Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

Norway

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2015
2,424
6,410
@79b79aa8
Ha ha, great answer.

I was thinking more along the lines that the routing itself for instance is free in terms of fees. But I don't know the cost in computer power (network, processing, memory) for either the "stresstester" or the network. Would a route-attack be possible?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zarathustra

Dusty

Active Member
Mar 14, 2016
362
1,172
A weakness I find in the LN is the difficulty to find a path with enough balance to transact from A to B.
I suppose (and maybe I'm wrong) that creating a lot of channels with very low balance would clog the routing algorithm and render the possibility to transact not-trivial amounts more difficult.
 

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,995
this is a spot on observation. Core has tried to co-opt Austrian terms and even the central themes behind this thread. let us not forget the times that Adam Back and Greg Maxwell have stopped by here in years past trying to contort the narrative regarding the blocksize debate only to be shot down resoundingly. or their numerous trolls, like brg444 or jonny1000 etc. or that this thread was locked on BCT for what amounts to pushing a free market alternative to Core; BU.
 
Last edited:

Mengerian

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 29, 2015
536
2,597
Hit it up on yours.org I wanted to retweet that one, but I couldn't find it. I love your writing @Mengerian it's targeted at the right audience.
Yours.org version available here: https://www.yours.org/content/austrians--don’t-be-fooled-by-the-bitcoin-core-cargo-cult-9c26cafb4ae6

The reason I focused on Medium, is that I want to reach non-BCHers. It was Saifedean's interview on the Tom Woods show that really got me going. He was really hitting Austro-Libertarian rhetoric in a way that would appeal to freedom-minded people who have only a superficial understanding of BTC/BCH issues. I don't want those good people to get bamboozled!
 

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,995
https://disqus.com/by/h0dl/?

not sure why this comment is being flagged as spam on his blog but here it is saved until it gets back up:


Your answer appears to go along with the claim that more commits equals better developer. In this specific BCH vs BTC debate, this is wrong imo. THE most compelling argument for BCH at the time of the fork, and currently imo , is/was that it minimalistically changed JUST the blocksize (with minimalistic additions to ensure its survival and without disrupting the entire space) which currently exists as its raison d'etre. It's actually a positive that most of BCH's code follows/copies the original BTC chain thus minimizing any potential conflicting concepts from an economic and technical standpoint. This argument leverages a similar concept as sharing the same genesis block. After all a great coder can also be considered one that recognizes the trend and backs off accordingly while occasionally inserting targeted coding strikes .

Btw, my argument doesn't even assume deadalnix has achieved this level of enlightenmen; its just that so far so good .
 
Last edited: