iCE please, i beg you, take your meds!
Haldol 1 tab po qid, as directed, # to be dispensed: 10000 tabs, 1000 refills.
4 pills a day keeps the doctor away!
Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 17. (Read 2032266 times)
With respect to Nick Most-Likely-To-Be-Satoshi-And-That-Is-Worth-A-Lot-Even-If -He-Isn't Szabo, I despise the "$4 billion system" argument. Every one of those investors knows it is a high risk asset with the potential for a 1000x return (and therefore, by any reasonable economics or logic, enormous risks). These are not widows and orphans.
Maybe the block size increase is a bad idea and maybe XT is a bad way to do it, but that argument is absurd sensationalism at its worst.
Maybe the block size increase is a bad idea and maybe XT is a bad way to do it, but that argument is absurd sensationalism at its worst.
If anyone is aware Bitcoin is an experiment, it is Nick Szabo.
The specific figure is of no particular matter to his argument, but it's worth noting the experiment has gained considerable scope, such that a significant real world financial aspect exists and should be taken into account (in this case, by the Planning Dept.).
That's exactly why including it is sensationalism.
Although I have to say to me it has the opposite effect: Only $4 billion? Good, still very safe to take some changes. Or maybe: Only $4 billion? This thing obviously still needs a lot of work.
The bolded parts are exactly why including it is not sensationalism.
The specific figure is a just neutral fact and was not sensationalized. It's not like he used ZOMG ALLCAPS FOUR BILLION or wrote out $4,000,000,000.00 with all the zeros.
You are exaggerating, just like when you used "maybe" in front of "block size increase is a bad idea."
Can you please get your Theymos Is Literally Hitler narrative sorted out? It's getting confusing.
Im just here observing your desperation curve, wondering where it will intersect the bitcoinXT adoption curve.
When t = t*.
The likelihood of sidechains becoming an integral part of Bitcoin is, I'd argue, far more important than any chance XT fork has at succeeding.
Keep burying your head in the ground and ignore innovation
But thats it - you're not arguing, you are just saying.
sidechains require far more fundamental changes to bitcoin to work than anything being done in this patch.
Do you even know what you're talking about?
make a point or shut up.
Sidechains are workable as of now under the existing protocol.
A softfork would allow more freedom in their functions, features and decentralization.
With respect to Nick Most-Likely-To-Be-Satoshi-And-That-Is-Worth-A-Lot-Even-If -He-Isn't Szabo, I despise the "$4 billion system" argument. Every one of those investors knows it is a high risk asset with the potential for a 1000x return (and therefore, by any reasonable economics or logic, enormous risks). These are not widows and orphans.
Maybe the block size increase is a bad idea and maybe XT is a bad way to do it, but that argument is absurd sensationalism at its worst.
Maybe the block size increase is a bad idea and maybe XT is a bad way to do it, but that argument is absurd sensationalism at its worst.
If anyone is aware Bitcoin is an experiment, it is Nick Szabo.
The specific figure is of no particular matter to his argument
That's exactly why including it is sensationalism.
Although I have to say to me it has the opposite effect: Only $4 billion? Good, still very safe to take some changes. Or maybe: Only $4 billion? This thing obviously still needs a lot of work.
The likelihood of sidechains becoming an integral part of Bitcoin is, I'd argue, far more important than any chance XT fork has at succeeding.
Keep burying your head in the ground and ignore innovation
But thats it - you're not arguing, you are just saying.
sidechains require far more fundamental changes to bitcoin to work than anything being done in this patch.
Do you even know what you're talking about?
make a point or shut up.
With respect to Nick Most-Likely-To-Be-Satoshi-And-That-Is-Worth-A-Lot-Even-If -He-Isn't Szabo, I despise the "$4 billion system" argument. Every one of those investors knows it is a high risk asset with the potential for a 1000x return (and therefore, by any reasonable economics or logic, enormous risks). These are not widows and orphans.
Maybe the block size increase is a bad idea and maybe XT is a bad way to do it, but that argument is absurd sensationalism at its worst.
Maybe the block size increase is a bad idea and maybe XT is a bad way to do it, but that argument is absurd sensationalism at its worst.
If anyone is aware Bitcoin is an experiment, it is Nick Szabo.
The specific figure is of no particular matter to his argument
That's exactly why including it is sensationalism.
Although I have to say to me it has the opposite effect: Only $4 billion? Good, still very safe to take some changes.
