Thoughts from Russia on the block size situation and Blockstream - page 7.

iCEBREAKER

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1072

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on August 29, 2015, 08:41:58 PM

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on August 29, 2015, 08:31:49 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 10:57:01 AM

You don't seem to grasp the confilct of interest between blocksteam and Core development. I doubt you someday will because you don't seem to know what a conflict of interest actually is. That's OK.

Repeating the 'Vast Blockstream Conspiracy' rumor won't make it true.

Blockstream is scaling Bitcoin in ways far more effective than XT's naive, ham-fisted, derpy 'duh just make the block moar big' approach.

Their Scaling Bitcoin workshops represent the proper way to gather information, share expertise, compare notes, find common ground, identify irreconcilable differences, and ultimately begin to move *with consensus* toward the goal of supporting more transactions, without sacrificing Bitcoin's unique distinguishing features.

Like it or not, at present Dr. Backamoto is effectively Bitcoin's CTO just as gmax is Bitcoin's Chief Scientist. Cool

While Gavin and Hearn are busy splitting the community into warring factions, Blockstream is doing amazing things at the frontier of computer science and cryptography.

EG, https://blockstream.com/2015/08/24/treesignatures/

They are brilliant guys for sure. However, your post is just an ad hominem that has nothing to do with the conflict of interest issue.

Accusing Blockstream devs of conflicting interests is an ad hominem attack, especially given their years of contributions in scaling Bitcoin to 1MB.

My posts demonstrates a confluence of interests between Blockstream and Bitcoin, which dispels OP's fuzzy evidence-free accusations of impropriety.

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 09:36:36 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 09:12:19 PM

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 09:06:07 PM

IMO, decentralized trading platform has been promoted for some years but never gained enough traction. This is largely due to the fact that no one want to send the money/goods first, and there are many complex scam/theft schemes in payments, which makes the dispute impossible without the involvement of authorities, but when you have authorities that can rely on, you don't really need decentralized trading anymore

This is not a valid point. first decentralized trading platform have never been fully implemented before. You should read more about OpenBazaar, they received 1M$ investment and launching this fall. Joystream is another different beast where you point really don't stand.

A simple example: Someone bought 1 bitcoin from you on OpenBazaar, paid $230 to your bank account, you release the coin to him. The next day, you found out that your bank account is frozen and police called you for an investigation, because the money is hacked from another bank account

How can you mitigate such kind of risk? You must make sure the money is sent from the users own account by asking him to upload his account screenshot together with his ID card. But normally users will refuse to show their ID card to a stranger on a decentralized platform, they would only show it to a well known registered finance institution which have strict rules for customer privacy protection

OpenBazaar is not a trading platform to exchange fiat (although you could with fairly high risk). It is a decentralized platform to sell good and services being paid off with bitcoin with 3 optional kind of decentralized escrow system.

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

Quote from: brg444 on August 29, 2015, 09:24:44 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 09:13:45 PM

Quote from: brg444 on August 29, 2015, 09:11:17 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 09:09:25 PM

Quote from: brg444 on August 29, 2015, 09:07:52 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 08:56:41 PM

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 08:47:22 PM

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it.

Sounds like the logic of a crippled brain Roll Eyes

How dare you reply to such a brilliant post with such a bland comment?

If OpenBazaar behave they can get a private, anonymity supported sidechain straight out of Blockstream Labs and run their own Lightning hub Wink

That's really cool but the fact is OpenBazaar will deliver much faster than blockstream will.

I would imagine since they got a jump start from code they didn't write Cheesy

I also imagine you are convince hordes of consumers will rush to use OpenBazaar as soon as they officially launch, right?

And you think people will rush into unproven concept / untested sidechains right from their launch? Huh

I don't see where I said that? I'd be much more interested in an anonymous sidechain than crypto-ebay though to be honest...

The issue is the premise of your argument is that Open Bazaar hugely popular market place might get choked out of transaction room.

I advise your to get rid of these disease that is trying to satisfy inexisting demand because "I swear" mass adoption is coming. To quote:

Quote from: hdbuck on August 24, 2015, 07:06:50 PM

But this mass thing is so not going to happen anyway, even if you "scale it" in advance. Sry but wake up, in its current form, bitcoin is out of the reach of regular sheeple.

People are too much anticipating, buying the fake dreams of them Antonopoulos, Gavin, Hearn et al., saving the planet with free insta-frappucinos.

I never made the claim that mainstream was coming by tomorrow. The thing is that you and I don't know exactly from where it will come and when. Will it come from a killer app? A monetary crisis? A mass marketeer campaign by the big boys? We don't know. What I do know though is that it will NEVER happen before we let enough room for it to happen.

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 09:12:19 PM

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 09:06:07 PM

IMO, decentralized trading platform has been promoted for some years but never gained enough traction. This is largely due to the fact that no one want to send the money/goods first, and there are many complex scam/theft schemes in payments, which makes the dispute impossible without the involvement of authorities, but when you have authorities that can rely on, you don't really need decentralized trading anymore

This is not a valid point. first decentralized trading platform have never been fully implemented before. You should read more about OpenBazaar, they received 1M$ investment and launching this fall. Joystream is another different beast where you point really don't stand.

A simple example: Someone bought 1 bitcoin from you on OpenBazaar, paid $230 to your bank account, you release the coin to him. The next day, you found out that your bank account is frozen and police called you for an investigation, because the money is hacked from another bank account

How can you mitigate such kind of risk? You must make sure the money is sent from the users own account by asking him to upload his account screenshot together with his ID card. But normally users will refuse to show their ID card to a stranger on a decentralized platform, they would only show it to a well known registered finance institution which have strict rules for customer privacy protection

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 09:13:45 PM

Quote from: brg444 on August 29, 2015, 09:11:17 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 09:09:25 PM

Quote from: brg444 on August 29, 2015, 09:07:52 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 08:56:41 PM

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 08:47:22 PM

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it.

Sounds like the logic of a crippled brain Roll Eyes

How dare you reply to such a brilliant post with such a bland comment?

If OpenBazaar behave they can get a private, anonymity supported sidechain straight out of Blockstream Labs and run their own Lightning hub Wink

That's really cool but the fact is OpenBazaar will deliver much faster than blockstream will.

I would imagine since they got a jump start from code they didn't write Cheesy

I also imagine you are convince hordes of consumers will rush to use OpenBazaar as soon as they officially launch, right?

And you think people will rush into unproven concept / untested sidechains right from their launch? Huh

I don't see where I said that? I'd be much more interested in an anonymous sidechain than crypto-ebay though to be honest...

The issue is the premise of your argument is that Open Bazaar hugely popular market place might get choked out of transaction room.

I advise your to get rid of these disease that is trying to satisfy inexisting demand because "I swear" mass adoption is coming. To quote:

Quote from: hdbuck on August 24, 2015, 07:06:50 PM

But this mass thing is so not going to happen anyway, even if you "scale it" in advance. Sry but wake up, in its current form, bitcoin is out of the reach of regular sheeple.

People are too much anticipating, buying the fake dreams of them Antonopoulos, Gavin, Hearn et al., saving the planet with free insta-frappucinos.

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

Quote from: brg444 on August 29, 2015, 09:11:17 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 09:09:25 PM

Quote from: brg444 on August 29, 2015, 09:07:52 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 08:56:41 PM

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 08:47:22 PM

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it.

Sounds like the logic of a crippled brain Roll Eyes

How dare you reply to such a brilliant post with such a bland comment?

If OpenBazaar behave they can get a private, anonymity supported sidechain straight out of Blockstream Labs and run their own Lightning hub Wink

That's really cool but the fact is OpenBazaar will deliver much faster than blockstream will.

I would imagine since they got a jump start from code they didn't write Cheesy

I also imagine you are convince hordes of consumers will rush to use OpenBazaar as soon as they officially launch, right?

And you think people will rush into unproven concept / untested sidechains right from their launch? Huh

Eastwind

hero member

Activity: 896

Merit: 1000

Block chain size has to increase to accommodate large transaction by people. If somebody wants faster transition, they can sidechain.

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 09:06:07 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 08:56:41 PM

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 08:47:22 PM

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it.

IMO, decentralized trading platform has been promoted for some years but never gained enough traction. This is largely due to the fact that no one want to send the money/goods first, and there are many complex scam/theft schemes in payments, which makes the dispute impossible without the involvement of authorities, but when you have authorities that can rely on, you don't really need decentralized trading anymore

This is not a valid point. first decentralized trading platform have never been fully implemented before. You should read more about OpenBazaar, they received 1M$ investment and launching this fall. Joystream is another different beast where you point really don't stand.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 09:09:25 PM

Quote from: brg444 on August 29, 2015, 09:07:52 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 08:56:41 PM

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 08:47:22 PM

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it.

Sounds like the logic of a crippled brain Roll Eyes

How dare you reply to such a brilliant post with such a bland comment?

If OpenBazaar behave they can get a private, anonymity supported sidechain straight out of Blockstream Labs and run their own Lightning hub Wink

That's really cool but the fact is OpenBazaar will deliver much faster than blockstream will.

I would imagine since they got a jump start from code they didn't write Cheesy

I also imagine you are convince hordes of consumers will rush to use OpenBazaar as soon as they officially launch, right?

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

Quote from: brg444 on August 29, 2015, 09:07:52 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 08:56:41 PM

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 08:47:22 PM

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it.

Sounds like the logic of a crippled brain Roll Eyes

How dare you reply to such a brilliant post with such a bland comment?

If OpenBazaar behave they can get a private, anonymity supported sidechain straight out of Blockstream Labs and run their own Lightning hub Wink

That's really cool but the fact is OpenBazaar will deliver much faster than blockstream will.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 08:56:41 PM

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 08:47:22 PM

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it.

Sounds like the logic of a crippled brain Roll Eyes

How dare you reply to such a brilliant post with such a bland comment?

If OpenBazaar behave they can get a private, anonymity supported sidechain straight out of Blockstream Labs and run their own Lightning hub Wink

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 08:56:41 PM

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 08:47:22 PM

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it.

IMO, decentralized trading platform has been promoted for some years but never gained enough traction. This is largely due to the fact that no one want to send the money/goods first, and there are many complex scam/theft schemes in payments, which makes the dispute impossible without the involvement of authorities, but when you have authorities that can rely on, you don't really need decentralized trading anymore

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 08:47:22 PM

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

And what case do you make about decentralized app that will rely on the blockchain? i.e. OpenBazaar and Joystream?

Crippling the blockchain would just cripple what you can build on top of it.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: johnyj on August 29, 2015, 08:47:22 PM

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity for blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

Fantastic post! Absolutely lucid and rational for once.

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

As long as there is fiat money, people will always first spend it since it is inflationary, so the scenario that bitcoin used for daily spending at large scale will never realize

Then the major usage left are long term saving and international remittance, both happens at very large size (over $100) and very low frequency (once a week/month)

In fact, majority of the transactions today in bitcoin network are pools paying miners and speculators deposit/withdraw from exchanges/gambling sites.

Gambling sites could occupy large amount of transaction capacity of the blockchain, how to move their large amount of traffic offline is a challenge, maybe they should cooperate with bitcoin exchanges and do internal settlement without direct receiving coins from individual users

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on August 29, 2015, 08:31:49 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 10:57:01 AM

You don't seem to grasp the confilct of interest between blocksteam and Core development. I doubt you someday will because you don't seem to know what a conflict of interest actually is. That's OK.

Repeating the 'Vast Blockstream Conspiracy' rumor won't make it true.

Blockstream is scaling Bitcoin in ways far more effective than XT's naive, ham-fisted, derpy 'duh just make the block moar big' approach.

Their Scaling Bitcoin workshops represent the proper way to gather information, share expertise, compare notes, find common ground, identify irreconcilable differences, and ultimately begin to move *with consensus* toward the goal of supporting more transactions, without sacrificing Bitcoin's unique distinguishing features.

Like it or not, at present Dr. Backamoto is effectively Bitcoin's CTO just as gmax is Bitcoin's Chief Scientist. Cool

While Gavin and Hearn are busy splitting the community into warring factions, Blockstream is doing amazing things at the frontier of computer science and cryptography.

EG, https://blockstream.com/2015/08/24/treesignatures/

They are brilliant guys for sure. However, your post is just an ad hominem that has nothing to do with the conflict of interest issue.

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on August 29, 2015, 08:31:49 PM

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 10:57:01 AM

You don't seem to grasp the confilct of interest between blocksteam and Core development. I doubt you someday will because you don't seem to know what a conflict of interest actually is. That's OK.

Repeating the 'Vast Blockstream Conspiracy' rumor won't make it true.

Blockstream is scaling Bitcoin in ways far more effective than XT's naive, ham-fisted, derpy 'duh just make the block moar big' approach.

Their Scaling Bitcoin workshops represent the proper way to gather information, share expertise, compare notes, find common ground, identify irreconcilable differences, and ultimately begin to move *with consensus* toward the goal of supporting more transactions, without sacrificing Bitcoin's unique distinguishing features.

Like it or not, at present Dr. Backamoto is effectively Bitcoin's CTO just as gmax is Bitcoin's Chief Scientist. Cool

While Gavin and Hearn are busy splitting the community into warring factions, Blockstream is doing amazing things at the frontier of computer science and cryptography.

EG, https://blockstream.com/2015/08/24/treesignatures/

Breadwallet just disagree with you:

https://twitter.com/breadwalletapp/status/636548340595843072

I hope you don't use it! Cheesy

iCEBREAKER

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1072

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

Quote from: knight22 on August 29, 2015, 10:57:01 AM

You don't seem to grasp the confilct of interest between blocksteam and Core development. I doubt you someday will because you don't seem to know what a conflict of interest actually is. That's OK.

Repeating the 'Vast Blockstream Conspiracy' rumor won't make it true.

Blockstream is scaling Bitcoin in ways far more effective than XT's naive, ham-fisted, derpy 'duh just make the block moar big' approach.

Their Scaling Bitcoin workshops represent the proper way to gather information, share expertise, compare notes, find common ground, identify irreconcilable differences, and ultimately begin to move *with consensus* toward the goal of supporting more transactions, without sacrificing Bitcoin's unique distinguishing features.

Like it or not, at present Dr. Backamoto is effectively Bitcoin's CTO just as gmax is Bitcoin's Chief Scientist. Cool

While Gavin and Hearn are busy splitting the community into mutually-destructive warring factions, Blockstream is doing amazing things at the frontier of computer science and cryptography.

EG, https://blockstream.com/2015/08/24/treesignatures/

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

I cant change your beliefs that we dont need bigger blocks but fortunately the miners are already voting on bigger blocks so I really dont care.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on August 29, 2015, 02:02:29 PM

1. Again: This was debated for 3 years. Gavin was forced to release something with Mike Hearn
because Greg and the kids on the blockstream wouldn't play ball. If they really wanted to
release something, they would have worked with Gavin so the solution is more to their preferences. Either
their interests in Blockstream prevented that, or they lack leadership/communication/team
skills. Either way is a problem. I think when you boil it down, they just don't see the urgency
as Gavin does. Maybe that's because of their other solutions like the lightening network.
Maybe they are willing to stall Bitcoin and take bigger risks. They don't want to take technical
risks purportedly, but they are willing to risk slowing down adoption. There is a risk/reward.
and part of their reward is blockstream business activities. This is what you seem to deny.

Quote from: brg444 on August 29, 2015, 12:28:53 PM

Absolutely not what happened. You can read about it here.

As far as the rest of the post your are just making an ass of yourself again making all kinds of disingenuous assumptions.

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on August 29, 2015, 02:02:29 PM

2. This leads to the next point. Gavin says a fix is urgently needed.
I say an imperfect fix IS better than no solution. Gavin
essentially said "Core devs won't agree, but we need bigger blocks,
so I'm going to do the best thing I can and release Bip 101 on Mike's fork."
No one ever said Bip 101 was perfect, but who are you to say its "broken"
and its worse than no solution? I guess you know more about bitcoin than
Gavin so we should listen to you. Roll Eyes

---

That you fell into the "urgency" trap does not mean everyone is stupid enough to do so.

You can find various explanations on the web as to why it is broken. In short: an arbitrary limit (8MB) picked out of a chinese fortune cookie and an absolutely irresponsible activation threshold (75%)

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on August 29, 2015, 02:02:29 PM

The only way your position even makes sense is if you truly believe its not
important to have bigger blocks asap. It must mean you agree with the devs
who aren't ready to raise the limit. Somehow it doesn't scare you. You're not
worried about scalability. Again, risk/reward. But you won't be getting the
rewards that blockstream and its investors get by taking their side.

Have you taken a looked at the average block size recently? We've been averaging less than 500kb for most of the year. Considering this, I indeed fail to see the need for "bigger blocks asap"

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on August 29, 2015, 02:02:29 PM

But you won't be getting the rewards that blockstream and its investors get by taking their side.

Topic: Thoughts from Russia on the block size situation and Blockstream - page 7. (Read 7429 times)