Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

don't you find yourself lame as hell quoting someone who's also getting pounded with downvotes?  and of all ppl, Troll davout-bc himself?   you're hurting your own case 

The only thing "lame as hell" is lending any credibility to reddit.

At this point I can only imagine you are trolling.

how do you measure consensus?

[brg444]

don't you find yourself lame as hell quoting someone who's also getting pounded with downvotes?  and of all ppl, Troll davout-bc himself?   you're hurting your own case 

The only thing "lame as hell" is lending any credibility to reddit.

At this point I can only imagine you are trolling.

how do you measure consensus?

here  :

[cypherdoc]

don't you find yourself lame as hell quoting someone who's also getting pounded with downvotes?  and of all ppl, Troll davout-bc himself?   you're hurting your own case 

The only thing "lame as hell" is lending any credibility to reddit.

At this point I can only imagine you are trolling.

how do you measure consensus?

here  :

XT with bigger blocks isn't ready yet.

[iCEBREAKER]

Its actually kinda fun watching you get pounded with down votes over there. Keep up the good work. Kid.

Enjoy your fallacious appeals to popularity all you like.

No amount of "Likes" will reverse the simple truth:

"you can build a visa on top of sound money, you can't build sound money on top of visa"

don't you find yourself lame as hell quoting someone who's also getting pounded with downvotes?  and of all ppl, Troll davout-bc himself?   you're hurting your own case 


davout-bc -6 points 9 hours ago

Why do you want to increase at all?

And for your convenience, here is the previous argument in its quantitative version: "it's easy to build (1..N) good payment networks network on top of (1) good settlements network, the opposite isn't true".

In other words: "you can build a visa on top of sound money, you can't build sound money on top of visa"

Downvotes (nor upvotes) affect the truth value of a statement.  Neither does labeling the speaker a "troll" (because Davout is a model of logical consistency).

I am proud to stand up for the truth, regardless of whatever passing narrative is preferred by the Frappuccino swilling mob.

You know what really is "lame as hell?"  Argumentum ad populum.   

It's a good thing the legal system does not decide cases by popular sentiment, or else you'd be out ~3000 LeBronCoins.   

[tvbcof]

don't you find yourself lame as hell quoting someone who's also getting pounded with downvotes?  and of all ppl, Troll davout-bc himself?   you're hurting your own case 

The only thing "lame as hell" is lending any credibility to reddit.

At this point I can only imagine you are trolling.

how do you measure consensus?

here  :

XT with bigger blocks isn't ready yet.

It's a relatively simple change.  The kind of analysis and testing that would be prudent has occurred.  All you have to do is release it and many many people will certainly jump on-board.  Just look at the sentiment here on trolltalk and on reddit.  And, of course, legacy Bitcoin with the temporary quick fix 1MB setting is pushing into the dangerous red zone that that Peter R dude has defined so it's ready to fail at any moment.

There may be a temporary need to kludge around a deficiency in hashing power as Hearn spoke of, but he's got that figured out via client updates and it would not last very long because most miners seem to be able to see the light.  With XT up and running there will be an escape port for the enlightened participants so it should rapidly take over.  XT is ready and it is time.  Go! Go! Go!

[Cconvert2G36]

2MB iCE and tvbcof?

We can build a bridge from the middle of the river?

[tvbcof]

2MB iCE and tvbcof?

We can build a bridge from the middle of the river?

What's the point?  If you want a universal crypto-currency which everyone uses for everything, do the calcs and do it.  If not, define where you want to draw the line (at what threshold do you kick people out and where do you kick them out to) and do that.  For some reason nobody wants to put any real numbers on any of that stuff.  Funny eh?

[Cconvert2G36]

2MB iCE and tvbcof?

We can build a bridge from the middle of the river?

What's the point?  If you want a universal crypto-currency which everyone uses for everything, do the calcs and do it.  If not, define where you want to draw the line (at what threshold do you kick people out and where do you kick them out to) and do that.  For some reason nobody wants to put any real numbers on any of that stuff.  Funny eh?

Being everything for everyone is silly, I agree. But 2MB (max not avg) seems manageable for a vast majority current nodes. Seems satoshi's vision was scaling up where technologically feasible and reasonable, while maintaining sufficient decentralization.

[brg444]

2MB iCE and tvbcof?

We can build a bridge from the middle of the river?

What's the point?  If you want a universal crypto-currency which everyone uses for everything, do the calcs and do it.  If not, define where you want to draw the line (at what threshold do you kick people out and where do you kick them out to) and do that.  For some reason nobody wants to put any real numbers on any of that stuff.  Funny eh?

Being everything for everyone is silly, I agree. But 2MB (max not avg) seems manageable for a vast majority current nodes. Seems satoshi's vision was scaling up where technologically feasible and reasonable, while maintaining sufficient decentralization.

What happens when we hit the 2MB limit?

[iCEBREAKER]

2MB iCE and tvbcof?

We can build a bridge from the middle of the river?

I suggested an initial increase to 2MB many months ago.  But everyone (except solex) was so high on 20MB++ block hype they ignored my proposal.  How nice of you guys to finally come around to my PoV, after getting #rekt day after day after day... 

I still support doubling max_blocksize to 2MB at the next fixed reward halving (and subsequent doubling coinciding with block subsidy halvings) IF AND ONLY IF the network suffers from actual congestion (IE competitive fees no longer properly prioritizing their tx).

Depending on the nature of the putative actual congestion (best case: sustained widespread actual use), I would even support 4MB to compensate for the previous halving.

What happens when we hit the 2MB limit?

Probably nothing, except further (natural, healthy) exclusion of marginal users.  We'll have more data/experience when we get there and burn that bridge when we come to it.

And no, I don't mind marginal use cases (spam/tips/coffees) being pushed off-Mainchain as fee markets develop.  That's just Bitcoin finally starting to work like it's supposed to.   

[Cconvert2G36]

Seeing that 1MB isn't completely full (outside spam ops), a 100% increase seems like a perfectly reasonable compromise... Let's do this. Study the results, and plan for the future accordingly.

[cypherdoc]

Its actually kinda fun watching you get pounded with down votes over there. Keep up the good work. Kid.

Enjoy your fallacious appeals to popularity all you like.

No amount of "Likes" will reverse the simple truth:

"you can build a visa on top of sound money, you can't build sound money on top of visa"

don't you find yourself lame as hell quoting someone who's also getting pounded with downvotes?  and of all ppl, Troll davout-bc himself?   you're hurting your own case 


davout-bc -6 points 9 hours ago

Why do you want to increase at all?

And for your convenience, here is the previous argument in its quantitative version: "it's easy to build (1..N) good payment networks network on top of (1) good settlements network, the opposite isn't true".

In other words: "you can build a visa on top of sound money, you can't build sound money on top of visa"

Downvotes (nor upvotes) affect the truth value of a statement.  Neither does labeling the speaker a "troll" (because Davout is a model of logical consistency).

I am proud to stand up for the truth, regardless of whatever passing narrative is preferred by the Frappuccino swilling mob.

You know what really is "lame as hell?"  Argumentum ad populum.   

It's a good thing the legal system does not decide cases by popular sentiment, or else you'd be out ~3000 LeBronCoins.   

Funny how it only became a real issue when I started wanting bigger blocks.

[majamalu]

I would even support 4MB to compensate for the previous halving.

Stop it, or else MP will expel you from La Serenissi-bla.

[iCEBREAKER]

You know what really is "lame as hell?"  Argumentum ad populum.   

It's a good thing the legal system does not decide cases by popular sentiment, or else you'd be out ~3000 LeBronCoins.   

Funny how it only became a real issue when I started wanting bigger blocks.

Yes, your hypocrisy became an issue when you begain accepting argumentum ad populum in one instance while in another rejecting it.

If you want to decide block size by a vote in the Court Of Reddit, why not do the same for your controversial hoard of coins' fate?   

[iCEBREAKER]

Depending on the nature of the putative actual congestion (best case: sustained widespread actual use), I would even support 4MB to compensate for the previous halving.

Stop it, or else MP will expel you from La Serenissi-bla.

The La Serenissima trope is very useful for appreciating the many sublime aspects of Bitcoin Sovereignty.  It's also amusing!   

Case in point, the recent discussion of how Layer 1 couldn't care less about what tx happen at Layer 2+, while nevertheless protecting their integrity.

"you can build a visa on top of sound money, you can't build sound money on top of visa"

From there, it's a short walk to Frap.doc's favorite source of maximum butthurt, Troll davout-bc himself's epic statement:

The true value that Bitcoin brings to the table is not "everyone gets to write into the holy ledger", it is instead "everyone gets to benefit from sane and non-inflationary financial instutions whose sanity and honesty are ensured by the holy blockchain".

IF AND ONLY IF technical and/or economic damage (IE actual congestion) occurs and persists as a direct result of the 1MB cap, the present controversy and contention will dissipate and be replaced by a rough consensus including MP.

That would put the "event" in "eventually."  Until then, "Not Tonight Dear!"   

[majamalu]

IF AND ONLY IF technical and/or economic damage (IE actual congestion) occurs and persists as a direct result of the 1MB cap, the present controversy and contention will dissipate and be replaced by a rough consensus including MP.

That would put the "event" in "eventually."  Until then, "Not Tonight Dear!"   

What happened to your faith in a forced and exclusive "fee market"?

[majamalu]

IF AND ONLY IF technical and/or economic damage (IE actual congestion) occurs and persists as a direct result of the 1MB cap, the present controversy and contention will dissipate and be replaced by a rough consensus including MP.

The problem is that what you call "actual congestion" or "economic damage" may be called "nice fee market" by others.

[iCEBREAKER]

IF AND ONLY IF technical and/or economic damage (IE actual congestion) occurs and persists as a direct result of the 1MB cap, the present controversy and contention will dissipate and be replaced by a rough consensus including MP.

What happened to your faith in a forced and exclusive "fee market"?

Nothing happened to it.  The market is at present working just fine, as properly competitive fees are ensuring their tx arrive happily and promptly at their destinations, enjoying phenomenal security and thus immune to aggression from the enemies of La Serenissima.

Were a future event caused by the 1mb cap to disturb us Citizens of La Serenissima, we would quickly take action.

That would put the "event" in "eventually."  Until then, "Not Tonight Dear!"   

[majamalu]

Were a future event caused by the 1mb cap to disturb us Citizens of La Serenissima, we would quickly take action.

Didn't you get the memo? The 1mb cap is not a problem according to MP, it is a solution.

[iCEBREAKER]

IF AND ONLY IF technical and/or economic damage (IE actual congestion) occurs and persists as a direct result of the 1MB cap, the present controversy and contention will dissipate and be replaced by a rough consensus including MP.

The problem is that what you call "actual congestion" or "economic damage" may be called "nice fee market" by others.

Wrong.  The objective definition of "actual congestion" is "competitive fees no longer properly prioritizing their tx."

Bitcoin's economic/incentive model requires tx priority be proportional to their fees.  That is not a subjective "call."

If a competitive fee for a tx fails to ensure it is prioritized higher than tx with lower fees, Bitcoin is broken (and nobody with million$ in BTC is going to stand in the way of fixing it ASAP).

That failure mode has never occurred for a significant duration; Bitcoin was built to be resilient and antifragile for the purpose of ensuring that doesn't happen.

You may be confusing equality of opportunity with equality of outcome.  The Free Shit Army does that all the time...Bitcoin user not affected!   

Were a future event caused by the 1mb cap to disturb us Citizens of La Serenissima, we would quickly take action.

Didn't you get the memo? The 1mb cap is not a problem according to MP, it is a solution.

We are in the present, not the future.  Didn't you get the memo?