Topic: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell - page 33. (Read 46265 times)
Greg has openly called for full blocks and a fee market (which we have right now).
If blocks are empty, then when the reward drops to zero how will miners get paid?
If LN siphons off the majority of network fees, how will miners get paid?
There will still be transactions done on the Blockchain, just like Xapo are doing this with off-chain transactions. Nothing is stopping anyone from
running their own nodes, but this is not what the miners want. They want to buy a bunch of hardware that needs very little effort and then they
want to mine with the maximum reward. Their whole business model is geared for "hardware" mining and not "software" mining.
edit
to counter the fail of calling it Fud/conspiracy from trainwreck
I didn't call it a conspiracy, I am asking you if you are claiming there is a conspiracy by blockstream that we should fear which signifies uncertainty for the future of bitcoin which implies we should doubt the current direction it is going?to counter the fail of calling it Fud/conspiracy from trainwreck
Also, assuming you are not a fan of Adam Back, I should point out he was an original cypher punk (as I understand), and quoted in Satoshi's whitepaper, seemingly obviously trusted and respected by Satoshi.
So your argument is that blockstream will have the biggest hub. Can you tell us why you think so ?
What does blockstream have that nobody else running a hub has ?
What does blockstream have that nobody else running a hub has ?
the DNS seed that controls the routing.... obviously
the DNS seed is used for jumpstarting bitcoin nodes not for lightning
thats a bitcoin DNS seed
LN has its own DNS seed..
remember rusty russel of LN is a blockstream employee
remember Cdecker is LN is a blockstream employee - https://github.com/cdecker/lseed
Quote
A DNS seed for the Lightning Network
edit
to counter the fail of calling it Fud/conspiracy from trainwreck
Ok. How can this be abused ?
This is for convenience just like the bitcoin DNS seed. Every lightning node operator
will make sure its well connected to the rest of the network so this is a minor nuisance even if abused.
typical Hillary voter
OMG i remember you, you are the dumb guy who was making youtube videos bashing Bitcoin back in 2014 hahahahahahhahahahaha you now turned yourself into a big block cheerleader, so pathetic, what the hell happened to you man?
You were wrong then and you are obviously wrong now sucker!
thats a bitcoin DNS seed
LN has its own DNS seed.. remember rusty russel of LN is a blockstream employee
So your argument is that blockstream will have the biggest hub. Can you tell us why you think so ?
What does blockstream have that nobody else running a hub has ?
What does blockstream have that nobody else running a hub has ?
the DNS seed that controls the routing.... obviously
the DNS seed is used for jumpstarting bitcoin nodes not for lightning
thats a bitcoin DNS seed
LN has its own DNS seed..
remember rusty russel of LN is a blockstream employee
remember Cdecker is LN is a blockstream employee - https://github.com/cdecker/lseed
Quote
A DNS seed for the Lightning Network
edit
to counter the fail of calling it Fud/conspiracy from trainwreck
So your argument is that blockstream will have the biggest hub. Can you tell us why you think so ?
What does blockstream have that nobody else running a hub has ?
What does blockstream have that nobody else running a hub has ?
the DNS seed that controls the routing.... obviously
the DNS seed is used for jumpstarting bitcoin nodes not for lightning
So your argument is that blockstream will have the biggest hub. Can you tell us why you think so ?
What does blockstream have that nobody else running a hub has ?
What does blockstream have that nobody else running a hub has ?
the DNS seed that controls the routing.... obviously
To be entirely fair, it was core supporters who artificially crashed the market by selling 20k btc on bitfinex and gdax after the first xt block was mined. So if anything, the selloff was core supporters trying to manipulate the price...
Care to back that up with some proof ?
OP is an uneducated baboon, similar to jonald_fyookball. These people have become so desperate that they've started spamming the board with threads and complaints.
Let me show you a nice picture:
Don't give me that "correlation != causation" crap, as the BTU folk has been often associating a price rise with an increase of BTU signalling (prior to this).
To be entirely fair, it was core supporters who artificially crashed the market by selling 20k btc on bitfinex and gdax after the first xt block was mined. So if anything, the selloff was core supporters trying to manipulate the price... Let me show you a nice picture:
Don't give me that "correlation != causation" crap, as the BTU folk has been often associating a price rise with an increase of BTU signalling (prior to this).
Bob Cindy
^ ^
v v
alice < > blockstream/DCG < > Felicia
^ ^
v v
Dave Eddie
So your argument is that blockstream will have the biggest hub. Can you tell us why you think so ?
What does blockstream have that nobody else running a hub has ?
I totally agree. Brilliant.
we all expect to be fair and decentralized. what it is right now isn't. its amazing that it still got some value even when its not decentralized. people hang its hope to btc. and we also hang out hope to those who wants this experiment fair and decentralized. we can see its broken as we progress so lets lets hard pork it. oink oink!
It's not actually amazing if you think about it from a perspective of macro-economic theory. It actually makes sense why bitcoin is valuable which has nothing at all to do with the transaction capacity.Can't you all comprehend what is written at the links I provided
No one is going to read or address a bunch of rambling, at least compress your argument. And I traversed it, its not founded, do you claim your argument is scientifically founded, because I don't think you do.
we all expect to be fair and decentralized. what it is right now isn't. its amazing that it still got some value even when its not decentralized. people hang its hope to btc. and we also hang out hope to those who wants this experiment fair and decentralized. we can see its broken as we progress so lets lets hard pork it. oink oink!
The protocol should be neutral to a 2nd layer, and I expect competition between several second layer networks over fees.
Even better, low end users should be able to participate by running LN nodes, getting a cut of the fees.
That's what I expect from this, and that's why I support SegWit
Even better, low end users should be able to participate by running LN nodes, getting a cut of the fees.
That's what I expect from this, and that's why I support SegWit
if your only supporting core with hopes of making an income running a LN node hoping to be a 'payment hopper'. i have to wake you up
even if it costs 1sat(its more and fixed so forget hopper competition) to make a payment and you core'bob' want a fee for instance
Alice< >'bob'< >Cindy< >Dave< >Eddie
if alice wants to pay Eddie.. alice needs to pay
'bob' 1sat,
Cindy 1 sat
Dave 1 sat
to get to Eddie.. costing alice 3sat(it will be more, but for simple demo im just saying 1sat each)
if alice wants to pay Dave.. alice needs to pay
'bob' 1sat,
Cindy 1 sat
to get to Dave costing alice 2sat(it will be more, but for simple demo im just saying 1sat each)
this will not happen.. instead..
Bob Cindy
^ ^
v v
alice < > blockstream/DCG < > Felicia
^ ^
v v
Dave Eddie
now alice can pay anyone for just 1 sat.. and the other people get nothing... yep thats right core'bob' you get nothing.
blockstream get the 1sat's per payment.
even funnier part is LN has fixed the fee at % of amount.(which actually limits how many transactions you can make offchain)
EG if 1%= 100 payments and literally your money is gone in mostly fee's
Segwit offers the fees relief every BU supporter is asking for.
It doesn't, stop lying, it was clearly explained by franky1 why it doesn't.
Core assumes attackers are going to spam LN instead of the main chain, are you telling me you actually believe in that?
Nonsense.
The whales want the fees to be too high on the main chain for you peons to use and they have their reason for that which you wouldn't understand, so they don't even bother to tell you.
But the fact is, you will not have any choice but to follow the decision of the whales.
So just keep crying in your milk, or perhaps consider another possible future option.
If you want to gain insight, read the following thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18339801
That alone tells me Core is either flat out lying or has absolutely no clue what they're doing.
The whales know what they are doing and why.
Like I said don't treat your users like they are idiots.
Idiots can't be treated as anything other than what they are. Again the above linked thread is available for those who want to learn.
Blockstream's hostile takeover attempt of Bitcoin is very much like a color revolution, the tactics used so far have been very eerily similar to what the CIA does when they target a country or a government for overthrow and replacement by a puppet dictatorship who will bow to US interests.
Except Bitcoin is totally different. And many people involved with bitcoin, aren't stupid. They see easily through this insanity.
Except Bitcoin is totally different. And many people involved with bitcoin, aren't stupid. They see easily through this insanity.
Repeating what I wrote upthread (but which you ignored apparently), you are stupid.
Until you take the time to understand what is really going on, then you will remain willfully stupid.
I am laughing watch you guys fighting each other and personalizing the issue, when in fact the fate of this was decided years ago before Core even exist.
You guys are fighting over nothing.
Do you simply refuse to click the links I provided and understand this issue properly.
Or do you prefer to fight over irrelevant matters which have no bearing whatsoever to the issue at hand.
Come on guys, you are demonstrating how stupid and closed-minded you are. The Bitcoin whales are laughing at you.
Can't you all comprehend what is written at the links I provided
...LN...
Let them do it fairly and with free market dynamics, not unfair advantage of influence over
the core repo and intentionally stunting growth on the first layer, which is exactly what they've been doing.
Let them do it fairly and with free market dynamics, not unfair advantage of influence over
the core repo and intentionally stunting growth on the first layer, which is exactly what they've been doing.
The protocol should be neutral to a 2nd layer, and I expect competition between several second layer networks over fees.
Even better, low end users should be able to participate by running LN nodes, getting a cut of the fees.
That's what I expect from this, and that's why I support SegWit
The insults are well deserved. This debate has been going on for 2 Years. Now Gmax and pals are threatening to destroy bitcoin and hand over the network effect to Ethereum. They even threaten a POW change if they can't get what they want, this is the equivalent to a child throwing a temper tantrum because their mommy didn't buy them the candy they wanted.
Someone has to call Core out on their BS, and for being a bunch of babies with no leadership skills whatsoever.
Emotions are running high, and it's a good thing, because it will accelerate the process towards a rightful conclusion to this conflict.
Core is not supposed to have leadership, its supposed to be decentralized and you are clearly an enemy versus bitcoin for asserting it should have a leader and leadership.
Emotions running high is not a good thing, nor is accelerating the process, that is anti-reason and instable (ie not secure to suggest).
Do you have a scientifically founded argument or not?
gmaxwell and his team avoided community consensus by going soft.. pools didnt ask to be the only vote.. it was thrust upon them.
gmaxwell and his team scream drama cries that splitting is bad, purely to play the fake victim card
gmaxwell says that it can cause issues blah blah blah. trying to play the victim card. but its gmaxwell and his team with all the deadlines. PoW change nuclear options. and the overrule activation and split code even if there is no consensus
gmaxwell loves his zcash, monero and $$$ fiat salary
oh..
this little nugget
gmaxwell and his team scream drama cries that splitting is bad, purely to play the fake victim card
gmaxwell says that it can cause issues blah blah blah. trying to play the victim card. but its gmaxwell and his team with all the deadlines. PoW change nuclear options. and the overrule activation and split code even if there is no consensus
gmaxwell loves his zcash, monero and $$$ fiat salary
oh..
this little nugget
What you are describing is what I and others call a bilateral hardfork-- where both sides reject the other.
I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral ... Sadly, the proposals authors were aggressively against this.
The ethereum hardfork was bilateral, probably the only thing they did right--
I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral ... Sadly, the proposals authors were aggressively against this.
The ethereum hardfork was bilateral, probably the only thing they did right--
Jump to: