Thoughts from Russia on the block size situation and Blockstream - page 10.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1004

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Har01d on August 29, 2015, 12:56:50 AM

Well, as I expected, this post has been deleted from /r/Bitcoin.
More than that, I have seen a link post from another redditor who had linked here, but it also has been deleted.
This is kind of interesting how even a little piece of $21M cake turns so-called crypto-anarchists into watchdogs.

it really is amazing what money can do. I think those guys got into blockstream with the best of intentions but then became trapped by their assumptions and pressure to make good with their investors. I'm sure I don't know the half of what's going on but something ain't right with the whole stonewalling thing. doesn't look like the community will allow their small block vision though.

Har01d

member

Activity: 75

Merit: 10

Well, as I expected, this post has been deleted from /r/Bitcoin.
More than that, I have seen a link post from another redditor who had linked here, but it also has been deleted.
This is kind of interesting how even a little piece of $21M cake turns so-called crypto-anarchists into watchdogs.

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

Quote from: Har01d on August 28, 2015, 11:31:28 PM

knight22, I can't agree more about market makers, but I have many doubts that miners will listen to them.

BIP100 gives miners total control of the transaction rate in the blockchain, whilst BIP101, as you say, "gives everyone predictable room for growth".
The mathematical problem for the miners is to calculate what's more profitable for them in the long run. Since it's almost unreal to solve this problem, because no one can look 10 years ahead, we have devolved to political issues.

Miners will have to listen to them one way or the other because it is these businesses that create the most value to the coins. Without them, bitcoin would not be where it is now in term of value and usefulness. There is no good incentives for miners to mine coins that an industry doesn't want or can't even use properly.

aztecminer

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1000

blockstream train:

Har01d

member

Activity: 75

Merit: 10

knight22, I can't agree more about market makers, but I have many doubts that miners will listen to them.

BIP100 gives miners total control of the transaction rate in the blockchain, whilst BIP101, as you say, "gives everyone predictable room for growth".
The mathematical problem for the miners is to calculate what's more profitable for them in the long run. Since it's almost unreal to solve this problem, because no one can look 10 years ahead, we have devolved to political issues.

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

The big question is, how big payment processors and market makers will react. They have a lot of weight and they already have made a firm stance on BIP101 for the obvious reason that it gives them predictable room for growth.

Bitcoin won't be ruined. They is an incentive to prevent that.

Har01d

member

Activity: 75

Merit: 10

×

Topic: Thoughts from Russia on the block size situation and Blockstream - page 10. (Read 7342 times)