Topic: Bitcoin’s Segregated Witness: More Than Just Malleability Fixes and Scaling (Read 2201 times)

My ass is jealous of the amount of shit that just came out of your mouth.

I'm not blaming Asian buyers for anything. I love them for it. They're buying and holding fast and massively driving the price up. What's not to love?

I'm not pro-anything. As I said before, I don't care how the idiots in power change Bitcoin. Soft fork it, hard fork it, SegWit the shit out of it, roll it up in a blunt wrapper and smoke it, I just don't want anything done until all the crazy buying action stops and it peaks. Why spook the crayzians while they're buying like mad. Leave them alone.

And don't forget the tragedy of the commons:


Removing coin age priority at this stage will push fees even higher, by causing long term coin holders to compete with the spammers. Perhaps it could be removed in the future in the name of fungibility, but I don't consider it a good idea with the current capacity issues.

I'll keep that in mind. I've never done a moderated thread as I do have an antipathy towards censorship, but it may be time to learn. (Even if I were to do so, I'd only censor rude/vulgar posts and invite them to try again, not ones I disagree with.)

As it stands, I think most people just check the OP and link if there is one, and don't wade into all the comments most of the time. But if they do, I would be stunned if the average reader just wandering into this debate found themselves persuaded by the over-the-top, often rude and vulgar (not all, but a few), and kooky conspiracy-minded posting of the anti-SW crowd.

The average person, for example, is going to note that most Bitcoin organizations and developers favor Segwit. If it's such a terrible idea as the more obnoxious ranters say yelling specious claims about technical risks and so forth, then why are so many people supporting it? Why do we keep hearing about BU's code failing but not SW crashing and burning? There is a huge discordance between anti-SW rhetoric and reality, and they aren't making themselves persuasive with their wild rhetoric. (Insofar as a couple of them are more restrained and trying to be more measured in their responses, I thank them for that. But they are not representative.)

All in all, I thank them for bumping the thread, and driving people away from their viewpoint. It helps people understand the benefits and need for Segwit, and why we likely need to push through a UASF despite the headaches. I'd remind everyone that the clock is ticking, and every day BitMain mines with covert ASICBOOST the more mining become centralized under their domination. (Please don't insult my intelligence by saying that just because they admitted they spent the time and effort to design ASICBOOST into their chips doesn't mean they are using it.)

factual improvements?
lol
which are where..
oh im guessing "if" 100% move funds to segwit keys and the utopian unicorn stops native spammers.
i say utopian unicorn, because segwit does not stop native spammers. it actually helps native spammers

EG
v0.12 - 4k txsigoplimit 20k blocksigoplimit (under 10 second validation time)
v0.14 - 16k txsigoplimit 80k blocksigoplimit (under 8 minute validation time)
plus other new spam attacks that even carlton banks revealed.

lauda.. you loved having the "quadratics is bad" arguments for a whole year... even you should understand quadratics worse with segwit code limits if used by native keypair users.
wake up, spammers wont use segwit keypairs

1. look at the unconfirmd spam
https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-size?timespan=1year
june/july spike -hmm i wonder which team needed something to be implemented so needed to create drama that month.. oh blockstream(core) CSV
october -> spikes -hmm i wonder which team needed something to be implemented so needed to create drama that month.. oh blockstream(core) segwit

2. look at the code rules that allowed fee increases
hmm i wonder which team removed the fee priority - oh yea blockstream(core)
hmm i wonder which team removed reactive pricing when demand was low to replace it with average fee to keep prices up - oh yea blockstream(core)
hmm i wonder which teams says "just pay more" is best economics. rather then make code rules that actually work - oh yea blockstream(core)

3. dont blame "asians" when its the coders decisions at play

From "Do you support Segwit" https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18541674


All I ask is for people to clear up any misunderstandings or misinformation I have been fooled into.

Lauda, you should know one of the reasons I started posting here, other than Greg's idiotic reply to DGulari, was that I noticed you were trolling nonstop at people who were clearly the voice of reason here.

Some select quotes:




So I took out my titanium fact hammer and started smashing every god damn shill I saw in the mouth for 2 weeks. I think things got a little better after that.

I see your mouth has begun to heal so it is itchy again.

Lauda, you're a dishonest clown as usual.  I never said one negative thing about segwit here. 
 

OP, you made a grave mistake by not self-moderating this thread. Anything that is even remotely positive about Segwit or Bitcoin Core, even when we are talking about *facts*, will get smashed by the group of hired goons. You can find them in all related threads, see: franky, jonald, Alex, kiklo. There are some that occasionally come and go, see: zimmah.

---

This thread is already flooded with such responses, even though the article mentions *some factual improvements*.

I am an active trader but not with cryptocurrency.
For me Bitcoin is a long term investment.  

I guess if you do not care about Bitcoin as a long term investment, your position makes sense.
I mistakenly assumed you did.

But you made the same mistake assuming others think like you, which is
why you didn't understand why we feel something should be done.

Sure, if investing long term means "a year or two" and not "beyond my lifetime". I really don't care how much Bitcoin is worth when I'm dead.

You're right, day trading, forex trading is too risky. I guess I do mean short term investing.

Both are equally likely.   
Also, neither of the examples are about trading, they're both about investing long term.     
   
Trading would be buying at $100, selling at $200 and buying back at $150, then selling at $300.   
Which would make a much bigger profit, but comes at much greater risk.

Exactly. the easiest solution is usually the best. And in this case, the easiest solution is to just increase the blocksize.   

As for other improvements, FlexTrans is better then SegWit in every possible way. But that's really a discussion for later. 

First we need to grow.   

At this rate we're just arbitrarily limiting the growth of bitcoin.

Of course, so we can all cash out at $1,700 and do it again.

Here's the deal with trading:

If you have $100,000 to spend and you buy a commodity worth $100,000 then you can buy one share. To double your money its value needs to go to $200,000 a share. To make 100x increase in your investment it needs to go to $10,000,000 a share.

If you have $100,000 to spend and you buy a commodity worth $2 then you can buy 50,000 shares. To double your money it needs to go to $4 a share. To make 100x increase in your investment it needs to go to $200 a share.

Which of the 100x scenarios do you think is more likely in your lifetime?


Here's my comment in the thread discussing that stupidity:

Why, so you can cash out at $1700?

I'm in it for much more than that...

Going back to your question
That's the only way we're going to get to here ==>

http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-price-could-be-500000-by-2030-first-snapchat-investor-says-2017-3

I've always cared about the same thing, the value of my wallet.

There's no proof that many people are spending Bitcoin. A large chunk of the daily transactions are small miners getting paid from the pools. Another large chunk are exchanges reconciling trader accounts. Can you show me this massive amount of individual users buying Frappuccinos because I've already given you a link that can show you daily transactions going back 5 years?

I never claimed that block size wasn't going up. I never claimed that increasing block size wasn't a good idea. I never claimed to care about changing Bitcoin to Segwit or BU. I don't care if you personally suck off Joseph Poon until the Lightning Network becomes a household word. I just want Bitcoin to stand pat until the crayzians finish driving the exchange rate through the roof.

You've never give much of a shit about anything have you? 

You're dancing around the issue -- whatever you think about Erik Vorhees and day traders and drug users is irrelevant.  The data (avg block size over time) speaks
for itself.

You are also incorrect that the person buying coffee isn't making you money.  The more people that want to bitcoin, the more demand it has.  That makes the price go up, genius.

If you want to be one of those "I thnk bitcoin should be gold 2.0 and I want Bitcoin to be a settlement layer" people, then just say so...but don't sit here and tell me blocks aren't full because
when you do that you just sound like a shill/idiot.

Wow, you really are a bit of a drama queen.

There has never been a bigger spammer than Erik Voorhees and his SatoshiDice spam and Bitcoin survived just fine. Businesses are dumping Bitcoin because no one spends Bitcoin. Drug addicts are the only ones that have ever seen much value in jumping through all the hoops to buy Bitcoin to spend it instead of just using your debit card or credit card. No one spends Bitcoin and day traders (currently crayzians) are trading on an exchange that handles the internal transactions quickly and only reconciles them on the blockchain when someone cashes out or buys in so who gives a crap about confirmation times. I don't give a shit about someone waiting to buy a cup of coffee because they're not currently making me any money.

Changing Bitcoin in the middle of a run up is just nuts. Wait until the price starts to crash and I cash out again then do whatever you want with it.

there's been increasing periods of congestion (high confirmation times and a huge mempool) which is easily exploited by spammers, transaction fees have skyrocketed, Bitcoin marketcap share has dropped from 95% to 66%... Businesses like Del and Fiverr are dropping Bitcoin... its getting worse and worse fundamentally.

Do you want to wait before the house completely burns down before calling the fire company?

You say you've been wathcing Bitcoin for 6 years but you seem really out of touch with the reality of the situation here.