Bitcoin Forum
April 03, 2020, 09:05:38 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Bitcoin fork proposal by respected Bitcoin lead dev Gavin Andresen, to increase the block size from 1MB to 20MB.
pro
anti
agnostic
DGAF

Pages: « 1 ... 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 [104] 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Bitcoin 20MB Fork  (Read 154258 times)
sardokan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1003



View Profile
March 09, 2015, 08:36:19 AM
 #2061

We actually do not even have a problem.

I do have a problem, I'm a bitcoin poor associated with a list of Bitcoin richs  Grin

I do have another problem, it's folks that want to put their one size for all dick in every holes.

But you are right, we don't have a problem, because we will maintain our tool, even if they go shitcoin.


I also have an impression that there are much more tech saavy people that are against this fork than pro (I didn't say all, but much more, for shity readers)
1585904738
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1585904738

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1585904738
Reply with quote  #2

1585904738
Report to moderator
1585904738
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1585904738

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1585904738
Reply with quote  #2

1585904738
Report to moderator
1585904738
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1585904738

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1585904738
Reply with quote  #2

1585904738
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1585904738
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1585904738

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1585904738
Reply with quote  #2

1585904738
Report to moderator
1585904738
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1585904738

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1585904738
Reply with quote  #2

1585904738
Report to moderator
1585904738
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1585904738

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1585904738
Reply with quote  #2

1585904738
Report to moderator
hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1001



View Profile
March 09, 2015, 08:39:00 AM
 #2062

I also have an impression that there are much more tech saavy people that are against this fork than pro (I didn't say all, but much more, for shity readers)

never follow teh masses. never. ever. they're dead already. zombi sheeples.

DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 1535


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 09:42:04 AM
 #2063

GigaBloatCoin has far less than the required 95% support and is thus not going to happen.  Quick, sell all your BTC before they become worthless hipster curiosities!   Grin
And where did you get the 95% support from? Hmmm?

http://gavintech.blogspot.de/2015/01/twenty-megabytes-testing-results.html

"Current rules if no consensus as measured by block.nVersion supermajority.
Supermajority defined as: 800 of last 1000 blocks have block.nVersion == 4"

Once that thing is going live, you're just going to get dragged by nose into it.

Thanks for the correction.  But the Pro side is only running 60%, far short of the required 80% minimum.

If you honestly believe that any future adopters of bitcoin will share your views, then you really are just the embodiment of the elitist who thinks they can have their cake and eat it.  If you want to be one of the elites, then you have to accept that as more people join, you're going to become more and more of a minority.  New users aren't going to want the same thing you do.  Why would they want to support a chain that won't support them?  Either that, or you have to admit that you want to burn the bridge behind you and make Bitcoin intentionally unattractive to new users, which sounds like the direction you're heading in.  It's inevitable that sooner or later there will be a tipping point.  That current 60% will be at least 80% sooner than you might think.  You're already losing and you'll be losing by a bigger margin with every new user. 

davout
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1002


1davout


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 09:54:01 AM
 #2064

You're already losing and you'll be losing by a bigger margin with every new user. 

Since when is Bitcoin a democracy?

DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 1535


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 10:03:26 AM
 #2065

You're already losing and you'll be losing by a bigger margin with every new user. 

Since when is Bitcoin a democracy?

It's not, it's better than that.  The elites have found it incredibly easy to manipulate democracy, but they'll find it much more difficult to do the same here.  I hope you're all going to put your money where your mouth is and put up those 1mb nodes.  Just know that every single startup, merchant, payment processor, venture capitalist and new user are against you.  All of those groups will gain from the benefits of network effects and a larger userbase.  Your side of the argument is campaigning against a larger userbase.  That's what it boils down to.  Get ready to put a hell of a lot of money in to try and beat them.  I doubt you're going to have much success, though.

hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1001



View Profile
March 09, 2015, 10:03:53 AM
Last edit: March 09, 2015, 11:03:39 AM by hdbuck
 #2066

GigaBloatCoin has far less than the required 95% support and is thus not going to happen.  Quick, sell all your BTC before they become worthless hipster curiosities!   Grin
And where did you get the 95% support from? Hmmm?

http://gavintech.blogspot.de/2015/01/twenty-megabytes-testing-results.html

"Current rules if no consensus as measured by block.nVersion supermajority.
Supermajority defined as: 800 of last 1000 blocks have block.nVersion == 4"

Once that thing is going live, you're just going to get dragged by nose into it.

Thanks for the correction.  But the Pro side is only running 60%, far short of the required 80% minimum.

If you honestly believe that any future adopters of bitcoin will share your views, then you really are just the embodiment of the elitist who thinks they can have their cake and eat it.  If you want to be one of the elites, then you have to accept that as more people join, you're going to become more and more of a minority.  New users aren't going to want the same thing you do.  Why would they want to support a chain that won't support them?  Either that, or you have to admit that you want to burn the bridge behind you and make Bitcoin intentionally unattractive to new users, which sounds like the direction you're heading in.  It's inevitable that sooner or later there will be a tipping point.  That current 60% will be at least 80% sooner than you might think.  You're already losing and you'll be losing by a bigger margin with every new user.  

erf, new bitcoin adopter?! try new bitcoin speculator..

bitcoin is a safe-algorithmic-haven from the extraordinary growing BS we call financial system.
people that dont get it will deserve what's going to hit them. they're dead(lifts) anyway. seeking regulation and control over and over again. + they think you bitcoiner crazy..
but their bank account is not backed by +350PH computing power (exponentially growing, no matter your block-political demagoguery).

this is how bitcoin should be pitched for it to gain massive inflow of cash, not talking about freakin oranges and apples, praying on the starving africans and other frappucino cravers..

short your excessive fiat, buy bitcoin and ferakin hodl Wink
scarcity in both outstanding units and transactions will do the rest..

maybe buy some popcorn wit your precious bitcoin but that's quite it. nah forget it buy it with worthless dollars or euros.. eurocard/visa/ripple whatever. just stop spamming the blockchain.
davout
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1002


1davout


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 11:27:27 AM
 #2067

Just know that every single startup, merchant, payment processor, venture capitalist and new user are against you.

Really?

DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 1535


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 11:43:38 AM
 #2068

Just know that every single startup, merchant, payment processor, venture capitalist and new user are against you.

Really?

Linking to an article that mentions "mass market adoption" while supporting a limit that would suppress mass adoption only further serves to highlight the dichotomy in your stance.  You can't have it both ways.  If you want mass adoption, 1MB is not sufficient.  But most of the other things you've said in the various threads on this topic seem to suggest you don't want mass adoption.

Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2534
Merit: 2486


Exchange Bitcoin quickly-https://blockchain.com.do


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 12:26:24 PM
 #2069

guys, the bitbeans shitcoin with 20MB blocks falls out of sync (no surprise for me)

conclusion: 20MB blocks will likely lead to bad sync and qt-clients falling out of sync.
This problem will almost certainly occure and make bitcoin a horror for the user.
Syncing problems for a majority of users can be expected.

#justsayin'
Because what happens to an altcoin must happen to Bitcoin too.  Roll Eyes

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀████████
██████▀▄██▀▀▄▄ ████▄▀██████
█████ ███ ████ ▀▀████ █████
████ █████ ███▀▀▀▄████ ████
████ ███▀▀▀▄▄▄████████ ████
████ ██▄▄▀▀███████▀▄▄█ ████
█████ █████ █▀██▀▄███ █████
██████▄▀███▀▄█▀▄███▀▄██████
████████▄▄▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▄▄████████
██████████▀▄███████████████
██████████████████████████
.
.FORTUNEJACK   JOIN INVINCIBLE JACKMATE AND WIN......10 BTC........
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████▀▀▀       ▀▀▀██████
█████  ▄▄▄█████▄▄▄  █████
█████  █████ █████  █████
█████  ██▄     ▄██  █████
█████  ████   ████  █████
█████▄  ██▄▄█▄▄██  ▄█████
██████▄  ███████  ▄██████
███████▄   ▀▀▀   ▄███████
██████████▄▄ ▄▄██████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
.
..
davout
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1002


1davout


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 01:03:21 PM
 #2070

Linking to an article that mentions "mass market adoption" while supporting a limit that would suppress mass adoption only further serves to highlight the dichotomy in your stance.  You can't have it both ways.  If you want mass adoption, 1MB is not sufficient.  But most of the other things you've said in the various threads on this topic seem to suggest you don't want mass adoption.

If I really have to spell it out for you... I *own* Paymium. In other words : I am qualified to state what is strategic, and in the interest of startups of the space. You are not.

DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 1535


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 02:09:58 PM
 #2071

Linking to an article that mentions "mass market adoption" while supporting a limit that would suppress mass adoption only further serves to highlight the dichotomy in your stance.  You can't have it both ways.  If you want mass adoption, 1MB is not sufficient.  But most of the other things you've said in the various threads on this topic seem to suggest you don't want mass adoption.

If I really have to spell it out for you... I *own* Paymium. In other words : I am qualified to state what is strategic, and in the interest of startups of the space. You are not.

I figured based on the sig.  That's not the part you need to spell out in plain English.  If you are actively helping merchants to accept Bitcoin for any purchase, no matter how small, in a move towards mass adoption, why are you also stating that you'd prefer those smaller transactions on another chain and supporting a limit that would force that outcome?  Why are you doing one thing and saying the opposite?

davout
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1002


1davout


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 02:33:32 PM
 #2072

If you are actively helping merchants to accept Bitcoin for any purchase, no matter how small, in a move towards mass adoption, why are you also stating that you'd prefer those smaller transactions on another chain

I never said "on an other chain". I said "off-chain".
That's simply because that it is much more efficient. It really makes no sense to try to address all business needs with one single solution.

Bitcoin is a very expensive technology, it's vastly counterproductive to try and insist that every customer gets addressed the same way.
The question that comes more frequently is certainly not "will we be able to stay on-chain?", but it is "why do we have to wait 10 minutes to receive our money?".

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".

Do you genuinely think that the level of security provided by the blockchain is absolutely necessary for every single transaction? Do you honestly think everyone will be able to educate themselves enough to grasp how bitcoin actually works? and actually use it properly and securely?

R2D221
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
March 09, 2015, 02:54:01 PM
 #2073

I never said "on an other chain". I said "off-chain".
That's simply because that it is much more efficient. It really makes no sense to try to address all business needs with one single solution.

Why not?

Bitcoin is a very expensive technology, it's vastly counterproductive to try and insist that every customer gets addressed the same way.

Actually, it's way cheaper than current banking systems. This comes up a lot in “Bitcoin is wasting energy” threads.

The question that comes more frequently is certainly not "will we be able to stay on-chain?", but it is "why do we have to wait 10 minutes to receive our money?".

People who make this question don't understand how transactions work. The solution is educate them, not change the system based on a non-problem.

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".

I disagree. The holy blockchain is useless to me if I as an Average Joe don't get to write into it.

Do you genuinely think that the level of security provided by the blockchain is absolutely necessary for every single transaction?

Yes, I believe so. My daily expenses are very important to me. If they were insecure and somehow reverted, that would mean I would have to return all the goods I've bought. Nobody wants that.

Do you honestly think everyone will be able to educate themselves enough to grasp how bitcoin actually works? and actually use it properly and securely?

Most of the people don't have a clue how the Internet actually works (and they don't need to), and that doesn't stop more than a billion people to use Facebook daily.

An economy based on endless growth is unsustainable.
DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 1535


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 03:01:38 PM
 #2074

If you are actively helping merchants to accept Bitcoin for any purchase, no matter how small, in a move towards mass adoption, why are you also stating that you'd prefer those smaller transactions on another chain

I never said "on an other chain". I said "off-chain".
That's simply because that it is much more efficient. It really makes no sense to try to address all business needs with one single solution.

Bitcoin is a very expensive technology, it's vastly counterproductive to try and insist that every customer gets addressed the same way.
The question that comes more frequently is certainly not "will we be able to stay on-chain?", but it is "why do we have to wait 10 minutes to receive our money?".

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".

Do you genuinely think that the level of security provided by the blockchain is absolutely necessary for every single transaction? Do you honestly think everyone will be able to educate themselves enough to grasp how bitcoin actually works? and actually use it properly and securely?

If it's not a transaction on a blockchain, then the alternative is regulation, insurance, consumer protection and all the other centralised, flawed systems that don't come cheap either.  You need to trust the providers of those off-chain services not to lose your money.  I almost wish you had said "on another chain".  

davout
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1002


1davout


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 03:42:38 PM
 #2075

Most of the people don't have a clue how the Internet actually works (and they don't need to), and that doesn't stop more than a billion people to use Facebook daily.

This actually illustrates the point beautilfully, what would happen if, suddenly, one billion people couldn't use Facebook anymore?
The idea that this would make the internet one fifth less useful is fucking ridiculous on its face.


then the alternative is regulation, insurance, consumer protection and all the other centralised, flawed systems that don't come cheap either.

Absolutely not. That is only true for services that touch fiat.
Have you had a look at OpenTransactions for example ?

davout
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1002


1davout


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 04:01:40 PM
 #2076

If the internet couldn't be accessed by more than three person every second, then suddenly the internet stops becoming useful!

We'll park derps like you on dogecoin the same way one billion derps are herded towards Facebook every day.


You are so out of touch with the Bitcoin ecosystem, you're not a core developer, and nobody invited you to the Bitcoin MIT expo!

Kinda glad I'm not getting the same invitations as Gavin.


LOL just wait til regulators comes after your piddly little Paymium services, just like how they came after Charlie Shrem, just like how they're blocking the Winklevoss ETF, just like how they went after every single money transmitter...

You must be new here.

BusyBeaverHP
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 209
Merit: 100


View Profile
March 09, 2015, 04:09:38 PM
 #2077

Polls still holding at 60% in favor vs 20% for anti... for all these arguments ad infinitum, the consensus is holding strong, but we'll have to wait and see.
Arghhh
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100


View Profile
March 09, 2015, 04:19:03 PM
 #2078

If the internet couldn't be accessed by more than three person every second, then suddenly the internet stops becoming useful!
We'll park derps like you on dogecoin the same way one billion derps are herded towards Facebook every day.
The reality is that derps like me vastly outnumbers tinpot dictators like you, and we'll park ourselves on Bitcoin and expand the blocksize by sheer weight of consensus.

We will feast on the network and write whatever the fuck we want on The Holy Ledger.

What are you going to do about that?
davout
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1002


1davout


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2015, 04:22:40 PM
 #2079

The reality is that derps like me vastly outnumbers

Bitcoin is neither a democracy nor a stupidocracy, get over it.

sickpig
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1007


View Profile
March 09, 2015, 04:25:04 PM
 #2080

LOL just wait til regulators comes after your piddly little Paymium services, just like how they came after Charlie Shrem, just like how they're blocking the Winklevoss ETF, just like how they went after every single money transmitter...

You must be new here.

FWIW I am relatively new here, though, after having read the article, I can't avoid noticing that Paymium/Bitcoin-central
offers this services not directly but through a chain of partnership (Paymium -> Aqoba -> Crédit Mutuel Arkea).

I dunno if it still applies, the article's quite old as it was published on Dec 2012, but if it's the case I've seen more than once the
"Finance industry" fighting back trying cutting links between exchanges and the entity entitled of the actual money transmitter
license. I'm not saying that's the case, though.


Bitcoin is a participatory system which ought to respect the right of self determinism of all of its users - Gregory Maxwell.
Pages: « 1 ... 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 [104] 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 »
  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!