A tiny fraction, LOL...
Maybe here in censored bitcointard.org land.
Lauda should have corrected the statement to say "a tiny
very vocal fraction" - which still remains true that they are tiny, and with very big mouths.
this is very untrue
dose no one remember that statement a large amount of large players signed?
lots of big players are for block size incress.
they want blocksize incress because they feel it will allow bitcoin to grow and so there businesses will grow too...
GREED IS GOOD!
O.k.
If you think it is relevant, then show the list.
Pursuit of such a topic seems to be a bit outdated, and if the statement and the signed supporters is not current, then why would we believe, necessarily that they still hold such a position. The other thing is that I really have neither seen evidence establishing that bitcoin is in some kind of crisis that actually needs a blocksize increase, so the issue still remains that even if there are still a few "prominent persons" on the supposed list, what are they arguing for exactly? Some kind of variation of XT or classic?
dose no one remember that statement a large amount of large players signed?
lots of big players are for block size incress.
they want blocksize incress because they feel it will allow bitcoin to grow and so there businesses will grow too...
I remember them: corporations (not developers or users) stacked with former employees of PayPal, Goldman Sachs, the Irish Central Bank, WalMart etc. Co
inbase were up until recently touting their 100% reserves: apparently, they're now been busted on that false claim, and don't actually operate with 100% reserves.
That's some real classy "big players" you're referring to, big bank gangsters in essence. What a big surprise that they're recommending/funding propaganda for changes to the network that will cripple or kill it.
Oh? seems like I may have posted before seeing this response, and your response seems to have adequately addressed this claim from Adam.
