Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 200. (Read 2032248 times)

Quote from: Zarathustra on June 23, 2015, 03:30:31 AM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on June 23, 2015, 04:04:33 AM

One of the nice things about having a 'benevolent dictator' is that it will be much easier to make decisions about these things going forward.
...

My god, cheezes christ, what a socialist pile of crap.

These socialists should be forced to spread their wealth. 'Maybe like a dividend to be distributed to all existing addresses'.

Zikes! You guys make some pretty strong arguments and have convinced me of the error of my ways. Let it be known that I hereby drop my support (however brief) for switching Bitcoin to be under a 'benevolent dictator' and under XT.

Thanks for setting me right guys.

You're saying Mike Hearn was performing an altruistic power grab? That's not so terrible is it? Who wouldn't want one person to control the way their monetary system develops, the sort of person you can rely on to ignore everything that anyone else has to say and override it with a unilateral hard fork, all because that person knows better? What's wrong with Mike, with his superior understanding of what I want for myself, making more of my decisions for me? Why not all of them? He's a smart guy, and there's no way he'd make decisions on my behalf that benefit him.

These arguments have devolved into stupidity. We'll (the majority) just fork mike out of power if he does something stupid. And implying a 21m increase because of an unrelated txn supply increase is a 5yo's logical fallacy.

You guys all need someone/some group in charge so badly that you run home to mamma even when the polled majority clearly wants an increase. But dispute mediation is even more fundamental to how bitcoin works than these other items. Its called open source. Run the rule set you want. My home system WILL easily keep up with 8MB and I support BTC user scalability (I want users in the Philippines to pay in coins) so that's what I'm going to run. Who cares if they (ppl in 2nd or 3rd world or economicly stressed) can't run their own personal copy... especially because 10ppl could pool their resources and do so If you want BTC to be a tool for bankers go ahead and stay on 1MB. In that case the only ppl running a full node will be bankers because they are the only ones who can use the network.

speaking of fallacies, what makes you think I'm a 1 MB block man?

To answer your question about who cares when 3rd world people can't get access to 1st world technology: they do. Who is this "who" that you're referring to, when you say "who cares?". What you really mean is: I'm in my little 1st world country group of people, and I don't consider these 3rd world peasants as fully fledged humans. Who cares about them? Everyone got everything solely by merit, ergo I am superior. Let me tell you, you're looking like less of a human to me.

And speaking of consensus polling, the unilateral (i.e. the perfect opposite of a consensus poll) forked client has been rejected in favor of going through the channels to consensus that already exist.

The reality is that the former XT supporters are the people who are in desperate need of a monetary despot; you can't paint unilateral forks any other way than exactly that.

boumalo

legendary

Activity: 1918

Merit: 1018

Quite a lot of resistance under 1200$ an once for gold.

thezerg

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1010

Quote from: Zarathustra on June 23, 2015, 03:30:31 AM

Quote from: Wexlike on June 23, 2015, 07:30:36 AM

One of the nice things about having a 'benevolent dictator' is that it will be much easier to make decisions about these things going forward.
...

My god, cheezes christ, what a socialist pile of crap.

These socialists should be forced to spread their wealth. 'Maybe like a dividend to be distributed to all existing addresses'.

Zikes! You guys make some pretty strong arguments and have convinced me of the error of my ways. Let it be known that I hereby drop my support (however brief) for switching Bitcoin to be under a 'benevolent dictator' and under XT.

Thanks for setting me right guys.

You're saying Mike Hearn was performing an altruistic power grab? That's not so terrible is it? Who wouldn't want one person to control the way their monetary system develops, the sort of person you can rely on to ignore everything that anyone else has to say and override it with a unilateral hard fork, all because that person knows better? What's wrong with Mike, with his superior understanding of what I want for myself, making more of my decisions for me? Why not all of them? He's a smart guy, and there's no way he'd make decisions on my behalf that benefit him.

These arguments have devolved into stupidity. We'll (the majority) just fork mike out of power if he does something stupid. And implying a 21m increase because of an unrelated txn supply increase is a 5yo's logical fallacy.

You guys all need someone/some group in charge so badly that you run home to mamma even when the polled majority clearly wants an increase. But dispute mediation is even more fundamental to how bitcoin works than these other items. Its called open source. Run the rule set you want. My home system WILL easily keep up with 8MB and I support BTC user scalability (I want users in the Philippines to pay in coins) so that's what I'm going to run. Who cares if they (ppl in 2nd or 3rd world or economicly stressed) can't run their own personal copy... especially because 10ppl could pool their resources and do so If you want BTC to be a tool for bankers go ahead and stay on 1MB. In that case the only ppl running a full node will be bankers because they are the only ones who can use the network.

sickpig

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1008

Can someone explain to me, why the chinese miners are against a 20mb block size increase? As far as i understand it, no one can force them to mine maxed out blocks. They can limit their own blocks just to 8 mb - or 1 mb in case of a really slow connection.

sure they can limit their own block, but nonetheless they need to build blocks on top of other miners blocks, hence they need to download (*) and validate blocks as big as 20MB (potentially).

(*) IBLT, matt corallo relay network and the fact that downstream bandwidth costs less than upload could help but maybe not enough for their taste.

Wexlike

legendary

Activity: 1473

Merit: 1086

Can someone explain to me, why the chinese miners are against a 20mb block size increase? As far as i understand it, no one can force them to mine maxed out blocks. They can limit their own blocks just to 8 mb - or 1 mb in case of a really slow connection.

Erdogan

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Carlton Banks on June 23, 2015, 04:04:33 AM

Quote from: Zarathustra on June 23, 2015, 03:30:31 AM

One of the nice things about having a 'benevolent dictator' is that it will be much easier to make decisions about these things going forward.
...

My god, cheezes christ, what a socialist pile of crap.

These socialists should be forced to spread their wealth. 'Maybe like a dividend to be distributed to all existing addresses'.

Zikes! You guys make some pretty strong arguments and have convinced me of the error of my ways. Let it be known that I hereby drop my support (however brief) for switching Bitcoin to be under a 'benevolent dictator' and under XT.

Thanks for setting me right guys.

You're saying Mike Hearn was performing an altruistic power grab? That's not so terrible is it? Who wouldn't want one person to control the way their monetary system develops, the sort of person you can rely on to ignore everything that anyone else has to say and override it with a unilateral hard fork, all because that person knows better? What's wrong with Mike, with his superior understanding of what I want for myself, making more of my decisions for me? Why not all of them? He's a smart guy, and there's no way he'd make decisions on my behalf that benefit him.

You are being sarcastic, ok, just want to point out that what we have is not a dictator that is an algoritm or a protocol, what we have is free market private money.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: Zarathustra on June 23, 2015, 03:30:31 AM

Quote from: Zarathustra on June 23, 2015, 03:30:31 AM

One of the nice things about having a 'benevolent dictator' is that it will be much easier to make decisions about these things going forward.
...

My god, cheezes christ, what a socialist pile of crap.

These socialists should be forced to spread their wealth. 'Maybe like a dividend to be distributed to all existing addresses'.

Zikes! You guys make some pretty strong arguments and have convinced me of the error of my ways. Let it be known that I hereby drop my support (however brief) for switching Bitcoin to be under a 'benevolent dictator' and under XT.

Thanks for setting me right guys.

You're saying Mike Hearn was performing an altruistic power grab? That's not so terrible is it? Who wouldn't want one person to control the way their monetary system develops, the sort of person you can rely on to ignore everything that anyone else has to say and override it with a unilateral hard fork, all because that person knows better? What's wrong with Mike, with his superior understanding of what I want for myself, making more of my decisions for me? Why not all of them? He's a smart guy, and there's no way he'd make decisions on my behalf that benefit him.

tvbcof

legendary

Activity: 4690

Merit: 1276

One of the nice things about having a 'benevolent dictator' is that it will be much easier to make decisions about these things going forward.
...

My god, cheezes christ, what a socialist pile of crap.

These socialists should be forced to spread their wealth. 'Maybe like a dividend to be distributed to all existing addresses'.

Zikes! You guys make some pretty strong arguments and have convinced me of the error of my ways. Let it be known that I hereby drop my support (however brief) for switching Bitcoin to be under a 'benevolent dictator' and under XT.

Thanks for setting me right guys.

Zarathustra

legendary

Activity: 1162

Merit: 1004

Quote from: Melbustus on June 23, 2015, 12:20:05 AM

I like Satoshi's quote on this:

Quote from: satoshi

...
Coins have to get initially distributed somehow, and a constant rate seems like the best formula.
...

http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography%40metzdowd.com/msg09979.html

The nonchalance, to me, indicates a nice trust in markets to do their job of optimizing allocation over time. But - if Bitcoin ever starts to become a serious global economic force, mainstream economists are going to flip out over the above quote, given the initial-distribution algo didn't go through some deep analysis, etc...

I think it's interesting how the engineering decision of making a simple/transparent (easy to implement, thus more secure) distribution algorithm trumped any potential detailed economic complexity, presumably due to Satoshi's understanding that the market would eventually allocate the capital optimally anyways, given the transparency of the current and future supply.

One of the nice things about having a 'benevolent dictator' is that it will be much easier to make decisions about these things going forward.

We already know that in the noble interest of getting a 'critical mass' in order to 'outrun regulation', it is critical to subsidize transaction costs. We also know with some reasonable certainty that one of the early attractions of Bitcoin was that people could 'make free money' with only a token effort. People like free shit. Always will.

In order to spread the wealth there are two choices.

- make more wealth and give it away (e.g., screw the obsolete 21 million cap thingy.)

- appropriate existing or lost money and hand it out.

Idea! We can be pretty sure that if/when XT takes over, coin tainting is not far behind. Why don't we use the otherwise wasted value to pass around to the masses. Maybe like a dividend to be distributed to all existing addresses. To be more fair and reduce gaming, however, it makes sense that people would need to appropriately register their true identities in order to receive the dividend though.

My god, cheezes christ, what a socialist pile of crap.

These socialists should be forced to spread their wealth. 'Maybe like a dividend to be distributed to all existing addresses'.

sickpig

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1008

speaking of IBLT, rusty russel has just posted a prototype on btc dev mailing list:

http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/009021.html

you could find the github repo here:

https://github.com/rustyrussell/bitcoin-iblt

the work is based on the famous gavin's gist:

https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/e20c3b5a1d4b97f79ac2

Erdogan

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1005