Pages:
Author

Topic: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell - page 10. (Read 46265 times)

legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003


Can you explain how what I said displays ignorance? If you want to make an argument, I'd love to hear it. Just saying, "You're a dummy, what books have you read" in anticipation of just marginalizing whatever I say, is kind of pointless.
You didn't say anything of substance so what can I quote. 

I return to my original assertion which  you could EASILY refute.  You have never read a book on economics.  If so which ones?

Who cares but you? The fact you think that is important shows your ignorance to me. I had an economics professor who WROTE an economics book laugh at me in 2006 when I said gold would not only not go back to 300 but would go even higher.

In 2011 to even now, every economics major on earth was/is telling us how bitcoin was going to fall to zero. What good did those official "Economics" books do them? They missed out on the investing opportunity of a lifetime.

Want a good "economics" book that I've read" Try "Atlas Shrugged"
legendary
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000

I know there is fear among the big blockers about it becoming like Paypal 2.0, but what if the system is a level playing field and an open one? I am sure Blockstream does not have a monopoly in setting up a payment hub service.

They do not have a monopoly, and I don't have any reason to suspect there isn't a level playing field.  The main issue for me is the entire market getting a huge boost to solve a problem that is being intentionally created by artificially restricting the main blockchain.  This is what is meant when people talk about "turning bitcoin from p2p cash into a settlement network."

This is from Satoshi's whitepaper.

Abstract.
A  purely peer-to-peer   version   of   electronic   cash   would   allow   online payments   to   be   sent   directly   from   one   party   to   another   without   going   through   a
financial institution.


This is what most of us understood when we all got involved. This is what i want. The ability to send from a to b. No queue jumping. No crap about free market fee competition when they don't understand what free market is. No going through "financial institution" - 3rd party - centralisation. Certainly not settlement network.
sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 251


Can you explain how what I said displays ignorance? If you want to make an argument, I'd love to hear it. Just saying, "You're a dummy, what books have you read" in anticipation of just marginalizing whatever I say, is kind of pointless.
You didn't say anything of substance so what can I quote. 

I return to my original assertion which  you could EASILY refute.  You have never read a book on economics.  If so which ones?
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003
Quote
what you said suggests you don't.

Can you quote what part of what I said suggests I don't?
You want me to quote the whole post?  You claimed you know and read economics, what books!?

Can you explain how what I said displays ignorance? If you want to make an argument, I'd love to hear it. Just saying, "You're a dummy, what books have you read" in anticipation of just marginalizing whatever I say, is kind of pointless.
sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 251
Quote
what you said suggests you don't.

Can you quote what part of what I said suggests I don't?
You want me to quote the whole post?  You claimed you know and read economics, what books!?
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003
Quote
what you said suggests you don't.

Can you quote what part of what I said suggests I don't?
sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 251

Quite a few. Care to substantiate your ad hominem attack with something of merit? Or are you just slinging poo?
Examples?  Its not ad hominem I'm asking if you have any actual knowledge of economics because what you said suggests you don't.  So give us some examples of economic related books you have so I can speak to some of your knowledge and you might demonstrate the truth that it exists.
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003
Are you claiming to have ever read a book on economics, because your post here seems to show you have zero understanding economics, macro economics, central banking, or the existing banking system works?

Quite a few. Care to substantiate your ad hominem attack with something of merit? Or are you just slinging poo?
sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 251


The lot of them above are talking bollocks. The problem with computer geeks is that they are brilliant at computer programming but piss poor at understand economics. That is true of every geek i've met in my life.
Have you ever read a book on economics?
sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 251


Hey, not every geek! I got into Bitcoin in 2011 because I understood the economic principles. I still don't understand the specifics of the code, but understood from the outset why bitcoin would succeed against crap like say, the LETS system. Mostly due to the fact that I had been trying to establish private value backed currency for 4 years prior.

The problem is that as soon as Silk Road got popular and drew attention from the powers that be, a lot of money was pumped into hiring kids out of college that had tech skills but zero understanding of how banks are a scam and that how bitcoin was designed as a system to bring banks down to rubble. Mostly they had a couple decades of state-sponsored brainwashing and couldn't understand how money could exist outside the state and went to work trying to make it succeed at exactly opposite of what it was built to do.

