Topic: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT - page 103. (Read 157137 times)

Thanks for the contribution.


 

I was just remarking on how Unlimiturd didn't even warrant a #R3KT thread to mark its death from suffocation under 10,000 coats of paint.

 

I'd be even more keen to know my money is not being "upgraded" ad infinity and subject to thousand and thousand lines of useless code being constantly added..

Less code please and feel free to do whatever you want on top of it, scam people, raise VC money, really what-thefuck-ever.

That's the correct way of saying it.

http://bravetheworld.com/2016/02/09/faith-bitcoin-restored/

Relevant.

So.  Fekkin.  Rekt.   

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-February/012412.html

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/44k1jo/how_does_gavin_know_there_will_be_thousands_of/czquq39

 

No, the final call is due to control of the code repository.

This final call is due to voting share based on mining share?

Fidelity was planning to pay market price for the block space it used.  

To get a feel for the market price of block space, the average fee per kilobyte paid in 2015-Q2 was 320 bits/kB.  At an exchange rate of $400/BTC, this equates to a cost of $128,000.00 / GB.  

It is interesting to compare this to the cost of AWS S3 storage (presently $0.03 / GB per month).  Since Blockchain storage is "forever" and the AWS storage is paid monthly, we need to calculate the net present value (NPV) of storing 1 GB of data "forever" to make an apples-to-apples comparison.  Assuming an interest rate of 6%, the NPV for storing data in the cloud forever works out to $6 / GB.  

So, storing data "forever" in the blockchain is presently approximately 20,000 times more expensive than storing it "forever" in the cloud.  In other words, it's not cheap!

Because Toomin has the "final call" like Hearn does with XT.

Because the project was to issue securitized assets in "a blockchain" to allow transfer among users.

The bitcoin protocol allows the creation of and transfer of zero value coins. From a technical perspective this is quite useful, for example-- if there were ever a desire to increase the granularity of coins or deploy confidential transactions in a backwards compatible way.. this would be used. Zero value coins could also be used as semaphors in complex smart contracts.

But in the present without applications it's an obnoxious DOS vector and so Bitcoin Core won't relay or mine them; but miners can easily bypass that restriction and already do so.

Plus, even if zero was blocked blocked... the alternative would be to use 1e-8 BTC payments which is so tiny as to be almost nothing. (A single Bitcoin in 1e-8 BTC payments would use 6GB of blockchain space).  The point that these "applications" can be done without any use of the Bitcoin currency _at all_ just lays bare what an abuse of the system they are.

BlindMayorBitcorn, I can't help but observe that flooding a thread with tripe-- as you appear to be doing-- when it isn't going your way is literally straight out of the GCHQ public communication subversion playbook. Also, did you forget to switch accounts? You're responding to yourself.

Adds a dash of salt to the wound, don'it?

Can anybody explain to me in small words how it's possible for Fidelity or whoever to have planned to send 0-fee 0-value transactions? Is that a bug?

Ok so association with the Toomincoin name is a way of expressing a theory without using the btc classic name?

Presumably because "Bitcoin Classic" is probably the most offensively newspeak-ish name in the history of software development.

Stupid question maybe but I missed the reason...

Why is everyone calling bitcoin_classic, Toomincoin ?

Hmm. Thanks.

How did we stop this from happening??

In one of Garzik's speeches he refereed to the "fidelity problem" suggesting that Fidelity could possibly be interested in using bitcoin but is holding off because bitcoin's lack of capacity made it unsuitable. Greg just filled us in on the details that was left out of Jeff's speech and shed new light what Fidelity had in mind with Bitcoin.

Here is the speech -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgjrS-BPWDQ&feature=youtu.be&t=3h31m13s

Thank goodness we avoided Fidelity spamming the blockchain without paying tx fees.