..and all pro XT and angry censorship postings are removed from the front of /r/bitcoin. Disgraceful.
Indeed. They will be making "A List' next....
I was told that "book burnings" would be next.
Can you please get your Theymos Is Literally Hitler narrative sorted out? It's getting confusing.
And why are you still here in the land of oppression, instead of running free and wild at https://voat.co/v/bitcoinxt ?
Did Hearn set up a checkpoint, or what?
Im just here observing your desperation curve, wondering where it will intersect the bitcoinXT adoption curve.
The likelihood of sidechains becoming an integral part of Bitcoin is, I'd argue, far more important than any chance XT fork has at succeeding.
Keep burying your head in the ground and ignore innovation
But thats it - you're not arguing, you are just saying.
sidechains require far more fundamental changes to bitcoin to work than anything being done in this patch.
Do you even know what you're talking about?
The likelihood of sidechains becoming an integral part of Bitcoin is, I'd argue, far more important than any chance XT fork has at succeeding.
Keep burying your head in the ground and ignore innovation
But thats it - you're not arguing, you are just saying.
sidechains require far more fundamental changes to bitcoin to work than anything being done in this patch.
Sidechains are not altcoins, nor are they "watered down," nor are their block chain's "seperate."
Do you guys know what the phrase "TWO WAY PEG" means?
Do you guys know what the phrase "TWO WAY PEG" means?
Yes, something that is impossible. Ask the SNB (down) or PBOC (up).
Fiat, LOL.
Do you know what the phrase "ATOMIC TRANSACTION" means?
(Keep acting stupid, I can do this all day.)
Keep acting smart.
NMF you started blathering about fiat nonsense in a discussion about crypto and e-cash.
Don't worry, TWP and AT are our friends!
https://people.xiph.org/~greg/blockstream.gmaxwell.elements.talk.060815.pdf
I couldn't be bothered to read that.
OK, here's the version for verbal learners:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pyVvq-vrrM
I couldn't be bothered to watch that.
This is a fight which, BY DESIGN, you Gavinistas cannot win. Poor thing, no wonder it's "doing your head in."
Quote
Just incredible how much crap an early adopter can write. He just writes like an angry internet troll. His posts contain mostly personal attacks.
His posts contain a lot of personal attacks. Yet only the simpletons clinging to these "because offended" are unable to recognize the insights. Truth hurts indeed
Can you explain which insights you're referring to? It looks to me like mostly technical misunderstandings about how a fork would play out combined with a lack of knowledge about Bitcoin. For example, explain how this is true:
"If Gavincoin wins, Bitcoin holdhouts lose nothing and Gavin supporters gain nothing. If Gavincoin flounders, Gavin supporters lose everything"
Hey iCE! This is your opportunity to show us that you are not just a brainless bully.
I've already shown you. Only the simpletons clinging to "because offended" are unable to recognize the insights.
Sidechains are not altcoins, nor are they "watered down," nor are their block chain's "seperate."
Do you guys know what the phrase "TWO WAY PEG" means?
Do you guys know what the phrase "TWO WAY PEG" means?
Yes, something that is impossible. Ask the SNB (down) or PBOC (up).
Fiat, LOL.
Do you know what the phrase "ATOMIC TRANSACTION" means?
(Keep acting stupid, I can do this all day.)
Keep acting smart.
NMF you started blathering about fiat nonsense in a discussion about crypto and e-cash.
Don't worry, TWP and AT are our friends!
https://people.xiph.org/~greg/blockstream.gmaxwell.elements.talk.060815.pdf
I couldn't be bothered to read that.
OK, here's the version for verbal learners:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pyVvq-vrrM
With respect to Nick Most-Likely-To-Be-Satoshi-And-That-Is-Worth-A-Lot-Even-If -He-Isn't Szabo, I despise the "$4 billion system" argument. Every one of those investors knows it is a high risk asset with the potential for a 1000x return (and therefore, by any reasonable economics or logic, enormous risks). These are not widows and orphans.
Maybe the block size increase is a bad idea and maybe XT is a bad way to do it, but that argument is absurd sensationalism at its worst.
Maybe the block size increase is a bad idea and maybe XT is a bad way to do it, but that argument is absurd sensationalism at its worst.
If anyone is aware Bitcoin is an experiment, it is Nick Szabo.
The specific figure is of no particular matter to his argument, but it's worth noting the experiment has gained considerable scope, such that a significant real world financial aspect exists and should be taken into account (in this case, by the Planning Dept.).
Everyone rushing to be the first XTcoin recipients are economically advantaging MP & Co by writing them free options:
This is a fight which, BY DESIGN, you Gavinistas cannot win. Poor thing, no wonder it's "doing your head in."
Quote
This is a fight which, BY DESIGN, you Gavinistas cannot win. Poor thing, no wonder it's "doing your head in."
Quote
Just incredible how much crap an early adopter can write. He just writes like an angry internet troll. His posts contain mostly personal attacks.
His posts contain a lot of personal attacks. Yet only the simpletons clinging to these "because offended" are unable to recognize the insights. Truth hurts indeed
Can you explain which insights you're referring to? It looks to me like mostly technical misunderstandings about how a fork would play out combined with a lack of knowledge about Bitcoin. For example, explain how this is true:
"If Gavincoin wins, Bitcoin holdhouts lose nothing and Gavin supporters gain nothing. If Gavincoin flounders, Gavin supporters lose everything"
Hey iCE! This is your opportunity to show us that you are not just a brainless bully.
Go on smoothie. Go on evoorhees. Fuck off to greener, censorship-free pastures where may you attempt to attack Bitcoin all you want.
Don't let me stop you. You're free now...move into the light...
Don't let me stop you. You're free now...move into the light...
iCEBLOW throwing his weapons. or, blowing his weapons.
or, in medical terms, engaging in "projectile vomiting".
You are also welcome to fuck to https://voat.co/v/bitcoinxt, where your XT junta will not be "suppressed" by moderators enforcing rules.
Why are you supporting theymos' "epitome of authoritarianism" and "censorship" by gracing his forum with your presence?
What are you so afraid of, that you agree with all this censorship ?
There is no censorship here or on the subreddit.
If you disagree, prove it by defecting from Core's flagship forums to https://voat.co/v/bitcoinxt.
Vote with your feet. Knock us out with the alleged Gavincoin consensus of your supposed XT socioeconomic majority.
"iCE, look. i told you, you need to take your medications every day. otherwise, the convulsions become uncontrollable.
please, for your own good".
please, for your own good".
Sidechains are not altcoins, nor are they "watered down," nor are their block chain's "seperate."
Do you guys know what the phrase "TWO WAY PEG" means?
Do you guys know what the phrase "TWO WAY PEG" means?
Yes, something that is impossible. Ask the SNB (down) or PBOC (up).
Fiat, LOL.
Do you know what the phrase "ATOMIC TRANSACTION" means?
(Keep acting stupid, I can do this all day.)
Keep acting smart.
NMF you started blathering about fiat nonsense in a discussion about crypto and e-cash.
Don't worry, TWP and AT are our friends!
https://people.xiph.org/~greg/blockstream.gmaxwell.elements.talk.060815.pdf
I couldn't be bothered to read that.
Sidechains are not altcoins, nor are they "watered down," nor are their block chain's "seperate."
Do you guys know what the phrase "TWO WAY PEG" means?
Do you guys know what the phrase "TWO WAY PEG" means?
Yes, something that is impossible. Ask the SNB (down) or PBOC (up).
Fiat, LOL.
Do you know what the phrase "ATOMIC TRANSACTION" means?
(Keep acting stupid, I can do this all day.)
Keep acting smart.
NMF you started blathering about fiat nonsense in a discussion about crypto and e-cash.
Don't worry, TWP and AT are our friends!
https://people.xiph.org/~greg/blockstream.gmaxwell.elements.talk.060815.pdf
With respect to Nick Most-Likely-To-Be-Satoshi-And-That-Is-Worth-A-Lot-Even-If -He-Isn't Szabo, I despise the "$4 billion system" argument. Every one of those investors knows it is a high risk asset with the potential for a 1000x return (and therefore, by any reasonable economics or logic, enormous risks). These are not widows and orphans.
Maybe the block size increase is a bad idea and maybe XT is a bad way to do it, but that argument is absurd sensationalism at its worst.
Maybe the block size increase is a bad idea and maybe XT is a bad way to do it, but that argument is absurd sensationalism at its worst.
Now, not yesterday, but today every bitcoin guru wannabe comes creeping out of the woodwork saying of course we need bigblocks but just something a tad different. I say hurry and sweep something together, build, test and distribute, or forever keep your peace.
Jump to: