Coin
Explanation
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19177. (Read 26608255 times)
February 26, 2016, 01:00:48 PM
February 26, 2016, 01:00:36 PM
^such insight govy.
You dont like it when your decerebrated croonies finally sees the light and wonder about blocksize inflation leading the nodes into centralized large datacenters. But who cares right? You Classic fuckwits already run most of your nodes using AWS free trials
You dont like it when your decerebrated croonies finally sees the light and wonder about blocksize inflation leading the nodes into centralized large datacenters. But who cares right? You Classic fuckwits already run most of your nodes using AWS free trials
February 26, 2016, 12:36:15 PM
^^Copy-pasting bits of your self-moderated thread with a question mark tacked on the end? Not even trolling, just spam. Might as well paste lorem ipsum.
Not interesting, adds nothing, minimal "meaning and lel through repetition" (the guy with Northern Exposure moose does it well, you do not).
If you are seriously struggling to understand how Bitcoin works, ask complete, direct questions. Make sure they're your own.
This is merely a suggestion
Not interesting, adds nothing, minimal "meaning and lel through repetition" (the guy with Northern Exposure moose does it well, you do not).
If you are seriously struggling to understand how Bitcoin works, ask complete, direct questions. Make sure they're your own.
This is merely a suggestion
February 26, 2016, 12:01:15 PM
But seriously, eli5 it to me now. How will decentralization be altered in a meaningful way if the number of nodes go down from 6000 to 2000 (I don't think it would, but I'm curious nonetheless)?
What is often overlooked is the fact that number of nodes is irrelevant if all nodes are run by the same parties, this is why it's crucial that the nodes can be run on people's personal computers at home, at their offices, and so on. "Specialization" of nodes, would kill Bitcoin as we know it (as a decentralized currency), this is why there is a clear agenda by some people to raise the block size and make Bitcoin nodes end up as centralized as mining is right now.
?
February 26, 2016, 12:00:46 PM
February 26, 2016, 11:45:39 AM
Launch window opening in a couple of days for Bitcoin Earth to Mars minimum energy transit and escape from the $500 sphere of gravity.
All lights continue to be green.
February 26, 2016, 11:37:37 AM
https://medium.com/@LeoAW/what-makes-bitcoin-secure-and-how-transaction-fees-keep-it-secure-86c36ec58cf#.sgvi4guoz
Quote
Conclusion
In conclusion, even with efficiency improvements like Segregated Witnesses, and alternative payment channels like Lightning, it will not be possible to scale Bitcoin to a value far above that of today without compromising its security. Significant blocksize increases might relieve fee pressure, but might carry with them other security or centralization issues not discussed here.
In conclusion, even with efficiency improvements like Segregated Witnesses, and alternative payment channels like Lightning, it will not be possible to scale Bitcoin to a value far above that of today without compromising its security. Significant blocksize increases might relieve fee pressure, but might carry with them other security or centralization issues not discussed here.
Lots of "if's" there. When every number in a calculation is an unknown...
February 26, 2016, 11:35:21 AM
Who are these people? Upper picture dunno chinese miners maybe? And the second one? Sorry for prob stupid question I'm just curious who the "wolves" are ))))
They know who you are. That's the important thing. Go out and have fun tonight. Let them do the worrying.
February 26, 2016, 11:32:56 AM
...It's a slidebar situation, not a binary one. The more you push the slidebar higher, the more problems you create. And pushing it just to satisfy the need for spam is irrational.
Yes, why others can't see it is beyond me.
How much of centralization are you willing to sacrifice in order to support more dust transactions? Good question.
It's more of a silly question. Or, dare I say it? A frickin' stupid question. Because it presupposes that centralization will be altered in a meaningful way.
Let me use the "two wolves and one sheep deciding on dinner" analogy smalblockers have run into the ground:
Right now, it's not 2 wolves and a sheep, it's NINE wolves and a sheep.
You're the sheep.
The wolves are all friends, they hang together, already shook hands on having you for dinner.
Here, sheep:
Now tell me more about slidebars.
Who are these people? Upper picture dunno chinese miners maybe? And the second one? Sorry for prob stupid question I'm just curious who the "wolves" are ))))
February 26, 2016, 11:30:08 AM
https://medium.com/@LeoAW/what-makes-bitcoin-secure-and-how-transaction-fees-keep-it-secure-86c36ec58cf#.sgvi4guoz
Quote
Conclusion
In conclusion, even with efficiency improvements like Segregated Witnesses, and alternative payment channels like Lightning, it will not be possible to scale Bitcoin to a value far above that of today without compromising its security. Significant blocksize increases might relieve fee pressure, but might carry with them other security or centralization issues not discussed here.
In conclusion, even with efficiency improvements like Segregated Witnesses, and alternative payment channels like Lightning, it will not be possible to scale Bitcoin to a value far above that of today without compromising its security. Significant blocksize increases might relieve fee pressure, but might carry with them other security or centralization issues not discussed here.
February 26, 2016, 11:26:28 AM
the price is pretty stable right now, im wondering if it will stay like that for a while, im looking to buy some bitcoins but honestly i dont have the courage to do that now
February 26, 2016, 11:19:12 AM
Launch window opening in a couple of days for Bitcoin Earth to Mars minimum energy transit and escape from the $500 sphere of gravity.
All lights continue to be green.
February 26, 2016, 11:17:12 AM
Blocks are full again. I think this will now probably happen any time the market tries to pump.
I don't see much upside but there's a lot of potential downside.
I don't see much upside but there's a lot of potential downside.
The bulls have a couple of days to break resistance at 450$. If they fail, there will be a lot of panicky downtrend.
Especially considering the hope from the halving price rise has decreased a lot since everyone is waiting it :-/
The miners will pump the jam or loose money.
February 26, 2016, 11:00:50 AM
February 26, 2016, 10:15:44 AM
February 26, 2016, 10:02:40 AM
Blocks are full again. I think this will now probably happen any time the market tries to pump.
I don't see much upside but there's a lot of potential downside.
I don't see much upside but there's a lot of potential downside.
The bulls have a couple of days to break resistance at 450$. If they fail, there will be a lot of panicky downtrend.
Especially considering the hope from the halving price rise has decreased a lot since everyone is waiting it :-/
February 26, 2016, 10:01:22 AM
Lambie, you’re becoming a bully like iCEBREAKER 
Now you're being unfair. Lambie has always been an asshole. iCEBREAKER is the pretender. And not a very good one.
But seriously, eli5 it to me now. How will decentralization be altered in a meaningful way if the number of nodes go down from 6000 to 2000 (I don't think it would, but I'm curious nonetheless)?
Good question. I don't know. I'm blind as a bat over here.
February 26, 2016, 10:00:48 AM
February 26, 2016, 09:56:37 AM
Blocks are full again. I think this will now probably happen any time the market tries to pump.
I don't see much upside but there's a lot of potential downside.
I don't see much upside but there's a lot of potential downside.
The bulls have a couple of days to break resistance at 450$. If they fail, there will be a lot of panicky downtrend.
February 26, 2016, 09:53:54 AM
Lambie, you’re becoming a bully like iCEBREAKER
Now you're being unfair. Lambie has always been an asshole. iCEBREAKER is the pretender. And not a very good one.
But seriously, eli5 it to me now. How will decentralization be altered in a meaningful way if the number of nodes go down from 6000 to 2000 (I don't think it would, but I'm curious nonetheless)?
Jump to: