that all the different central banks don't make the system decentralized.  They are all marchin in step to the same drummer.

I don't see how that's the case. If it's a good idea, and everyone's doing it, then the trade-off becomes attractive for just about everyone, so it can happen pretty fast without any centralization. Marching in lockstep doesn't mean centralized (of course; that's the whole idea of Bitcoin in a way).

Isn't there some kind of alert key that goes to every full node? SPV nodes don't matter since they don't care about blocksize. If the problem is just alerting everyone that a fork is coming and they have to choose sides, then what is the worst that can happen? Can someone even operate a full node without seeing the alert?

easily. if you're just running the full node as a service, like most of us do, then there's never any reason to login.  the way i check it's up and running periodically is by going to https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/ and checking the ip address to make sure there's a connection there.  thus, i would NOT get any alerts which, btw, i've only ever seen in the GUI and not in the command line which i use if and when i do happen to rarely go into the vps.

Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 04, 2015, 07:39:42 PM
 #25500


Yes because almost everyone agrees it should be raised (Greg and Luke excepted, though they agree it should be raised eventually). The poll didn't ask about raising to 20MB.

Gavin's proposal was just bad timing for them, they are not ready to deploy and would not have the opportunity to deploy should there be no demand, so they look for reasons to delay.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
Pages: « 1 ... 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 [1275] 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 ... 1558 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bitcointalk.org is not available or authorized for sale. Do not believe any fake listings.
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!