Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
- Thread starter cypherdoc
- Start date
@cypherdoc
Sounds that being pissed off at core is becoming more and more multicultural...
Sounds that being pissed off at core is becoming more and more multicultural...
It's fascinating to watch how other cultures "process the FUD" slightly differently (well differently than I do) but come to the same conclusion. The author of that piece is saying here that it's easy to understand why the community wants a block size limit increase: bigger blocks = more users. But it's difficult to understand why Core doesn't: each time Core gives a different reason! He concludes that this must mean that Core is just fundamentally opposed to the block size limit increase (the reasons they give are secondary). I think he's exactly right!
Why Core oppose a hard fork
The only reason for block size expansion, the only one, the only one, the only one (say the important things three times), is that there isn’t capacity to increase the number of users. There are many reasons why Core oppose block expansion. There are many reasons why Core oppose block expansion. There are many reasons why Core oppose block expansion. Say the important things three times. Do you know why there are so many? That’s simple. Each time one is criticized, they can produce another reason, among which some are for opposing block expansion. Their words and actions are clear enough, their basic premise is opposition of block expansion. Their arguments all serve this end. At the moment, the latest argument is consensus. This was also the reason for a united post on behalf of the Chinese bitcoin community. Its author also wonders, if consensus is finally reached, then what reason will Core provide for refusing?
@Peter R
you should go back thru this thread for your defense:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=181168.msg1977971#msg1977971
aantonop:
"gmaxwell has previously posted several misattributed quotes and then failed to retract them or apologize. This somehow does not disqualify him from deciding who is a good press contact. Apparently journalistic practices are not his forte.
Treat any quotes he posts with extreme suspicion, especially if they are selective, short, out-of-context and attempting to slander - ie, his usual schtick.
He rationalizes his opinion as the only one that matters, somehow "neutral" opinion that we'd all accept if we weren't so dumb. Then he imposes it through his commit control and pretends to be the victim of... too much speech!
The only thing that mattered in this debate was the opinion of the 3-4 developers who did not want any process that actually resulted in anything but what they had already decided. They twisted, turned and rationalized, but in the end did exactly what they intended from the beginning: censorship of particular opinions by exclusion and decree.
All hail our new overlords. They're not just coders, they are press directors and OWN bitcoin. As they often say, if you don't like it... fork."
you should go back thru this thread for your defense:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=181168.msg1977971#msg1977971
aantonop:
"gmaxwell has previously posted several misattributed quotes and then failed to retract them or apologize. This somehow does not disqualify him from deciding who is a good press contact. Apparently journalistic practices are not his forte.
Treat any quotes he posts with extreme suspicion, especially if they are selective, short, out-of-context and attempting to slander - ie, his usual schtick.
He rationalizes his opinion as the only one that matters, somehow "neutral" opinion that we'd all accept if we weren't so dumb. Then he imposes it through his commit control and pretends to be the victim of... too much speech!
The only thing that mattered in this debate was the opinion of the 3-4 developers who did not want any process that actually resulted in anything but what they had already decided. They twisted, turned and rationalized, but in the end did exactly what they intended from the beginning: censorship of particular opinions by exclusion and decree.
All hail our new overlords. They're not just coders, they are press directors and OWN bitcoin. As they often say, if you don't like it... fork."
Yet I am absolutely certain that none of these (Adam, ptodd, gmax) is Satoshi.
They all lacked the key insights. Also, discussing the double-spending problem on a ML doesn't make you an expert or particularly wise - it was known for a long while to be the problem with e-cash.
Just posted on bitcoin-xt google group
edit: add reddit link https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/433kxy/2mb_fork_merged_bip101_reverted/
edit2: git commit https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/commit/7950df6b17fb8cd8b34153dae6aa47a2b63f40d3
@dgenr8 wise move, keep up the good work!Tom Harding said:
edit: add reddit link https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/433kxy/2mb_fork_merged_bip101_reverted/
edit2: git commit https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/commit/7950df6b17fb8cd8b34153dae6aa47a2b63f40d3
Last edited:
olivier[4:47 AM]Quick update: we expect to have the beta release out in the next 24-48 hours. It takes a bit longer for the first version because we want to make sure we have the right processes in place for future releases etc.
[doublepost=1453995459][/doublepost]gavinandresen [5:15 AM] Code changes needed for the 2mb bump are pretty simple
well, i'll be.
Adam has been trolling the Classic Slack channels furiously
[doublepost=1453996863][/doublepost]
gavinandresen [7:58 AM] Hot off the press: https://github.com/gavinandresen/bips/blob/92e1efd0493c1cbde47304c9711f13f413cc9099/bip-bump2mb.mediawiki
[doublepost=1453997197][/doublepost]nice, short, & sweet
[doublepost=1453996863][/doublepost]
gavinandresen [7:58 AM] Hot off the press: https://github.com/gavinandresen/bips/blob/92e1efd0493c1cbde47304c9711f13f413cc9099/bip-bump2mb.mediawiki
[doublepost=1453997197][/doublepost]nice, short, & sweet
Last edited:
Decision time is soon upon us:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4344do/the_greatest_vote_in_bitcoins_history_is_coming/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4344do/the_greatest_vote_in_bitcoins_history_is_coming/
Luke-jr threatening to "cease contributing to Core" if priority tx criteria will be dropped entirely
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7346#issuecomment-176260451
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7346#issuecomment-176260451
rather ineffectual and quite revealing at the same time.
_mr_e
Active Member
- Aug 28, 2015
- 159
- 266
Let's hope thats a promise and not a threat!
u/nullc realty didn't like the message in this video I posts as a response to what appeared to be ignorance.
Last edited:
I thought this guy was a Troll, Did I miss something?
It's the strangest thing. Apparently he's stopped trolling and gone legit now.
bitsko
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 730
- 1,532
I think stolfi is motivated by his sense of politics to a certain extent. Though I believe he is still a complete skeptic. He just happens to get paid to sit around and read about bitcoin, and has something in his heart for the users, or something in his head against the usurpers of the protocol.
WRT stolfi, the Brazilian Real is getting crushed (http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=BRL&to=USD&view=5Y) and this isn't the first time. Read about why its called the "Real" -- its a funny story about mass psychological manipulation applied to fiat currencies.
It I had to guess, he or the people setting his political agenda are having a change of heart. His primary argument was always that BTC is too risky, etc and then he gets to watch as BTC basically maintains value (or strengthens a bit) while the Real loses over half its value.
The knee-jerk reaction from people with a political agenda is that owning BTC, gold or other forms of hard money is anti-patriotic. But that idea is silly. Yes it may fractionally and unnoticably undermine the state's immediate ability to print money to cover deficits. Yet these savings could form an important reservoir that can and will be used to keep an economy working even when staggering under high inflation and other pressures (like the price of a prime export falling by 2/3rds).
And this reservoir of savings will be deployed from the bottom up when needed at no cost to the state (i.e. people use their savings during hard times). Ultimately, its just another form of diversification. Central banks already keep reserves of other currencies -- its an impossible argument to simultaneously say that that is a good idea but doing so at an individual level is a bad one.
It could be that TPTB in Brazil are realizing this as they see what is going on in the other south american countries.
It I had to guess, he or the people setting his political agenda are having a change of heart. His primary argument was always that BTC is too risky, etc and then he gets to watch as BTC basically maintains value (or strengthens a bit) while the Real loses over half its value.
The knee-jerk reaction from people with a political agenda is that owning BTC, gold or other forms of hard money is anti-patriotic. But that idea is silly. Yes it may fractionally and unnoticably undermine the state's immediate ability to print money to cover deficits. Yet these savings could form an important reservoir that can and will be used to keep an economy working even when staggering under high inflation and other pressures (like the price of a prime export falling by 2/3rds).
And this reservoir of savings will be deployed from the bottom up when needed at no cost to the state (i.e. people use their savings during hard times). Ultimately, its just another form of diversification. Central banks already keep reserves of other currencies -- its an impossible argument to simultaneously say that that is a good idea but doing so at an individual level is a bad one.
It could be that TPTB in Brazil are realizing this as they see what is going on in the other south american countries.
The less options China has, the more Bitcoin will be looked at.
