Pages:
Author

Topic: Poll: Mike H. Interview - Convincing or not? - page 3. (Read 4958 times)

jr. member
Activity: 42
Merit: 1
I guess I'm extremely optimistic but as I said, I don't really mind if I won't be able to run a node at some point. Why should I care anyway? The cat is out of the bag and if bitcoin eventually become too centralized and allow censorship then I'll just move to the next uncensored blockchain just like I will do if the bitcoin blockchain doesn't scale enough.

Taking responsibility for your own future implies that you do care about the long term impact of your choices and actions. I know, we all grew up in this consumerist mindset and are not used to things like Bitcoin, so we are still projecting the old thinking onto this new technology. But I'm glad that many now realize that this "Game" is "Just A Lil Bit" different and being conscious and responsible is "How We Do".

Moving to the next (good) blockchain might prove to be difficult as PoW systems are extremely hard to duplicate in order for them to remain secure and independent from each other. We only have a few decent ones to play with and losing the most prominent example and the pioneer of that technology may have devastating effects on the whole crypto-verse in general. I would rather have another similar system make a risky move and experiment, while Bitcoin enjoys its heavyweight champion position and the sense of stability and trust that comes along with it. The leader only responds when being challenged in its area of expertise.
legendary
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3080

You sound like all socialist shills.


I'm not sure what you sound like. I do know it has very little to do with how that real world place operates.


He sounds as always. As the elitist ad hominem spammer destroying also this thread. Unfortunately he believes that he has to be everywhere to take over every thread and having the last word in every case. 30 percent of the posts are written by this pseudo 'bitcoiner'. Disgusting and completely against the idea of Bitcoin.

No, you're projecting your own transgressions onto others again. You're supporting the banks taking control of Bitcoin by promoting the accelerated growth of node resource requirements out fo the reach of ordinary users and ordinary miners.

You are the psuedo-bitcoiners, and you are the relentless BS artists in this debate. You cannot alter reality by virtue of continuously re-stating your preferred fantasy, everything you and your cohort have said and done is still here in black and white, and it turns out that the vast majority of genuine bitcoiners were not as gullible as your tactics suggest that you believed. No wonder you're all so incredibly bitter.

You are the one who is bitter. You - like brg444 - are one of those who notoriously attack others ad hominem. Your newest ad hominem attack: "Hearn is a sociopath".


It's not ad hominem when it's:

  • The actual point of an argument
  • True
member
Activity: 554
Merit: 11
CurioInvest [IEO Live]
Reading Mike Hearn cry on the development emails is the most cringe worthy thing.

Go read the BIP65 deployment thread on the dev emails. He is the only one opposing it, and everyone else is showing consensus.

Constantly stirring up drama, belittling other devs, and arguing like a little kid. So annoying.

Deployment of BIP65 should not be held up just because one dev is giving NACK. Many scalability projects are depending on BIP65 to progress.

When you look at the picture, there is widespread consensus in the technical community to deploy bip65 as a softfork, so there is no reason not to do it.

A NACK embellished with dubious explainations from a controversial person who has started a software propagation war and who has not contributed to core developments since a long time, should be ignored, similarly to Bitcoin nodes ignoring invalid blocks.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1004

You sound like all socialist shills.


I'm not sure what you sound like. I do know it has very little to do with how that real world place operates.


He sounds as always. As the elitist ad hominem spammer destroying also this thread. Unfortunately he believes that he has to be everywhere to take over every thread and having the last word in every case. 30 percent of the posts are written by this pseudo 'bitcoiner'. Disgusting and completely against the idea of Bitcoin.

No, you're projecting your own transgressions onto others again. You're supporting the banks taking control of Bitcoin by promoting the accelerated growth of node resource requirements out fo the reach of ordinary users and ordinary miners.

You are the psuedo-bitcoiners, and you are the relentless BS artists in this debate. You cannot alter reality by virtue of continuously re-stating your preferred fantasy, everything you and your cohort have said and done is still here in black and white, and it turns out that the vast majority of genuine bitcoiners were not as gullible as your tactics suggest that you believed. No wonder you're all so incredibly bitter.

You are the one who is bitter. You - like brg444 - are one of those who notoriously attack others ad hominem. Your newest ad hominem attack: "Hearn is a sociopath".
legendary
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3080

You sound like all socialist shills.


I'm not sure what you sound like. I do know it has very little to do with how that real world place operates.


He sounds as always. As the elitist ad hominem spammer destroying also this thread. Unfortunately he believes that he has to be everywhere to take over every thread and having the last word in every case. 30 percent of the posts are written by this pseudo 'bitcoiner'. Disgusting and completely against the idea of Bitcoin.

No, you're projecting your own transgressions onto others again. You're supporting the banks taking control of Bitcoin by promoting the accelerated growth of node resource requirements out fo the reach of ordinary users and ordinary miners.

You are the psuedo-bitcoiners, and you are the relentless BS artists in this debate. You cannot alter reality by virtue of continuously re-stating your preferred fantasy, everything you and your cohort have said and done is still here in black and white, and it turns out that the vast majority of genuine bitcoiners were not as gullible as your tactics suggest that you believed. No wonder you're all so incredibly bitter.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1004

You sound like all socialist shills.


I'm not sure what you sound like. I do know it has very little to do with how that real world place operates.


He sounds as always. As the elitist ad hominem spammer destroying also this thread. Unfortunately he believes that he has to be everywhere to take over every thread and having the last word in every case. 30 percent of the posts are written by this pseudo 'bitcoiner'. Disgusting and completely against the idea of Bitcoin.
sr. member
Activity: 346
Merit: 250
Mike and his alikes highlight what is worst in the community.

Bitcoin is suffering the childish attitude of a few irrelevant social spammers, but it shall prevail and exit this crisis reinforced in its fundamentals.

legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
September 30, 2015, 11:11:41 PM
#89
...
Either you have fantastic resources, gimp your node like I do, or are extremely optimistic. Do you keep track of the bandwidth your node currently uses with the 1mb spam limit in place?

I guess I'm extremely optimistic but as I said, I don't really mind if I won't be able to run a node at some point. Why should I care anyway? The cat is out of the bag and if bitcoin eventually become too centralized and allow censorship then I'll just move to the next uncensored blockchain just like I will do if the bitcoin blockchain doesn't scale enough.

Why do you need to kill Bitcoin?  Why not just move on now before it is ruined?

Because there is still no economic incentives to do so, but its coming. If bitcoin is killed it's because it will become irrelevant.

Bitcoin has the mindshare to succeed in some use-cases and to some degree indefinitely.  It will only be 'irrelevant' if it fails to live up to it's promise as a reliable and trusted vehicle for storage and transfer of value. The most likely way that will happen is exactly as you seem to be anticipating...centralization and censorship.  And the most likely way that will happen is if it outgrows it's potential to be supported in a hostile environment.

Reliable also means stay competitive in a competitive environment so it can also fails without centralization and censorship. Bitcoin can't afford to stay behind the curse too long in terms of scaling capacity and competitive fees.

I am very confident that this is exactly the goal for certain influential and well financed elements of the ecosystem at this time.

Who do you have in mind?
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
September 30, 2015, 11:02:50 PM
#88
...
Either you have fantastic resources, gimp your node like I do, or are extremely optimistic. Do you keep track of the bandwidth your node currently uses with the 1mb spam limit in place?

I guess I'm extremely optimistic but as I said, I don't really mind if I won't be able to run a node at some point. Why should I care anyway? The cat is out of the bag and if bitcoin eventually become too centralized and allow censorship then I'll just move to the next uncensored blockchain just like I will do if the bitcoin blockchain doesn't scale enough.

Why do you need to kill Bitcoin?  Why not just move on now before it is ruined?

Because there is still no economic incentives to do so, but its coming. If bitcoin is killed it's because it will become irrelevant.

Bitcoin has the mindshare to succeed in some use-cases and to some degree indefinitely.  It will only be 'irrelevant' if it fails to live up to it's promise as a reliable and trusted vehicle for storage and transfer of value.  The most likely way that will happen is exactly as you seem to be anticipating...centralization and censorship.  And the most likely way that will happen is if it outgrows it's potential to be supported in a hostile environment.  I am very confident that this is exactly the goal for certain influential and well financed elements of the ecosystem at this time.

legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
September 30, 2015, 10:58:40 PM
#87
you big block supporters for the sake of expanding to the masses really dont get it sometimes.  example... in my hood theres a bus that runs every 10 minutes.  its pretty much empty most of the time except rush hour.  during rush hours some people need to wait for the next bus.  so the proposal is to get a bigger bus and lets keep getting bigger buses so more people can get on.  what you dont realize is if you get a bigger bus this bus company will go out of business before enough people move to the neighborhood to use it.  this is absurd and you are all idiots.  tss out

in my hood there is a full blown subway every 4 min because your silly bus every 10 min won't be able to clear all the sheeples.
tss
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 500
September 30, 2015, 10:53:56 PM
#86
you big block supporters for the sake of expanding to the masses really dont get it sometimes.  example... in my hood theres a bus that runs every 10 minutes.  its pretty much empty most of the time except rush hour.  during rush hours some people need to wait for the next bus.  so the proposal is to get a bigger bus and lets keep getting bigger buses so more people can get on.  what you dont realize is if you get a bigger bus this bus company will go out of business before enough people move to the neighborhood to use it.  this is absurd and you are all idiots.  tss out
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
September 30, 2015, 10:50:19 PM
#85
...
Either you have fantastic resources, gimp your node like I do, or are extremely optimistic. Do you keep track of the bandwidth your node currently uses with the 1mb spam limit in place?

I guess I'm extremely optimistic but as I said, I don't really mind if I won't be able to run a node at some point. Why should I care anyway? The cat is out of the bag and if bitcoin eventually become too centralized and allow censorship then I'll just move to the next uncensored blockchain just like I will do if the bitcoin blockchain doesn't scale enough.

Why do you need to kill Bitcoin?  Why not just move on now before it is ruined?

Because there is still no economic incentives to do so, but its coming. If bitcoin is killed it's because it will become irrelevant.
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
September 30, 2015, 10:21:35 PM
#84
...
Either you have fantastic resources, gimp your node like I do, or are extremely optimistic. Do you keep track of the bandwidth your node currently uses with the 1mb spam limit in place?

I guess I'm extremely optimistic but as I said, I don't really mind if I won't be able to run a node at some point. Why should I care anyway? The cat is out of the bag and if bitcoin eventually become too centralized and allow censorship then I'll just move to the next uncensored blockchain just like I will do if the bitcoin blockchain doesn't scale enough.

Why do you need to kill Bitcoin?  Why not just move on now before it is ruined?

legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
September 30, 2015, 09:51:13 PM
#83
I guess I'm extremely optimistic but as I said, I don't really mind if I won't be able to run a node at some point. Why should I care anyway? The cat is out of the bag and if bitcoin eventually become too centralized and allow censorship then I'll just move to the next uncensored blockchain just like I will do if the bitcoin blockchain doesn't scale enough.

"Just move to the next blockchain"

 Cheesy

If only it could really be so simple as it is in your delusions...


Just wait for an economic incentive to do so and you won't believe how simple it will be. https://shapeshift.io/

Not sure how a blockchain with a disorganized core team is going to compete long term with a core that has an organized team. << Thinking otherwise would be the delusional mindset.

Ask yourself why bitcoin have an organized team then you'll understand why it will happen to another blockchain if necessary.
legendary
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1030
Twitter @realmicroguy
September 30, 2015, 09:49:54 PM
#82
What is the difficulty in moving assets to another blockchain? This does not seem complicated. Smiley

--

Not sure how a blockchain with a disorganized core team is going to compete long term with a core that has an organized team. << Thinking otherwise would be the delusional mindset.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 504
Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks
September 30, 2015, 09:46:40 PM
#81
I guess I'm extremely optimistic but as I said, I don't really mind if I won't be able to run a node at some point. Why should I care anyway? The cat is out of the bag and if bitcoin eventually become too centralized and allow censorship then I'll just move to the next uncensored blockchain just like I will do if the bitcoin blockchain doesn't scale enough.

"Just move to the next blockchain"

 Cheesy

If only it could really be so simple as it is in your delusions...
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
September 30, 2015, 09:38:52 PM
#80
OpenBazaar and joystream absolutely need censorship-poof money to operate.

Why?

OpenBazaar is a decentralized censorship-proof market place and Joystream is an torrent sharing platform with micro-payments to give incentive for better upload.

No need to explain further why they need censorship-proof money.  

The thing is, good enough decentralization is good enough. If there is censorship, then these platforms will just migrate to another blockchain. There is no value to add censorship on a blockchain at all.

I'm not sure what "good enough" decentralization is. If I can't run a full node over a shitty internet connection in an environment that is anti-Bitcoin, then I would say the decentralization is not good enough.

Good enough decentralization is good enough to keep bitcoin censorship-free with all the feature it actually offers. I can't tell how much nodes does that represent (I guess time will tell) but being able to run it on a shitty internet connection is unnecessary although it would be a nice to have.

To answer your question I do run a node but I don't mind if I can't at some point but I'm also sure the market will come up with cheap solutions so I can continue for a long time ahead regardless of how bitcoin scales.  

Either you have fantastic resources, gimp your node like I do, or are extremely optimistic. Do you keep track of the bandwidth your node currently uses with the 1mb spam limit in place?

I guess I'm extremely optimistic but as I said, I don't really mind if I won't be able to run a node at some point. Why should I care anyway? The cat is out of the bag and if bitcoin eventually become too centralized and allow censorship then I'll just move to the next uncensored blockchain just like I will do if the bitcoin blockchain doesn't scale enough.
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1012
September 30, 2015, 09:13:34 PM
#79
OpenBazaar and joystream absolutely need censorship-poof money to operate.

Why?

The thing is, good enough decentralization is good enough. If there is censorship, then these platforms will just migrate to another blockchain. There is no value to add censorship on a blockchain at all.

I'm not sure what "good enough" decentralization is. If I can't run a full node over a shitty internet connection in an environment that is anti-Bitcoin, then I would say the decentralization is not good enough.

To answer your question I do run a node but I don't mind if I can't at some point but I'm also sure the market will come up with cheap solutions so I can continue for a long time ahead regardless of how bitcoin scales.  

Either you have fantastic resources, gimp your node like I do, or are extremely optimistic. Do you keep track of the bandwidth your node currently uses with the 1mb spam limit in place?
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
September 30, 2015, 09:02:46 PM
#78
https://openbazaar.org/
http://www.joystream.co/
https://www.changetip.com/

As per example. And that just the beginning. Too bad all of these platforms will have to move to another more desirable blockchain that scales in a competitive manner at some point.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the examples here really need the raw power of censorship-proof money if there is any chance that bloating the chain with every transaction under the sun (excuse the exaggeration) may actually harm Bitcoin's ability to remain censorship-proof (which I most certainly think it will). I would honestly prefer these transactions never touch the block chain (unless there is some kind of aggregation).

Clearly we disagree on this point and I doubt very much that either of us will be able to see the other's point of view. Perhaps the best answer is truly a fork so both sides can move forward with their specific goals in mind.

I'm curious, do you run a full node knight22?

OpenBazaar and joystream absolutely need censorship-poof money to operate. The thing is, good enough decentralization is good enough. If there is censorship, then these platforms will just migrate to another blockchain. There is no value to add censorship on a blockchain at all.  

To answer your question I do run a node but I don't mind if I can't at some point but I'm also sure the market will come up with cheap solutions so I can continue for a long time ahead regardless of how bitcoin scales.  
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1012
September 30, 2015, 08:54:10 PM
#77
https://openbazaar.org/
http://www.joystream.co/
https://www.changetip.com/

As per example. And that just the beginning. Too bad all of these platforms will have to move to another more desirable blockchain that scales in a competitive manner at some point.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the examples here really need the raw power of censorship-proof money if there is any chance that bloating the chain with every transaction under the sun (excuse the exaggeration) may actually harm Bitcoin's ability to remain censorship-proof (which I most certainly think it will). I would honestly prefer these transactions never touch the block chain (unless there is some kind of aggregation).

Clearly we disagree on this point and I doubt very much that either of us will be able to see the other's point of view. Perhaps the best answer is truly a fork so both sides can move forward with their specific goals in mind.

I'm curious, do you run a full node knight22?
Pages:
Jump to: