ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT - page 57.

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2349

Eadem mutata resurgo

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on March 28, 2016, 06:47:13 PM

Like herpes, Hearn is the gift that keeps on giving.

IOW, he hasn't stopped whining about his rage-quit.

Quote

Bitcoin's problem is not a lack of a leader, it's problem is that the leader is Gregory Maxwell at Blockstream and he's a terrible decision maker.

Blockstream is the source of the refusal to bump the block size.

Indeed, the block size debate did not stalemate. It resulted in the small blockists winning, due to the much more aggressive tactics they used

OK Mikey, tell us all about how Core's roadmap is "much more aggressive" than XT/Classic's governance coup and contentious hardfork at ~75% ... Roll Eyes

Him and Swanson must have run out of things to BS each other about at R3CEV ... they are like out best weapon against the banks, dump your dross coders and 'thought leaders' into a "bankcoin' blockchain fintech project and demand outrageous salaries.

iCEBREAKER

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1072

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

Like herpes, Hearn is the gift that keeps on giving.

IOW, he hasn't stopped whining about his rage-quit.

Quote

Bitcoin's problem is not a lack of a leader, it's problem is that the leader is Gregory Maxwell at Blockstream and he's a terrible decision maker.

Blockstream is the source of the refusal to bump the block size.

Indeed, the block size debate did not stalemate. It resulted in the small blockists winning, due to the much more aggressive tactics they used

OK Mikey, tell us all about how Core's roadmap is "much more aggressive" than XT/Classic's governance coup and contentious hardfork at ~75% ... Roll Eyes

HostFat

staff

Activity: 4270

Merit: 1209

I support freedom of choice

@Carlton Banks
I don't think that you are really interesting on the debate, you are probably just trolling or don't know on what you are talking about.
There are some users that are already on my ignore list, many that I've found on this thread, you are now the next one.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: HostFat on March 28, 2016, 06:15:08 PM

Other clients (unlimited, xt and classic) are working on solutions to scale "on-chain", they are doing it because it is possible and they haven't any conflict of interest on giving these kind of solutions.

It isn't possible to scale something that's already at it's maximum growth. Y'know, all those threads titled "BLOCKS ARE FULL" and so on.

You're part of that group that just wants to keep trying it the old way, but we're moving on from the days of "lets add more wings! And more propellors!". It's turbofan time.

"Move on" is the only option, the only question is which direction you head in. Just do it already, preferably somewhere where repetitive politicking is appreciated (let's be honest, I'm telling you you're going nowhere, as everybody dislikes being told what to think)

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2349

Eadem mutata resurgo

Quote from: bargainbin on March 28, 2016, 04:39:51 PM

Bitcoin needs to shrink!

... rather, you need a shrink. You're the sickest thing on this whole forum, imho.

HostFat

staff

Activity: 4270

Merit: 1209

I support freedom of choice

@Carlton Banks
I don't think that bitcoin is for the rich now... but some are pushing on this way buy doing wrong short term choices, to please their investors.

Other clients (unlimited, xt and classic) are working on solutions to scale "on-chain", they are doing it because it is possible and they haven't any conflict of interest on giving these kind of solutions.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: HostFat on March 28, 2016, 05:36:19 PM

Rich people to be rich need that poorers people use and accept the same money, there is no other way around.

If Bitcoin is for the rich, explain it's popularity in Venezuela or the Russian gov banning it. It's cheaper and more useful than traditional banking now, or nobody would use it for anything.

Get some perspective: Bitcoin has and will grow much faster than any blocksize limit (and those who promoted blocksize-as-a-scaling-solution like Gavin Andresen know this only too well). Adding more blocksize space without improving the efficiency of the space, it's like trying to fight fires with gasoline in the water hose.

This paradigm has maxed out it's growth potential. Time for a new one. Or maybe you could just recommend the old one to us. Again.

HostFat

staff

Activity: 4270

Merit: 1209

I support freedom of choice

Rich people to be rich need that poorers people use and accept the same money, there is no other way around.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: Bergmann_Christoph on March 28, 2016, 04:37:03 PM

Ok. Good bye, have fun. I'm sure you will enjoy exciting discussions!

And yes: Things are simpler without people that have another opinion. Glad you realized.

The point of differentiating opinions based on technical expertise has long been passed. We are in the age of "I'm right because I think so", shilling, promoting and whatnot. This does not help either side. This isn't about "another opinion" anymore (people who want to have a healthy discussion are very welcome though).

Quote from: bargainbin on March 28, 2016, 04:39:51 PM

Bitcoin needs to shrink!

Interesting statement.

bargainbin

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Quote from: Lauda on March 28, 2016, 03:29:20 PM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on March 28, 2016, 03:25:12 PM

Thank you Adam, you're the first Classic/2MB shill who has been polite enough to ask. Please leave.

Carlton, where have you been? Your direct approach was missing in some of these discussions (for a while).
Anyhow, you do make a point. The majority of the users do not like the people supporting controversial hard forks in addition to all of them being moved to the altcoin section. Things would be much more simpler if people like Veritas, Adam, etc. just left. Forums have been created to suit the needs of the people supporting such forks, they might as well use them.

Right on! We never liked him anyhow.

Bitcoin needs to shrink!

Bergmann_Christoph

sr. member

Activity: 409

Merit: 286

Quote from: Lauda on March 28, 2016, 03:29:20 PM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on March 28, 2016, 03:25:12 PM

Thank you Adam, you're the first Classic/2MB shill who has been polite enough to ask. Please leave.

Carlton, where have you been? Your direct approach was missing in some of these discussions (for a while).
Anyhow, you do make a point. The majority of the users do not like the people supporting controversial hard forks in addition to all of them being moved to the altcoin section. Things would be much more simpler if people like Veritas, Adam, etc. just left. Forums have been created to suit the needs of the people supporting such forks, they might as well use them.

Ok. Good bye, have fun. I'm sure you will enjoy exciting discussions!

And yes: Things are simpler without people that have another opinion. Glad you realized.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: Carlton Banks on March 28, 2016, 03:25:12 PM

Thank you Adam, you're the first Classic/2MB shill who has been polite enough to ask. Please leave.

Carlton, where have you been? Your direct approach was missing in some of these discussions (for a while).
Anyhow, you do make a point. The majority of the users do not like the people supporting controversial hard forks in addition to all of them being moved to the altcoin section. Things would be much more simpler if people like Veritas, Adam, etc. just left. Forums have been created to suit the needs of the people supporting such forks, they might as well use them.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: adamstgBit on March 28, 2016, 02:42:42 PM

please make it clear that "we" aren't welcome here.

Thank you Adam, you're the first Classic/2MB shill who has been polite enough to ask. Please leave.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: adamstgBit on March 28, 2016, 02:42:42 PM

untill LN proves itself.
i think it might be wise to bump the blocklimit just enough to not hurt adoption.
once LN has proven itself, then, sure, be very conservative with future blocklimit incress to make sure max-decentralization is kept.

This tactic makes no sense:"Let's not be conservative because we want adoption (i.e. because of greed), and let's be conservative later once LN is ready.". Segwit will provide adequate transaction capacity for the network at the moment. It should be fine until sometime in 2017. There is no need to bump the block size limit right now.

Quote from: adamstgBit on March 28, 2016, 02:42:42 PM

you spread your mindset and i'll spread mine?? if you really dont want opposing views and discussion on this forum please make it clear that "we" aren't welcome here.

Spreading a healthy mindset is great, what your "friends" are doing is not.

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: Lauda on March 28, 2016, 02:35:54 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on March 28, 2016, 01:55:33 PM

show me the money!
lightning network sounds good, but its not like its widely used and has been peer reviewed for vulnerabilities.
i dont think we should bank on unproven tech.
but ya it sounds very cool.

This thinking pattern is very wrong. Please stop spreading the mindset from bad forums/reddit pages. Instead of constanly complaining about everything, you could try helping. There was a period in time where the shills used the "LN is vaporware." tactic which was quickly disproved. LN is in development by various groups and you can't expect it to be reviewed and tested already.

untill LN proves itself.
i think it might be wise to bump the blocklimit just enough to not hurt adoption.
once LN has proven itself, then, sure, be very conservative with future blocklimit incress to make sure max-decentralization is kept.

you spread your mindset and i'll spread mine?? if you really dont want opposing views and discussion on this forum please make it clear that "we" aren't welcome here.

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: illyiller on March 28, 2016, 02:07:45 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on March 28, 2016, 01:55:33 PM

but its not like its widely used and has been peer reviewed for vulnerabilities.
i dont think we should bank on unproven tech.
but ya it sounds very cool.

Sounds sorta like ETH. Yet so many XT/Classic supporters are claiming ETH solves bitcoin's problems, including scalability -- "and so we must increase block size to compete with the unproven, highly vulnerable ETH!" Roll Eyes

ETH has been widely used for months now, and its market cap is 1/10^th of bitcoins.
it still remains "unproven" in my view, but day by day its getting more and more "proven"
yes BTC is competing with ETH... and ETH sure as hell won't be the last altcoin to compete with BTC.
the premises that bitcoin would become valueless if its blocks got much bigger is going to be put to the test.
bitcoin will self impose a 1MB limit. other coins won't.

if its true that max-decentralization is what the market wants then we have nothing to worry about.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: adamstgBit on March 28, 2016, 01:55:33 PM

show me the money!
lightning network sounds good, but its not like its widely used and has been peer reviewed for vulnerabilities.
i dont think we should bank on unproven tech.
but ya it sounds very cool.

This thinking pattern is very wrong. Please stop spreading the toxic mindset. Instead of constanly complaining about everything, you could try helping. There was a period in time where the shills used the "LN is vaporware." tactic which was quickly disproved. LN is in development by various groups and you can't expect it to be reviewed and tested already.

illyiller

hero member

Activity: 697

Merit: 520

Quote from: adamstgBit on March 28, 2016, 01:55:33 PM

but its not like its widely used and has been peer reviewed for vulnerabilities.
i dont think we should bank on unproven tech.
but ya it sounds very cool.

Sounds sorta like ETH. Yet so many XT/Classic supporters are claiming ETH solves bitcoin's problems, including scalability -- "and so we must increase block size to compete with the unproven, highly vulnerable ETH!" Roll Eyes

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: Lauda on March 27, 2016, 03:11:34 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 27, 2016, 01:02:20 PM

Lightning network is just the first example of can be done building on P2SH with payment channels.

The lightning network is a great achievement. It is quite unfortunate that people are bashing it. LN has a theoretically infinite capacity. It is absurdly more efficient than transacting on the main-chain in addition to being both decentralized (it should be) and secure as well. It is currently the only known way for Bitcoin to scale towards mainstream adoption.

show me the money!
lightning network sounds good, but its not like its widely used and has been peer reviewed for vulnerabilities.
i dont think we should bank on unproven tech.
but ya it sounds very cool.

Sam Weir

newbie

Activity: 27

Merit: 0

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: exstasie on March 25, 2016, 08:34:02 PM

What are you suggesting? That we should ignore the fact that people like frapdoc and jl777 pulled massive scams on the bitcoin community? If you're suggesting that everyone in the community has done so.... well, I disagree.

JL777 did never scam anyone. He is one of the best devs in crypto. Some recent info on supernet http://coremedia.info/index.php/supernet/item/229-supernet-weekly-no1

The rest of the interwebz seems to disagree with you....

Topic: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT - page 57. (Read 157137 times)