Topic: I am sorry to say, Mike Hearn was right. (Read 2534 times)

No, that just means I post here a lot.


I'm sorry, this is a determination which each user must make on their own. You are free to run Bitcoin software with any set of rules you desire!


Anytime.

hmmm..not sure what camp I'm in ..but knowing the BTC holders that I know..and trying to reach consensus....only a 'hard fork' to force everyone on the train may be the only solution.

w/o seg witness no lightning network..but then again if BTC core sees BTC as 'just' a store of value like gold (and price is going up) and want the decentralization from mining ..well

this deadlock could go on another 2 years imho.

sheesh

I don't think Circle decision to change their business model is based on the block size, to me it is fear of IRS coming after them, also we need to realise that it is not every time that big things are better than small. Let's give SW a chance

Oh good, you are a hero member and so I think you are able to define exactly:

What is SPAM ( in terms of transactions ) ??

I only accept mathematically and logically strict definitions.

Otherwise anything and anybody using this word I will categorize as FUD and ignore.


Tx in advance.

you are a strange guy
you have been on this forum and as a bitcoin user you don't know who Mike Hearn is and haven't head the FUD he spread back when price was $450

and on top of that you call circle a big player?
it was just a service on the internet that didn't even have half as many users as other counterparts.
they had to do free money giveaways to get users to start using their service. it was something like $10 or 20 something back then.

https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoinobituaries




https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-is-a-bubble-it-will-burst-on-monday-12-december-2016/

I don`t know who Mike Hearn is and don`t know much about blocksizes,LN and all this stuff.

A major player like Circle left bitcoin and the btc price even increased.

Bitcoin is stronger than before,i guess.

But come to think of it, ever since Circle made the announcement, the price of Bitcoin has been on the increase and didnt even feel the effect of someone falling out. From own way of looking at it, I think they are actually pulling out because of the coming regulations which they might not be able to handle and this also will mean more money for thier competitors or Circle is not that popular as they thought they are because the only time I have heard about this is just recently.

The 1MB anti-spam limit was in place when they started their business.

Oh, and...


Still here I see, bumping FUD, etc...

So this means, you will leave, too?

Circle was a really bad service to begin with. And the reason for their departure is certainly not blocksize (maybe they like to blame Core team for their own mismanagement).

We need a healthy transaction fee marketplace. Even now, one of the biggest miners mines empty blocks, because transaction fees are not lucrative enough compared to finding the next block faster.

The Bitcoin blockchain was never meant to be a settlement layer for microtransactions. It's far too inefficient to accomplish this task. SegWit and LN are meant to address this.

The most important point is that the Bitcoin network stays decentralized. Any blocksize increase is a risk in that regard. Blocksize increases should only be considered, once all other options have been exhausted and even medium value transactions (> $ 20) are no longer affordable (average fee >10% of transaction value).

They didn't turn against Bitcoin, Bitcoin turned against them. 

These Circle jerkers will soon realize that they made a huge mistake to turn against the Bitcoin community. They were happy to ride on

our backs, but now that they made their profits off our backs, they turning their backs on us. The only reason why they were needed, were the

government regulations forcing people to use them. In a perfect scenario we would not need any of these third party services. Mike Hearn

turned against Bitcoin and ran to R3 and now he is creating shit there too. 

How come it doesn't sound true to you ? Are you implying that in order to feel that thats true you need to be able to modify bitcoin according to your wishes
and everyone needs to follow ?
You can both modify bitcoin and run for president and the number of real followers you get is a direct metric of how good your ideas are.
If you're not getting any followers and you still feel you're in the right then nobody can help you.

Yes there is bitcoin congestion but there are answers to every problem. Even with these problems bitcoin still continue to grow and though the big companies decision such as circle to leave bitcoin has negative impacts to some users, bitcoin will still increase its value.

There are truths spoken by Mike Hearn but saying in 5 years bitcoin is a goner is a speculation that is exaggerated.

Today you either pay the price to get processed fast, either wait the correct moment to send your transaction for smallest fees.
People that don't know this say a lot of useless crap just because they are angry, or they can, or it fits their business model.

SegWit is a step forward. Maybe not the best movement because it may not be accepted by the high percent required, but it's still a step forward.
If they think it well, 4MB, 8MB or whatever are not the best choices. The best choice is dynamic size. If or when this will get implemented, it's a matter for the future.

For now Bitcoin is FAR FROM DOING BAD and the market is well aware of this.
So no, Mike Hearn was not as right as OP would like....

It's because if the blocksize increases ,these shitty nodes will shut down due to bandwidth problems.

Everyone blames Core, or the Developers, but the one you should really blame is your shitty ISP if you have slow connection.

We can't raise blocks until people have shitty internet connection.

If the price doesn't care, I don't care. And why should anybody else? I have other things to worry about.

Armory never was "in business". They got a capital investment many years ago which they managed to spend before ever figuring out what their profit model was.

Yet, since Armory has gone "out of business", the repo has been forked by one of the former employees. Since that time drastic improvements have occurred and Armory is no longer falling behind on development. It doesn't replicate the entire block chain as it used to, and startup times have decreased drastically. The most recent version has separated the client from the database which opens a wide range of use cases that were previously unavailable. The upcoming version brings compatibility with SegWit, among other things. Oh, thanks to Armory going "out of business" the phone home code has been completely removed, which many users saw as an intrusion on their privacy. Apparently the FOSS version of Armory wasn't even going to be continued beyond 0.93.

Armory's development is now in the hands of a talented dev who obviously sees a bright future for Bitcoin, and thanks to him the project has advanced a long way in a short time.

Most startups fail. This is not unique to Bitcoin. Blocks had the 1MB limit long before any of these companies were created. If their business model required writing every transaction under the sun into the permanent ledger that every full node must keep a copy of forever, perhaps they should have reconsidered.

Trying to attribute poor business decisions of various Bitcoin startups to a previously existing 1MB anti-spam limit is disingenuous at best and the fact that you even try gives me some insight into how far you will go to push your agenda.

i for one would put more money and faith into bitcoin if some real scaling was actually operating and not just being squabbled over. i'm sure many other people feel the same way. true, most of them won't be anywhere near an exchange but at a certain point traders will be affected by rising demand from other sources.

everyone wants it to scale but if everyone's pet solution cock blocks everyone else's then a huge amount of future potential is being thrown away. if nothing has been agreed on within a couple of years then i don't believe it ever will.

Why do you people keep threads like this alive? You all realize if no one posts here then this thread will just sink to the bottom like whale turds in the ocean.

@ Lauda, why have you not put Franky1 on ignore yet? You're continuous arguing with him is simply giving him a reason to post.

To mods: I consider this post to be on topic because OP's premise is rediculous and should be ignored, therefore, it speaks to the topic.