Topic: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT - page 117. (Read 157137 times)

the real funny thing is that i hated xt's 100mb, 20mb, 8mb proposals.
i have not or will not download classic, xt or BU

just because someone wants more capacity doesnt mean they are die hard gavin coin lovers.

and just because someone points out that segwit has some negatives (and i admit positives too) doesnt make them a bitcoin-core hater..

im just pissed off with all the social drama and bickering. which is more aimed at the people instead of the code

but when you do wipe away all the social drama of the leaders of camp blockstream or camp gavincoin and just look at the code of a simple and basic 2mb block increase.. you will realise that a 2mb rule will allow segwit to still do what they want to do, still allow miners to just make 1mb blocks..
it wont kill off bitcoin-core..

it wont actually stop blockstream from doing what they want. all blockstream need to do to stick with 1mb for block creation preference(for miners) and 2mb for user acceptance block limit. that way everyone can work together.. and both bandcamps can just do what they do best... CODE!

again i think the drama is just white noise. and detracting from the actual debate about what the code will do..

so carry on with your buzz words like ZOMG toominista REKT etc as much as you like. as it just seems like you are just posting stuff for personal entertainment rather than actually making a point about the future of bitcoin CODE

miners have already proven that even if there are 10,000 tx's waiting.. they are not going to throw every transaction into a block.
if there was a 95% consensus for 2mb.. miners would wait a bit just to make sure its not a fluke of sybil attack by gavin and cohorts..
and once they see that it is 95% of genuine users wanting and able to accept 2mb.. then miners will upgrade..
but. their first block after the upgrade will be 1.000.250byte. as they dont want to push the luck of wasting too much time..
slowly over days weeks and months they will raise their preference up bit by bit..

just like miners who have had 1mb limit for a few years now have had preferential settings below 1mb.. so dont expect instant jump to 2mb.. because the fee's wont be worth it.

imagine it.. fee=4cent.. which on 4000 lean transactions is only $160..
do you really think miners are going to suddenly throw 8000 tx's at a block instantly.. risking $10,000 block reward.. just for the sake of $320..

there is no logic at all to jump straight to full 2mb.. but there is logic to slowly do
4001tx
4002tx
and so increasing incrementally when they find they can comfortably handle it.

and as for a malicious person doing a single tx with large amount of data..
most miners would ignore it just as they ignore 0fee transactions(because they can), if its going to risk their chance of the $10,000 block reward..

and anyone wanting to try bribing a miner into doing a single tx of 1mb.. would need to have fee's of a few thousand dollars.. which as afew have said would cause delay for 10 minutes.. which if you look into the recent past.. no one really screams blue murder if a block takes 12 minutes..

and do you think that the malicious user could continue making these large transactions if it costs thousands each time.. nope.. their money will dry out first.

so its just scaremongering and not seeing the reality of scenario's

2mb ToominBlocks will be filled instantly, because of the massive, irresistible financial incentive to short ToominCoins.  Everyone will be doing it.

And you failed to provide a response to the mention of >10 minute validation times.

Do you believe ignoring the problem with quadratic sigop lag will just go away if you ignore it, or do you not even understand what that means?


As for Peter "Frictionless Spherical Blockchains in a Vacuum" Rizun's obscurantist scientificism, remember how utterly anti-predictive his past hypotheses have been.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12160206  (locked thread, can't quote)

Nice chart. I like your style

They won't do that if:
A) The attack is malicious and the person would most likely include an unusually high fee (what's a few thousands dollars to attack Bitcoin? Nothing).
B) The miner itself is malicious.

Should we ignore the fact that this opens up another attack vector, really?

and 2000 people wanting to do a transaction should wait 1 hour to get a confirmation?, purely because miners ignore transactions because there is not space for every transaction to fit. like they have been doing for the last year+

so 2000 people every 10 minutes have to get pissed off waiting 1 hour.. all because..
1 person "may" make 1 transaction that takes 10 minutes.

mmmm.. do you see the imbalance in that mindset.. ?

the funny thing is that miners can ignore spam transactions and leave that 1 large tx sat doing nothing.. instead of ignoring normal transactions..

in short
large single transactions of high bytes, are not going to cause an issue.. as you said.. it can get dealt with in 10 minutes..
but pissing off people making them wait an hour will cause issues.. and that cant be resolved in 10 minutes

I never said that. Either you are trying to manipulate my words or are failing to understand it. What I'm saying is, is that a single transaction can be constructed that would cause problems to the network.

saying blocks will be instantly filled right to the top of the 2mb limit.. is just scaremongering propoganda to try keeping people away from that idea. using no logic..

so this image shows it better..

That does it.  I'm all out of #rekt memes.   

Interesting ...

http://8btc.com/thread-28217-1-1.html

Didn't read but I miss you. Nice hat, grandpa.

That'll learn me.

There are other issues with morons like you. Long to validate transactions are just the tip of iceberg. I believe that's why I've just Ignored you.

There are other issues with small blocks. Long transaction confirmations times are just the tip of the ice'n'berg. I believe that's why Satoshi was so blasé about how easy it was to increase the limit with a simple change.

There are other issues with large blocks. Long to validate transactions are just the tip of iceberg. I believe that's why Satoshi eventually deferred the removal of his limit.

I hope that you're being sarcastic else this is just an appeal to authority. Satoshi is indeed a very great man, but that does not mean that he has the answers (or the best answers) to everything.

2 MB blocks are indeed dangerous ATM. It is possible to construct a transaction that would take too long to validate (over 10 minutes) due to the quadratic scaling (validation time).

No wonder the Tooministas promptly memory-holed Marshall Long from their dev list (and replaced him with Peter_R, master of Powerpoint pull reqs).

But the shills will. And that's what the whole fun is about.

Ahh, now I get it!


Satoshi will return eventually.  But sorry, not tonight dear!