Pages:
Author

Topic: Gavin Andresen Proposes Bitcoin Hard Fork to Address Network Scalability - page 6. (Read 18399 times)

legendary
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1660
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
Actually... M is a 1,000 and MM is a 1,000 x 1,000, or 1,000,000. When speaking of financials($) that is one of the most correct ways of doing it that is universally understood in the plant of Earth. It appears in all popular formats including banking statements, IPO releases from companies, stock indexes, most financial documents, ETC....

"M" should be be used with numbers that are related with intangible and conceptual subjects like money, time, and counting. The "k" is related to the "M"(always a lower-case k) which is the abbreviation for kilo-. 'k' abbreviation should be used with things that are tangible and physical, like distance and weight.

Confusion comes from a former symbol abbreviation of an "M" with an overstrike or overbar. The overbar means that the mille unit (1,000) is multiplied again by 1,000 because MM = M * M in math. A number followed by an M with an overstrike then means that the preceding number is multiplied by 1,000,000.

Since it is very difficult to create this symbol and most people do not know keyboard shortcuts or how to make it, it is hardly ever seen and is improperly abbreviated as a single "M" instead of the proper "MM".
This grammar rule is not very well known outside the financial world and will often be used incorrectly and the slang of "k" for thousand is often used even by venerated publications such as the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.  

So I notice your message under your name says you are trolling, but you actually thought that you were right so you were not trolling in this scenario, just uninformed.


orly?

I can point to any number of formally adopted international standards adopted by accredited standards organizations which are unanimous on the SI system of prefixes. As a serious question, can you point to the same for your financial-based prefix system you describe above?
hero member
Activity: 759
Merit: 502
Finally good news, even Satoshi told the 1MB limit is temporary.

But easier would be double maxblocksize every block reward halving, to make Bitcoin simple...

50 BTC = 1 MB
25 BTC = 2 MB
12.5 BTC = 4 MB

and so on.
hero member
Activity: 700
Merit: 500
meaning fees will need to be higher. It is not intended for fees to be so high early on, that comes later.
... So if there are too many transactions going through that it goes over 1MB consistently only the higher value fees will be taken which makes fees go up in price.

tada the protocol already found the answer itself... no need for fork. Who said the most precious numbers were cheap to transact? use an alt for your tipping.

edit: you can put a k for thousand and a M for millions... but I don't think you need to learn the next letters... even in your fantasies...

Actually... M is a 1,000 and MM is a 1,000 x 1,000, or 1,000,000. When speaking of financials($) that is one of the most correct ways of doing it that is universally understood in the plant of Earth. It appears in all popular formats including banking statements, IPO releases from companies, stock indexes, most financial documents, ETC....

"M" should be be used with numbers that are related with intangible and conceptual subjects like money, time, and counting. The "k" is related to the "M"(always a lower-case k) which is the abbreviation for kilo-. 'k' abbreviation should be used with things that are tangible and physical, like distance and weight.

Confusion comes from a former symbol abbreviation of an "M" with an overstrike or overbar. The overbar means that the mille unit (1,000) is multiplied again by 1,000 because MM = M * M in math. A number followed by an M with an overstrike then means that the preceding number is multiplied by 1,000,000.

Since it is very difficult to create this symbol and most people do not know keyboard shortcuts or how to make it, it is hardly ever seen and is improperly abbreviated as a single "M" instead of the proper "MM".
This grammar rule is not very well known outside the financial world and will often be used incorrectly and the slang of "k" for thousand is often used even by venerated publications such as the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. 

So I notice your message under your name says you are trolling, but you actually thought that you were right so you were not trolling in this scenario, just uninformed.
hero member
Activity: 700
Merit: 500
I have seen your posts and you do troll. I could go back to a thread from something and post your quote where you admit that you troll for the fun of it. You treated me badly before in a thread from the past and it is whatever honestly.
No, that was me, and I still say you were trolling first in that thread.  However, in this thread, I agree with you.

if they fork once they will fork twice...  Angry
If you don't like that, then you need to get a time machine and go back in time to stop them from forking the first time.

what do you mean no that was you? The thread I am referencing is something from months back and I don't think I ever quoted you on anything but I may be mistaken because I am not going to take the time to search through every post I ever made. But I am pretty sure I have never said anything to you.
newbie
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
if they fork once they will fork twice...  Angry

You cannot change that if forking is what they do.  Angry
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 123
"PLEASE SCULPT YOUR SHIT BEFORE THROWING. Thank U"
I have seen your posts and you do troll. I could go back to a thread from something and post your quote where you admit that you troll for the fun of it. You treated me badly before in a thread from the past and it is whatever honestly.
No, that was me, and I still say you were trolling first in that thread.  However, in this thread, I agree with you.

if they fork once they will fork twice...  Angry
If you don't like that, then you need to get a time machine and go back in time to stop them from forking the first time.

It's funny how none of you want to accept the existence of alts, and how they could be integrated in the p2p payment system... but nooo, you want your precious bitcoin to take over everything, including alt... interesting.
hero member
Activity: 807
Merit: 500
I have seen your posts and you do troll. I could go back to a thread from something and post your quote where you admit that you troll for the fun of it. You treated me badly before in a thread from the past and it is whatever honestly.
No, that was me, and I still say you were trolling first in that thread.  However, in this thread, I agree with you.

if they fork once they will fork twice...  Angry
If you don't like that, then you need to get a time machine and go back in time to stop them from forking the first time.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 123
"PLEASE SCULPT YOUR SHIT BEFORE THROWING. Thank U"
if they fork once they will fork twice...  Angry
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500

Probably THE most critical thing would be predictability, and the set-in-stone increase in transaction rate achieves that.  Without predictability it would be much less easy to justify investments in infrastructure among other forms of planning and it would likely set the solution back a fair bit.  So, hats off to Gavin on this thing at least.  (No shit.)
I would strongly agree with this. It is unquestionable that the block size will need to be increased in order for Bitcoin to facilitate the number of transactions it would likely see when it becomes successful. If the protocol is forked multiple times then uncertainty would be caused
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276

Probably THE most critical thing would be predictability, and the set-in-stone increase in transaction rate achieves that.  Without predictability it would be much less easy to justify investments in infrastructure among other forms of planning and it would likely set the solution back a fair bit.  So, hats off to Gavin on this thing at least.  (No shit.)

I still don't understand why, if the goal is to support the world's beings with a nearly free (in monetary terms) solution to their economic exchange needs, the expansion rate is so low.  It makes me suspicious that there is something else going on...but then I'm a naturally suspicious guy.  I'd take a long hard look at the deltas which make 1.0, especially with the likes of Mike hanging around.  Maybe it's just a matter of getting people used to hard forks the solution can be more easily modified at will (or on demand) going forward.

fa
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
If a hard fork is inevitable, lets just embrace it. We should give BTC protocol a chance to improve itself. Just like we have Html 5 and CSS 3 after Html 4 and CSS2.
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
scams hunter!
i like this hardfork idea
newbie
Activity: 48
Merit: 0
I just worry about the negative impact when the hard fork is taking place especially put into consideration the size of network we are having right now. I mean what if somebody plans a out scheme that manipulates the network during the switch over. But then if we think again, if we don't do it now, then the question is when are we going to do it. As the network grows there can never be the right time.... and we really need to plan, prepare and anticipate for the future.
I don't think a planned fork would make the network any more vulnerable to a potential attack then a time when the network is not about to get hard-forked. I would even argue that the network would be slightly more secure during this time as many people would be paying very close attention to the network and various aspects about the network
hero member
Activity: 544
Merit: 500
response from Gavins AMA today

Quote
Q: (NedRadnad) - Do we really need to hard fork the chain to achieve scalability? When do you plan on making the fork?

  gavinandresen  A: Yes, I think we do. There is still at least a month or two of work before I'd be willing to write a patch to increase the maximum block size, and then probably a month or two more of arguing. So, early next year at the earliest before even starting the hard-fork process (which must roll out to miners – they will control when the fork actually happens).

estimates on timeframe suggest Q2 next year at the earliest.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
When did this turn into a discussion about TBF, Gavins credibility and such?
This is about Network Scalability. Gavin is right, and you know that he is.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 123
"PLEASE SCULPT YOUR SHIT BEFORE THROWING. Thank U"
meaning fees will need to be higher. It is not intended for fees to be so high early on, that comes later.
... So if there are too many transactions going through that it goes over 1MB consistently only the higher value fees will be taken which makes fees go up in price.

tada the protocol already found the answer itself... no need for fork. Who said the most precious numbers were cheap to transact? use an alt for your tipping.

edit: you can put a k for thousand and a M for millions... but I don't think you need to learn the next letters... even in your fantasies...
hero member
Activity: 700
Merit: 500
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 123
"PLEASE SCULPT YOUR SHIT BEFORE THROWING. Thank U"
by reading this post I realized that most of you are against competing currencies... if you could kill the king$ you would, just because you have high stakes in btc... But the great wise and smart speculators will all know your little plan before you are even born. Why? they are so basic, make btc the only global currency, and you, first time hoarders the new master of the Earth... you really believe it would be that simple...  Roll Eyes Long Live the Alt. Btc must stay unforked. the speculators, again will find its right place... to extract the maximum value of it. by learning to code you made a trade off. You can't escape the consequences of this choice.

Edit: forking would be the greatest thing to happen to the alts since... well... bitcoin.
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1393
You lead and I'll watch you walk away.
"Only invest what you can afford to lose" applies just as well to any complete technology as it does to something that's still in beta.  

Remember, Bitcoin is the initial implementation of a protocol.  Even if Bitcoin is a mature technology and no longer experimental, you should still invest only what you can afford to lose, because some other implementation of the protocol (yes, an altcoin) may eventually be the one that businesses settle on as being friendlier to their interests.  

I think investing is different from daily use. If the only users were speculators I wouldn't have an issue with them losing everything. If you invest in junk bonds and lose it all it's your fault. The altcoins don't have much of an economy. Those are really investments (so to speak) and their users are out for a quick return. Some of the altcoins are trying new things and might have the ability to overtake Bitcoin while being more stable and safe. In that case, I hope they do leave Bitcoin. I seriously doubt big business, at this point, will jump ship and attach to an altcoin with no name recognition and no established economy.

I know it's impossible to see many problems before they happen. Some issues can be seen ahead of time and corrected. For the most part the dev team has corrected the issues quickly. Sometimes crooks can use real systemic issues as an excuse to steal as Karpeles did with transaction malleability. Is the system so well prepared now that we can scale up and invite even more use and possibly more loss until there's no one left on the earth that's willing to trust Bitcoin?

It's an easy decision for businesses to accept another payment method. It's especially easy when companies like Coinbase are offering the first million dollars of exchanges to fiat for free. Users are a different story. Users need to trust the system and benefit from it. I know low fees are a benefit and this will help. Should the system be throttled limiting the amount of new entry until it's ready for prime time, is it ready now or is there no way to know until it's ramped up? Ever increasing use means ever increasing losses when failure happens. I would hate to be the lead dev knowing I had this huge experimental market sitting on my shoulders. I'm really not trying to be a prick. I'm just giving you food for thought. Mr. Andresen likes to reach out to the community for consensus and that's a good thing. Maybe the word community to him means only the dev team. In that case, he should really just send out an email instead.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 123
"PLEASE SCULPT YOUR SHIT BEFORE THROWING. Thank U"
...

K.I.S.S. = Keep It Stupidly Simple, leads to the Moon and beyond...
Pages:
Jump to: