Topic: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell - page 38. (Read 46265 times)

THE MAJORITY is with you 21 million %.

yea 1m = 1 minute = 1 month = 1 millennium ... choose what you like


Or maybe BU is just response to NO REACTION to pure facts that BTC sucked at some point and lost currency attributes with fees like 1$ in march.

you are the centralist!!

how about just add a few lines of code to be dynamic with segwit.
get your own desires of being god/mommy removed.. and bring yourself down to being on a level of PEER. not the TIER network you want

P.s dont reply commenting about your own mommy complex..
only reply about:

GMAXWLL: if core want to resolve things.. there are 2 options

1. PROVE how backward compatible things are by getting their partner BTCC to make a segwit block with a segwit confirmed tx in it.. worse case rejected in 3 seconds.. best case nothing bad. and it instills confidence.
2. make it dynamic segwit. that way when people realise segwit activation day solved nothing(due to needing users needing to do other things beyond segwit activation).. atleast people are then able to move on with dynamics rather than waiting another 2 years for core to make more excuses

Would you please stop obsessing over me?  It's creepy.

I am not your mommy.

You do not get to determine how I spend my time, you do not get to restrict what I say or believe.  I don't force anyone to do anything. You will you make me cow down and obey you through threatening me by lying to the public to try to raise a mob of idiots against me, and even if you do manage to get me killed you will not stop bitcoin, you will not convert it to the centralized coin you seem to so desperately want.

So give it a break.

lets keep in mind:

- Pools are not miners so its more than a couple guys.
- in Bitcoin, miners get to vote, not nodes.   
- Even though Core has 60% hashrate, segwit has far less, and some BU supporters like segwit. 

But most importantly, if segwit is not gaining consensus, the responsible thing for Greg Maxwell to do would be to compromise and allow a modest (2mb) increase
to the blocksize.  He knows if he announced support for a 2mb HF, it would get consensus quickly.  He simply does not want to.

 

Agree with you,it is all done against segwit,in decentralisation users decide not few fat guys,finally few fat guy can destroy everything together with themself,lets fire Rome


@Kimi80 ordinary people like you are telling truth,that what we have now is fight for power,domination,it is totally against Satoshi vision p2p money

I`m newbie in many things, can you please explain to me what is the difference between real and fake bitcoins? How can we notice the difference?
I understand that some dev`s have different opinion on how should bitcoin be upgraded, many things are complicated for me to understand, can someone clear up things for me?
Whom to trust, I noticed some names, and many people argue what is right, and everyone tell some other story. I`m ordinary man, and I think there is many people here just like I`m, how can we know who tells the truth and really wish good for bitcoin, and who is looking for fast profit?

Miners (a couple guys with a ton of hashrate) are blocking segwit (a factual capacity increase) while going against 80%+ of node support. This doesn't make sense.

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).

You are going to end up with $0 if you acquire fake BTU tokens instead of real Bitcoins.

It isn't my opinion. Rather it is the economics and technological facts. You can choose to pursue reality or delusion, but only reality is what you will get.

I can appreciate your sentiment... First of all, what we need right now as a community is unity.

Greg Maxwell is the author of the core scaling roadmap and also the
Blockstream CTO, and he is at the heart of this debate.  

Greg has openly called for full blocks and a fee market (which we have
right now).  

But there is a growing number of users and miners that do not
think his roadmap is a good one.
 
This is why 40% hashpower is signaling for Bitcoin Unlimited (despite the inferior code and team).
We have to scale, we have to scale soon, and this is becoming more apparent with every passing day.
 
Bitcoin's value comes at least in part from its utility for fast reliable transactions and low fees -- a utility
that is being undermined by the blocksize.

Because of this undermining, altcoins are now being used for
actual money transfer and this is contributing to the BTC cryptocap share being at an all time low.

The extreme small blockers that want Bitcoin to be a digital gold
without great utility make even less sense than Blockstream.
There will be no great value to Bitcoin without widespread use.
(Nor will there likely be a security model that is even viable for
that scenario)
 
Many of the supporters of core's roadmap seem to be most concerned with
centralization via node cost increases.  They need to understand that
those cost increases are inevitable -- the best we can do is mitigate
them but even LN will require much bigger blocks... and by crippling
on chain scaling now, we are seriously eroding the Bitcoin first mover
advantage, adoption and network effect.  For example,  Fiverr
no longer accepts Bitcoin.  How sad.

These core supporters also should understand that the more we try
to have small blocks and a small main chain, the more we'll have to
rely on third parties, which is just as dangerous a form of centralization
(if not more dangerous) than expensive-to-run nodes.  

If you want Bitcoin to be BIG, there are going to have to be a lot
bigger blocks and a lot bigger nodes, even with Segwit, even with LN.

Blockstream wants to build a 2nd layer?  That's fine, that's great.  

BUT...

Please...

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.

says falling shows 1 minute chart 

Chart is showing core market value of CORE innovation/progress vs altcoins.
You can allso see that as CORE progress VS alt-coins IMO.
This chart is falling hard and HF can makes new lows.
I think that market is usually give a fair price of items:

You guys ruined it all.  Bitcoin is now fucked and getting more fucked everyday.  I think the end in near.