Topic: BLOCKSTREAM Appreciation Thread - page 5. (Read 6265 times)

That is my main concern. Is Blockstream the main force behind the indecision to increase the block size?

A heartfelt thanks to the investors in Blockstream™, led by Reid Hoffman, Khosla Ventures and Real Ventures, with investments from Nicolas Berggruen, Crypto Currency Partners, Future\Perfect Ventures, Danny Hillis, Eric Schmidt’s Innovation Endeavors, Max Levchin, Mosaic Ventures, Ray Ozzie, Ribbit Capital, Jerry Yang’s AME Cloud Ventures and several others. Your goals are our goals.

Recognizing our self-serving biases is an important first-step toward cognitive humility. The fact is humans tend to be better at remembering and integrating information consistent with our beliefs. Conflict of interest is an extention of this that anyone involved in something as important as Bitcoin would certainly be mindful of; no self-respecting cypherpunk would seek to profit from their position at the expense of the project.

That's why the Blockstream^TM suite of products will all be open source. For the community.

I applaud your honesty, even though I disagree with you.  You are at least clear and transparent with your position.  That is NOT the case with the majority of the Blockstream Players. 

But I will address the flaw in your argument, with the entire Blockstream argument for that matter..... you act as if raising the block limit kills the possibility of creating sidechains to handle much of the smaller "day to day account volume". 

The problem is that raising the block size doesn't kill your possibility, but not raising kills many many other possibilities, and only leaves your solution.  That really stinks of a Fiat Style position.  We have Two (2) Fiat Threats to Bitcoin....

1) the existing Fiat Bankers that would love nothing better than to control and stifle anonymity and freedom to build out the bitcoin network into many many directions.

AND

2) the New Fiat BLockstream that would love nothing better than to control and stifle anonymity and freedom to build out the bitcoin network into many many directions.

That is the irony of the Blockstream Sales Pitch..... they desire to be what they tell everyone to fear.

 

Cheers!!!!!!!

Blockstream^TM is taking a conservative approach. SegWit soft fork, see how that goes. Then Lightning Network and some sidechains and we'll be good to go. Isn't it? I don't "code" or have any particular "insights". But I can appreciate that.

I mean, 2mb/4mb/8mb, what difference does it make; it will never be enough for the sloppy mob of Backpagers pounding at the doors. We have serious business to conduct. Amirite?

I've got news for you.... you've gotten all you are going to get.  The Core Dev Team is a failed sham.  They've given you their solution.... Lightening Network/Liquid/Blockstream.  Period.  Under no circumstances will there be any meaningful discussion that includes raising the block size, making it intelligently scalable based on growth.  This way they protect what is important to them.... THEIR CONTROL OVER THEIR ECONOMIC BUSINESS MODEL.

Keyword above is "business".  They have a HUGE conflict of interest in that they are making decisions based on what is good for their business model. 

The biggest SCAM in the entire Bitcoin System is Blockstreams whole "Us vs the Fiat System" headfake.   Blockstream is positioning itself to be the "New Fiat Central Authority".   Seriously, if Bitcoin were to eventually grow to its potential and become the global currency - do you really want this group of special interest frauds to have total control?

I can't believe I am going to say this, It makes me want to VOMIT that I am getting ready to suggest that everyone read Mike Hearn's November letter on this subject.  As much as I hate the current XT release, and think Mike is totally untrustworthy as well, he has totally nailed it in this letter in regards to Blockstream and Core Dev.

https://medium.com/block-chain/on-block-sizes-e047bc9f830#.raipo96xw  <

Everybody that really doesn't know anything about this should read it.  Because it is the truth.  And this is NOT my support for current XT - but I will say it again, if the Core Dev can't eliminate the biased, conflicted interest comitters - then XT or a Fedcoin may very well surface to effectively kill the current Bitcoin Core.  Leadership is needed fast.