Too much politics. Is there some technical reason we can't have both bigger blocks and better blocks? Is this more than jockeying for power?
That's the plan: Segwit = 1.7mb to 3mb (depending use), plus solves tx malleability.
Obviously, all these "disagreements" aren't about the ~300kb difference between segwit and a 2mb hf.
Okay. So, why not change a one to a two now while we wait for the other, presumably more convoluted, stuff to get done?
When you are dealing with billions of dollars, it would be irresponsible to suddenly change without any actual techinical reason (besides a bunch of loud mouthed cunts complaining).
You disagree that we will need greater transaction capacity in the foreseeable future?
I don't know. You seem to be attempting to attribute a claim to me that I am not making. Most people, including myself, seem to believe that some kind of increased blocksize limit is going to have to take place down the road (the extent to which the time-line for such capacity increase is foreseeble seems somewhat speculative).
Too terse and jam-packed with infos; fleshed out the first paragraph 4 u.
I don't know. You seem to be attempting to attempt to attribute a claim to me that I am not attempting to make, and/or have attempted to make in the past or am in the process of currently making. Had i have attempted to make such claim, which you are attempting to attribute to me, to wit that we will need greater transaction capacity in the foreseeable future, which as stated previously, I have not attempted to make, nor am likely to make in the foreseeable future, my line of argument would be quite unlike the one to be pursued below, i.e the one i find fitting to pursue in light of your nasty and manipulative misinterpretation of my intended claim, which, as I believe I have conclusively conveyed, was not the claim that i have attempted to make.
Most people, including myself, i.e. I and many, though not all, people who are not myself, or, in layman's terms "the others," of whom there are more than one or several, and, implicitly, significantly more than one, that is up to as many as all, though I'm not attempting to imply that all the people concur with the claim which I have not made, thou such an claim would be justifiable, nay, almost begging, though make such a claim which you are attempting to attribute to me I have not made, seem to believe that some kind or another of increased blocksize limit is going to have to take place, or rather, will be appropriate, down the road (the extent to which the time-line, that is to say the time dimension of the space-time continuum, which accounts for sequentuality and temporaity of the topic at hand by allowing flux in the system that, otherwise, would be doomed to the stasis of pure persistance, which is to say "our world as we know it," for such capacity increase is foreseeble, in as much as anything could be said to be foreseeable to a predictable degree of certitude, seems somewhat, albeit not altogether, speculative).
Western union and paypal base their fees on the amount of money moved. Bitcoin bases its fees on size of actual transactions in data terms. Very different business models. Pretending that you can directly compare them is fraudulent.
Bitcoin is not a business.
Correct. That's why he's telling you that you can't compare not_a_business to a_business, it don't work.
I did not read all of your rewriting of my sentences because it seems like a complete waste of time because it really boils down to a childish form of an
ad hominem attack.
Don't you have better things to do with your time?
O.k.. yep, the job of a troller is to attack and to distract with non-sense, and I suppose in that regard you are attempting to earn your money with such efforts?
And, since you are getting paid for these kinds of trolling efforts (hopefully you get paid well, maybe ?? I hope. Is it by the post or by the hour or a salary?
I imagine you are getting paid by the post (in BTC how ironic), maybe .01 or more BTC per post? or some other rate,... I'm kind of guessing the rate. The best paying signature campaigns receive around .0015 per posts, yet the best paying ones explicitly require that posters do not spam or troll, and even the best paying signature campaigns are not going to bring anywhere near enough money to live (maybe .2BTC or so per month). Even if you live in some very cheap place, you need to be able to make 1 BTC per month or so to live, no? I suppose it could be a supplemental income too, even with all your creative efforts?
Since you are getting paid for your distracting efforts, then I suppose, there is some kind of value. In this regard, you get paid and your employer gets some of the value of your efforts as part of the troll/shill team. I hope that you are making at least a couple of BTC per month for your attempts (before you get banned).