I suspect a lot of these new coders are even from privileged families and are completely aware of the nonsense they are promoting. Some kid with blue hair goes straight from college to heading a 75 million dollar company? I call bullshit. Who are this kid's parents?
Are you claiming to have ever read a book on economics, because your post here seems to show you have zero understanding economics, macro economics, central banking, or the existing banking system works?
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003
The lot of them above are talking bollocks. The problem with computer geeks is that they are brilliant at computer programming but piss poor at understand economics. That is true of every geek i've met in my life.

Hey, not every geek! I got into Bitcoin in 2011 because I understood the economic principles. I still don't understand the specifics of the code, but understood from the outset why bitcoin would succeed against crap like say, the LETS system. Mostly due to the fact that I had been trying to establish private value backed currency for 4 years prior.

The problem is that as soon as Silk Road got popular and drew attention from the powers that be, a lot of money was pumped into hiring kids out of college that had tech skills but zero understanding of how banks are a scam and that how bitcoin was designed as a system to bring banks down to rubble. Mostly they had a couple decades of state-sponsored brainwashing and couldn't understand how money could exist outside the state and went to work trying to make it succeed at exactly opposite of what it was built to do.

I suspect a lot of these new coders are even from privileged families and are completely aware of the nonsense they are promoting. Some kid with blue hair goes straight from college to heading a 75 million dollar company? I call bullshit. Who are this kid's parents?
legendary
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
Just a reminder. SegWit is a transaction limit proposal, and if activated it will be much harder to increase transaction capacity on chain knowing that post SegWit increases comes with 4X the block weight. 


here are the economic policies being pushed by incumbent developers - they unanimously support limiting bitcoin transaction:

Quote from: Greg Maxwell
“There is a consistent fee backlog, which is the required criteria for stability.“

Quote from: Pieter Wuille
“we - as a community - should indeed let a fee market develop, and rather sooner than later”

Quote from: Mark Friedenbach
“Slow confirmation, high fees will be the norm in any safe outcome.”


Quote from: Luke-jr
“Reasonable block sizes currently range from ~550k to 1 MB"

Quote from: Jorge Timon
“…higher fees may be just what is needed…”


Quote from: Wladimir J. van der Laan
“A mounting fee pressure, resulting in a true fee market where transactions compete to get into blocks, results in urgency to develop decentralized off-chain solutions.”


The lot of them above are talking bollocks. The problem with computer geeks is that they are brilliant at computer programming but piss poor at understand economics. That is true of every geek i've met in my life.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 501


As for BU, is there nothing stopping people submitting a pull request, or opening issues? Same with core, classic, xt. They are all clubs if you like, that can decide to accept or reject your pull request, or may respond with different ideas to the issue that you opened.
I can't be anything clearer, you have to be a member of BU to make a proposal, and so you have to be invited be the existing membership, which created and invited itself.  It cannot be any more a setup for a dictatorship who's sole intention is to usurp power from the decentralized structure.

This is why there is 100's of core contributor's which is not a single team but many teams and many individuals versus a very very small handful that is the clique that is BU.

So are you saying you have to be a member to create a BUIP? Is it not possible to propose a change to them for which they may create a BUIP for it? How significantly different is this to creating a BIP, which has to go through an approval process?
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale


As for BU, is there nothing stopping people submitting a pull request, or opening issues? Same with core, classic, xt. They are all clubs if you like, that can decide to accept or reject your pull request, or may respond with different ideas to the issue that you opened.
I can't be anything clearer, you have to be a member of BU to make a proposal, and so you have to be invited be the existing membership, which created and invited itself.  It cannot be any more a setup for a dictatorship who's sole intention is to usurp power from the decentralized structure.

This is why there is 100's of core contributor's which is not a single team but many teams and many individuals versus a very very small handful that is the clique that is BU.

You are the ideal buddy.

What do you think, ideal code should look like for your ideal money solution?

Would you think it should have thousans of lines with thousands of params?

Or just minimal lines with minimal param set?

I suggest you should apply for BU membership!

sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 251


As for BU, is there nothing stopping people submitting a pull request, or opening issues? Same with core, classic, xt. They are all clubs if you like, that can decide to accept or reject your pull request, or may respond with different ideas to the issue that you opened.
I can't be anything clearer, you have to be a member of BU to make a proposal, and so you have to be invited be the existing membership, which created and invited itself.  It cannot be any more a setup for a dictatorship who's sole intention is to usurp power from the decentralized structure.

This is why there is 100's of core contributor's which is not a single team but many teams and many individuals versus a very very small handful that is the clique that is BU.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Ethically speaking, Blockstream/Core are just about the lowest you can go.  Adam Back and Greg Maxwell are poison and have to be eliminated despite their fancy PhD.  We can't have a centralized, for profit head of Bitcoin.  That is all Blockstream and AXA are trying to bring forth.  Time to get a few guys with technical competence and no paycheck from Adam Back to retake over Core.

I haven't seen such sustained blatant evilness in open source for years.

All the Blockstream tactics are straight out of the banking cartel's playbook.

sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 501
No but seriously, core is not a team, its an open source project anyone can contribute too and get involved with.  BU you have to be voted into the club.  Core has 100's of contributors and I can't do anything about BU having only a about a dozen.

You can't get kicked out of core or leave.  It's not a club you join like bu with membership rules.  

I understand now you just can't understand this concept of decentralization and open contribution.  I suppose now no bu supporters do.

Thats why it can be cloned when the source code maintainers don't like your ideas and don't give you the key to the door. This happens with many open source projects. People have different ideas on how things can be implemented. Some solutions are superior, others are just different approaches.
The difference with bitcoin is that people only have to comply with a protocol. The code is not the protocol.

As for BU, is there nothing stopping people submitting a pull request, or opening issues? Same with core, classic, xt. They are all clubs if you like, that can decide to accept or reject your pull request, or may respond with different ideas to the issue that you opened.
sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 251
No but seriously, core is not a team, its an open source project anyone can contribute too and get involved with.  BU you have to be voted into the club.  Core has 100's of contributors and I can't do anything about BU having only a about a dozen.

You can't get kicked out of core or leave.  It's not a club you join like bu with membership rules. 

I understand now you just can't understand this concept of decentralization and open contribution.  I suppose now no bu supporters do.
legendary
Activity: 4410
Merit: 4766
We need a new dev team that would take a name Bitcoin-Core
As it stands anyone can contribute to Core, because core is NOT single dev team, but a composite of many different individuals and sub teams.  

??anyone can contribute ??lol
what a laugh

anyone can put in a spell check edit (pull request) of a document and if seen as someone the maintainer likes, it gets added.
but as for trying to actually change to dynamics with core code of the actual code rules.. forget it

many have tried
and guess who is usually the main names that Nack (not acknowledge)

You are directly and perfectly calling for a coup of the decentralization core and asking it to be replaced with single entity. Core is comprised of 100's of contributors and more and more as time goes by.
i feel hyena is more so asking to get rid of the blockstream puppetmasters. to actually have core become unbiased

BU is comprised of a dozen or so devs that don't understand decentralization and open source.

if core was really "independent". then technically they would not be dependant on core and could help out with other implementations with out any repercussions or threats of being REKT by leaving core..

yet the history shows if you leave core your instantly REKT.

just look what your own words are saying .. core are a group of X but BU are Y.. if core are independent then why be so bold as to try tarnishing anything not core why not just say BU needs more devs and core devs are free to help out anyone or any brand with no arrogant insulting childish 'eww your leaving the cool kids and playing with the the small kids' name calling
sr. member
Activity: 532
Merit: 251
We need a new dev team that would take a name Bitcoin-Core
As it stands anyone can contribute to Core, because core is NOT single dev team, but a composite of many different individuals and sub teams.  You are directly and perfectly calling for a coup of the decentralization core and asking it to be replaced with single entity. Core is comprised of 100's of contributors and more and more as time goes by.  BU is comprised of a dozen or so devs that don't understand decentralization and open source.
Pages:
Jump to: