bitsko
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 730
- 1,532
@freetrader I heard you were stimulated by enemy operatives. Any truth to that? I dont believe it.
Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
- Thread starter cypherdoc
- Start date
i thought that guy had no time for Bitcoin dev (despite hanging out here everyday)? then, all of a sudden, he's cranking out a new client replete with extensive documentation, support channel, reddit guides, AMA's, etc. it's almost like he's part of a team...
Christoph Bergmann
Active Member
Let me try to translate: for years we have sth like 50k tx a day from sth like 10k users and no uptrend in sight. But we must abaolutely hurry to serve billions of users. Please give us money.
'scaling blockchain' has so often a weird, fishy touch. It starts with having a low and flat demand, but constructs the need for producing a gazillion capacity with the best engineerical masterplan. Then this masterplan is somehow sold to pay devs to realize it.
If I had a demand for 1mw energy in my village, I wouldn't invest in a company to produce a 1tw powerhouse here.
It's not like bsv and lightning and IBM don't do it too. But it gets fishy when they don't get the money from pro investors but beg the community.
Bch wants to put the Waggon before the horse. If they had users, and flowering businesses which process payments on the bch chain, investment in infrastructure would be easy. But they think they can brute force adoption by investing in developers to fulfill the scaling masterplan.
Again... Bch is not alone. Bsv, iota, Ava, cardano and a lot try this too.
Q. It's been edited since you saw it, the draft, correct?
A. Thank God.
lol, emphasis mine.
A. Not in the technology. She trades Bitcoin. I haven't discussed that with her, but it is open to the world because she posts on Twitter performance graphs and she - I guess the word is "twits" with other people who also trade on Bitcoin.
lol, emphasis mine.
A. Thank God.
lol, emphasis mine.
Post automatically merged:
A. Not in the technology. She trades Bitcoin. I haven't discussed that with her, but it is open to the world because she posts on Twitter performance graphs and she - I guess the word is "twits" with other people who also trade on Bitcoin.
lol, emphasis mine.
Last edited:
Norway
Well-Known Member
- Sep 29, 2015
- 2,424
- 6,410
My favorite quote from Craig's uncle Donald:
Q. How long have you been married?
A. 58 years.
Q. Congratulations. That is amazing.
A. Two life sentences.
Full document:
Q. How long have you been married?
A. 58 years.
Q. Congratulations. That is amazing.
A. Two life sentences.
Full document:
i had an Uncle Donald once. was one of the nicest and most honest guys. sigh.
“We want to make sure that technology moves forward, but on the other hand, we want to make sure that cryptocurrencies aren't used for the equivalent of old Swiss secret number bank accounts,” Mnuchin said in February.
www.washingtonexaminer.com
isn't this what Barry said?
Bolton: Trump told Treasury secretary to ‘go after’ Bitcoin - Washington Examiner
President Trump told Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to clamp down on the trading and selling of the internet currency Bitcoin, according to John Bolton's book about his time in the Trump administration. "Don't be a trade negotiator," Trump allegedly said, as was written in The Room Where It...
www.washingtonexaminer.com
isn't this what Barry said?
Although BSV has increased the block size I don't think it is over-engineering like other chains.
The fact that the protocol allows for large blocks doesn't mean the node software or miner hardware can handle it.
We know that miners can handle 300MB blocks but we don't know if they can more and we don't know how they would handle multiple such blocks in close succession.
This seems to be the position of multiple people.
From my point of view BSV has already shown that it is better suited to achieve BU's goals.
All those fancy new OP_Codes in BCH are not needed for P2P electronic cash.
What P2P electronic cash needs is scale and cheap fees.
BSV has shown to be better than BCH in both of these propoerties.
79b79aa8
Well-Known Member
- Sep 22, 2015
- 1,031
- 3,440
nope. he asked "should i be worried about bitcoin?". the answer he got was no, and he didn't. the focus shifted into preserving the US's technological lead. mnuchin gets that much too, despite his boss's instincts.isn't this what Barry said?
79b79aa8
Well-Known Member
- Sep 22, 2015
- 1,031
- 3,440
https://read.cash/@micropresident/why-automatic-replay-protection-exists-b41608d2
enjoy a future of perpetual protocol wrangling on BCH -- except of course if there is "consensus".
institutional adoption, here we come!
enjoy a future of perpetual protocol wrangling on BCH -- except of course if there is "consensus".
institutional adoption, here we come!
79b79aa8
Well-Known Member
- Sep 22, 2015
- 1,031
- 3,440
yes that's another relic of the BTC past. the only feasible activity on BTC at present is exchange trading. BCH is also heading in that direction, although for different reasons (it's not the high fees, but the lack of applications. BCH devs do protocol development, forever.)
oh, and by the way, the BCH developer tax is coming back --guaranteed. but first it will poison the conversation until the november "upgrade".
Christoph Bergmann
Active Member
Yes, software needs to be improved to handle 300mb blocks. Both node software to be backend of payment services and / or explorers, as well as wallets and so on.
However... What demand do we have? Is there any indicator that there will be such a massive demand? I don't see it. If there will ever be a demand for gigabytes of blockchain space, dozens of chains compete about it (eg bch, tron, eos, xrp, stellar, iota, dash, omg...).
And all of them funnel investment, by token, by community, by vcs, to create the machine that will satisfy a demand we don't even know it exists. Or, if we know anything, that it is strongly tight to network effects and doesn't like to leave btc or eth even despite massive scaling problems.
What I meant to say is the most chains change the protocol and add features that will help with those future "Gigameg" blocks.
BSV did not change the protocol.
It "only" removed a hard coded limit but the optimization will be done when needed and when there is a real demand that will force the miners to either improve or get outperformed by others.
BU has lost much of its power and is kept out of the mud fight for now even though BU never hat the automatic reply protection.
BSV did not change the protocol.
It "only" removed a hard coded limit but the optimization will be done when needed and when there is a real demand that will force the miners to either improve or get outperformed by others.
Post automatically merged:
That is very much possible and could explain why the Bitcoin Cash Node team who spearheaded the "no tax" movement is currently the enemy number one.
BU has lost much of its power and is kept out of the mud fight for now even though BU never hat the automatic reply protection.
79b79aa8
Well-Known Member
- Sep 22, 2015
- 1,031
- 3,440
elected BU officers do not lead in any direction. mostly they are silent.
for several members including the officers, the emotional blow of the BCH/BSV fork appears to have been too much to handle, and they withdrew.
some came to erroneous technical conclusions and never recognized it. some handled the matter poorly and never recognized it either.
a few people stick around BU hoping to get funding. they are very suspicious of members who don't, who are interested in bitcoin rather than BCH and can clearly see that BSV is miles ahead. they assume we are dishonest and not worth their time to listen to. if they actually bother to parse our arguments, they are surprised to recognize they are not scandalously irrational or self-serving. but it is not sufficient to open their minds.
BU/BCH optimists appear to believe that once the devs fix double spending, block propagation, and get to work on lifting the blocksize, then consumers will be attracted to using BCH as cash. in the meantime, they appear to expect BTC will stall, BSV implode, ABC disappear, and every other blockchain fold. imagining new use cases and adoption models, building functionality and applications, realizing that blockchain ecosystem development is not protocol development, are not part of the picture.
The BU officers are not leaders per se. When they have good insights and people follow they become leaders, they are officers because of their past efforts and their willingness to serve.
In general, not directed at BU, elected officials are middle management.
BU was once a leader in the bitcoin space, I'd argue it was because we were open to discussion, respectful, transparent and rational, we wanted a protocol-free of political manipulation. Shammah Chancellor, in the reference above, has admitted to exactly that, the ultimate shenanigans, cooperating with special interests, to change the protocol to benefit special interests, the epitome of collusion the BU members were trying to mitigate so the bitcoin could serve everyone equally.
It's so ironic, such changes to BCH are central planed "socialism" for the "benefit of the community". Where BSV is accused of centralized planing because there was a defiant leader who refused to cooperate, who by the way, has more or less kept to his promise not to change the protocol.
In general, not directed at BU, elected officials are middle management.
BU was once a leader in the bitcoin space, I'd argue it was because we were open to discussion, respectful, transparent and rational, we wanted a protocol-free of political manipulation. Shammah Chancellor, in the reference above, has admitted to exactly that, the ultimate shenanigans, cooperating with special interests, to change the protocol to benefit special interests, the epitome of collusion the BU members were trying to mitigate so the bitcoin could serve everyone equally.
It's so ironic, such changes to BCH are central planed "socialism" for the "benefit of the community". Where BSV is accused of centralized planing because there was a defiant leader who refused to cooperate, who by the way, has more or less kept to his promise not to change the protocol.
Last edited:
bitsko
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 730
- 1,532
BU is about to piss away $120,000 on some bullshit
30k for an algea colored infinity logo.
for $5 i can make ya'll a nobody gives a shit logo
'ABC is already preparing for avalanche in the code'
'lets throw 96 grand at an incompatible preconsensus method'
Post automatically merged:
30k for an algea colored infinity logo.
for $5 i can make ya'll a nobody gives a shit logo
Post automatically merged:
'ABC is already preparing for avalanche in the code'
'lets throw 96 grand at an incompatible preconsensus method'
Last edited: