Matonis: If Bitcoin XT Succeeds You Can Kiss 21 Million Cap Goodbye - page 2.

yayayo

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1024

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 02:52:22 PM

Quote from: OgNasty on June 28, 2015, 12:27:53 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 12:13:10 PM

Still, what you are saying implies that increasing the supply will increase the revenue,
which is a theory I haven't heard before and sounds specious to me.

No. Not increasing the revenue (market cap growth), redistributing it primarily to those in control. Same old story.

Sorry, I don't quite follow. No matter, I agree its good to keep a close eye on Gavin and what's he's up to.

Also its irresponsible of Matonis to imply there could ever be a coin increase, even if he has good intentions of
stopping the XT fork.

I don't think it's irresponsible. It's always good to be warned on possible negative outcomes to prepare ourselves.

Crowd behavior can be pretty irrational. If I take a look at threads on reddit where quite a few people begging for Gavin to take leadership and override consensus I get a very bad feeling. Uninformed masses often only go after short term rewards which can have disastrous consequences.

ya.ya.yo!

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: OgNasty on June 28, 2015, 12:27:53 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 12:13:10 PM

Still, what you are saying implies that increasing the supply will increase the revenue,
which is a theory I haven't heard before and sounds specious to me.

No. Not increasing the revenue (market cap growth), redistributing it primarily to those in control. Same old story.

Sorry, I don't quite follow. No matter, I agree its good to keep a close eye on Gavin and what's he's up to.

Also its irresponsible of Matonis to imply there could ever be a coin increase, even if he has good intentions of
stopping the XT fork.

Slark

legendary

Activity: 1862

Merit: 1004

Quote from: tokeweed on June 27, 2015, 08:05:24 PM

Then I guess there are more ulterior motives behind XT than a 20mb block.

It can be something more behind it, maybe first attempt to divide bitcoin chain. Create alt-Bitcoin and maybe destroy some principal rules imposed by Satoshi.
If ever something so critical like number of bitcoin will change I will quit. You simply cannot change some things.

OgNasty

donator

Activity: 4760

Merit: 4323

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 12:13:10 PM

Still, what you are saying implies that increasing the supply will increase the revenue,
which is a theory I haven't heard before and sounds specious to me.

No. Not increasing the revenue (market cap growth), redistributing it primarily to those in control. Same old story.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: OgNasty on June 28, 2015, 12:09:46 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 12:02:40 PM

MY point is that if people agree to something as idiotic as changing the 21M,
there is really no hope at all. Fortunately, I don't think that is the case.
In fact, bitcoiners appear to be MUCH more intelligent, free thinking,
and independent than the general "sheeple" population that is so easily
persuaded by mass media.

The problem is that most people aren't even running their own nodes anymore, let alone mining at any real scale to have an opinion. The businessmen with the money invested in giant mining centers are the ones who will ultimately make the call, and they will choose what is most profitable (i.e. them not having to take a block reward cut). Blame those who supported cloud mining & manufacturers building their own mining centers for causing the centralized network. We've seen the direction that greed takes money, and it's printing more money. Now we get to watch as greedy well capitalized businessmen destroy what we all love so dearly. Just a shame that the push is coming from Gavin. He's supposed to be the protector, but he's trying to turn into a one man FED.

I respect your opinion more than most here OG and especially because you are or have actually been in the mining business.

Still, what you are saying implies that increasing the supply will increase the revenue,
which is a theory I haven't heard before and sounds specious to me.

Even disregarding the fact that increasing the limit would absolutely DEVASTATE
confidence and cause the price to plummet like a stone... I think that if you increase the
supply, the price will be lower with the same demand, so the revenue will be
the same.

Also, while people may not be running full nodes, they are choosing which SPV system's
rules to follow. So I don't really buy into the argument that not running full nodes takes
away the consensus power of the user base.

OgNasty

donator

Activity: 4760

Merit: 4323

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 12:02:40 PM

MY point is that if people agree to something as idiotic as changing the 21M,
there is really no hope at all. Fortunately, I don't think that is the case.
In fact, bitcoiners appear to be MUCH more intelligent, free thinking,
and independent than the general "sheeple" population that is so easily
persuaded by mass media.

The problem is that most people aren't even running their own nodes anymore, let alone mining at any real scale to have an opinion. The businessmen with the money invested in giant mining centers are the ones who will ultimately make the call, and they will choose what is most profitable (i.e. them not having to take a block reward cut). Blame those who supported cloud mining & manufacturers building their own mining centers for causing the centralized network. We've seen the direction that greed takes money, and it's printing more money. Now we get to watch as greedy well capitalized businessmen destroy what we all love so dearly. Just a shame that the push is coming from Gavin. He's supposed to be the protector, but he's trying to turn into a one man FED.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: forlackofabettername on June 28, 2015, 11:24:28 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 11:23:33 AM

If the community is that stupid, it would deserve it Tongue

... should be pointed out to any newbe how toxic this environment actually is ...

At BTCtalk the rule is: "i dig you a hole and if you fall into it you're a fool for doing so and deserve it. I on the other hand just helped you to see a truth about yourself by digging that hole for you in the first place and am a good man for doing this for you."

Yeah, man, this is how i can see bitcoin succeed. We all need to be that way! Thanks man! Great shit!

I don't really get your point although I detect a tone of sarcasm.

MY point is that if people agree to something as idiotic as changing the 21M,
there is really no hope at all. Fortunately, I don't think that is the case.
In fact, bitcoiners appear to be MUCH more intelligent, free thinking,
and independent than the general "sheeple" population that is so easily
persuaded by mass media.

Quote from: newflesh on June 28, 2015, 11:46:12 AM

Increasing the cap would be disastrous, wondering if Mantonis smoked a bowl before attending the interview.

You're giving marijuana a bad name. No amount of weed would make someone that stupid.

newflesh

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Quote from: forlackofabettername on June 28, 2015, 11:21:25 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 11:14:46 AM

I agree. If everyone uses the same code, that's what Bitcoin will be. it's called consensus.

The probability of everyone deciding to abandon the 21M limit is slim to none.

Unless you were able to make people believe it would have 'broad support in the community' and it is what 'bitcoin needs to grow' and 'who is against it must not have the best interest for btc in mind' and all that shit ... List goes on of course.
All you gotta achieve is to let a minority of apes believe they would be a majority on a mission for a great future and off do they go on a sanctuary mission to convert the heretics to also support increase max coins because "it will be the only way bitcoin can survive longterm" (without fees) and "even Satoshi wrote it down this way" ... and all that populist crap ...

Well yeah, just need to make sure that doesn't happen by calling out the bullshit when it happens. Not sure what can be done about the amount of Gavincoin shills on Reddit but I suppose that's to be expected.

Increasing the cap would be disastrous, wondering if Mantonis smoked a bowl before attending the interview.

OgNasty

donator

Activity: 4760

Merit: 4323

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

I think Gavin is actually doing a good thing for Bitcoin.

He is trying to leverage his position to make a change the community doesn't appear to support. It is important that he fails miserably at trying to force this through to reassure Bitcoin's resiliency. As mentioned by Matonis, if this succeeds, where does it end? Gavin must fail at this and be shown that he is not bigger than Bitcoin, which is the only positive that can come from this. If he succeeds, it is good that we discovered the Bitcoin project is a failure before it grew any further.

forlackofabettername

full member

Activity: 150

Merit: 100

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 11:23:33 AM

If the community is that stupid, it would deserve it Tongue

... should be pointed out to any newbe how toxic this environment actually is ...

At BTCtalk the rule is: "i dig you a hole and if you fall into it you're a fool for doing so and deserve it. I on the other hand just helped you to see a truth about yourself by digging that hole for you in the first place and am a good man for doing this for you."

Yeah, man, this is how i can see bitcoin succeed. We all need to be that way! Thanks man! Great shit!

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: forlackofabettername on June 28, 2015, 11:21:25 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 11:14:46 AM

I agree. If everyone uses the same code, that's what Bitcoin will be. it's called consensus.

The probability of everyone deciding to abandon the 21M limit is slim to none.

Unless you were able to make people believe it would have 'broad support in the community' and it is what 'bitcoin needs to grow' and 'who is against it must not have the best interest for btc in mind' and all that shit ... List goes on of course.
All you gotta achieve is to let a minority of apes believe they would be a majority on a mission for a great future and off do they go on a sanctuary mission to convert the heretics to also support increase max coins because "it will be the only way bitcoin can survive longterm" (without fees) ... and all that ...

If the community is that stupid, it would deserve it Tongue

forlackofabettername

full member

Activity: 150

Merit: 100

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 11:14:46 AM

I agree. If everyone uses the same code, that's what Bitcoin will be. it's called consensus.

The probability of everyone deciding to abandon the 21M limit is slim to none.

Unless you were able to make people believe it would have 'broad support in the community' and it is what 'bitcoin needs to grow' and 'who is against it must not have the best interest for btc in mind' and all that shit ... List goes on of course.
All you gotta achieve is to let a minority of apes believe they would be a majority on a mission for a great future and off do they go on a sanctuary mission to convert the heretics to also support increase max coins because "it will be the only way bitcoin can survive longterm" (without fees) and "even Satoshi wrote it down this way" ... and all that populist crap ...

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Vlad2Vlad on June 28, 2015, 11:10:13 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 11:05:35 AM

keep shouting for all I care. the max cap isn't changing. And if it does, we won't use that fork. have fun with your fud.

If the pools agree you will use the fork of their choice and love it. Cause nobody will be able to secure your personal choice. And any attempt to secure that chain by "the sheep" would be futile. These massive pools could easily dedicate a small portion of their hash power to kill any attempt to secure any undesired fork.

There is no democracy in Bitcoin, you all have eaten propaganda for years and are too clueless to see it.

The only thing keeping this fork from happening are the Chinese pools who control about 60% of the Bitcoin network. If they agree then you and all the other so called purists are gonna eat a massive increase in max cap and beg for more.

Welcome to reality!

I agree. If everyone uses the same code, that's what Bitcoin will be. it's called consensus.

The probability of everyone deciding to abandon the 21M limit is slim to none.

Vlad2Vlad

legendary

Activity: 3052

Merit: 1534

www.ixcoin.net

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 11:05:35 AM

keep shouting for all I care. the max cap isn't changing. And if it does, we won't use that fork. have fun with your fud.

If the pools agree you will use the fork of their choice and love it. Cause nobody will be able to secure your personal choice. And any attempt to secure that chain by "the sheep" would be futile. These massive pools could easily dedicate a small portion of their hash power to kill any attempt to secure any undesired fork.

There is no democracy in Bitcoin, you all have eaten propaganda for years and are too clueless to see it.

The only thing keeping this fork from happening are the Chinese pools who control about 60% of the Bitcoin network. If they agree then you and all the other so called purists are gonna eat a massive increase in max cap and beg for more.

Welcome to reality!

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Vlad2Vlad on June 28, 2015, 11:03:25 AM

I've been shouting since 2013 that the max "hard" cap was not written in stone and that Roger Ver and Andreas were shills and the max cap would be changed. I even had a debate on twitter with Voorhees about it when I posted a screenshot where it's actually listed as one of the risks in the Bitcoin ETF application.

keep shouting for all I care. the max cap isn't changing. And if it does, we won't use that fork. have fun with your fud.

Vlad2Vlad

legendary

Activity: 3052

Merit: 1534

www.ixcoin.net

I've been shouting since 2013 that the max "hard" cap was not written in stone and that Roger Ver and Andreas were shills and the max cap would be changed. I even had a debate on twitter with Voorhees about it when I posted a screenshot where it's actually listed as one of the risks in the Bitcoin ETF application.

It's amazing how I posted that in black and white everywhere and not one person noticed or even believed it.

Face it, Bitcoin worshippers, Bitcoin has been hijacked by banks, corporations and the government.

Enjoy the ride [and the drama].

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

There's a very short list of people that matter in development. They will figure out what's best for us. We really have no say anyway.

Wladimir J. van der Laan
Gavin Andresen
Jeff Garzik
Gregory Maxwell
Pieter Wuille
Luke Dashjr
Matt Corallo
Mike Hearn
Peter Todd

Matonis isn't in this group so his opinion doesn't matter.

forlackofabettername

full member

Activity: 150

Merit: 100

Quote from: DooMAD on June 28, 2015, 06:29:55 AM

XT is not proposing raising the 21 million cap. But I'm sure the OP in this thread was hoping a few people might believe that.

To clarify, someone who was a founding member of a slightly shady and not particularly transparent Bitcoin advocacy group thinks that if a fork is possible to increase the blocksize, a fork is also possible to increase the coin cap. However, in reality, the likelihood of one bears no relevance whatsoever to the likelihood of the other.

ad hominem

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: forlackofabettername on June 28, 2015, 03:14:27 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on June 28, 2015, 12:18:18 AM

The so called 'alert key' is just part of the code, it doesn't do anything except send a warning message, and it too can be forked away from Gavin should the community arrive at a consensus to do so.

I think that right there is a much more interesting topic!!!

edit:

well, there is that thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-list-arguments-against-the-idea-of-taking-away-gavins-alert-keys-1102455

cool.

IMHO, just the fact that people are ready to throw Gavin under the bus for associating with Hearn
leads me to believe the community is far too alert and aware to ever consider raising the 21M.
Such a non issue here.

DooMAD

legendary

Activity: 3948

Merit: 3191

Leave no FUD unchallenged

Quote from: ?? on ??

This will lead to inflation & bitcoin price could come back to $1.xx again Sad

Increasing block size limit is okay, but this is too much Angry

How about XT using their own blockchain & call their coins as Gavincoin (GVC)

XT is not proposing raising the 21 million cap. But I'm sure the OP in this thread was hoping a few people might believe that.

To clarify, someone who was a founding member of a slightly shady and not particularly transparent Bitcoin advocacy group thinks that if a fork is possible to increase the blocksize, a fork is also possible to increase the coin cap. However, in reality, the likelihood of one bears no relevance whatsoever to the likelihood of the other.

Topic: Matonis: If Bitcoin XT Succeeds You Can Kiss 21 Million Cap Goodbye - page 2. (Read 4484 times)