Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19283. (Read 26606905 times)

Well we should maybe stop moving up and get some stability on the 415 ^^

When the 415 floor will be strong enough, yeah let's move up again!

If not intentionally misleading its is downright stupid when a perfectly good analogy is available . Gavin and Brian spouting that nonsense should know better and its disturbing to hear it from them.

To be clear ... this is a far better analogy--

Different browsers = Bitcoin Core, Bitcore, libbitcoin , ect....
Different protocols = TCP/IP and those that suggest we make some changes to make a new internet where existing browsers suddenly become incompatible with it.

Notice how standards that break the functionality of old browsers are rarely , if ever introduced on the internet. I can still run "mosaic-ck" and lynx browser on my linux computer with no problem and while I am unable to use all that fancy javascript/css/flash/ect I can use TCP/IP just fine as originally intended and surf the web, send emails, and read text. The internet was built with stacks and layers of technology to insure backward compatibility and a HF is the exact opposite of this. So no, it isn't just an imperfect analogy but one that is extremely misleading.


We are building a tank with hardened steal, exploding anti- tank missile panels, advanced engine and suspension components for maneuverability, and a more efficient engine to carry a larger capacity and more ammo...

You simply want to double the weight of the tank and throw a bigger cc diesel engine in her that guzzles more fuel.  

in a way, this is really funny. Core wants to keep blocks small to encourage nodes and they are. They have spawned over a thousand Classic nodes.

Eventually, they may be forced to upgrade to 2 MB just to prevent 8 MB blocks. I kinda hope they screw that up because I have no problem at all with 8 MB blocks.  The only way to improve the efficiency of the network without sacrificing significant security is by scaling up.  We want an armored truck, not a safe on castor wheels pulled by a horse.

Jimbo never gets involved in politics.

All analogies are imperfect or they wouldn't be analogies, just arguments.  You are correct that a losing fork is not like a browser with lower market share. It will almost certainly die quickly, but on a different time frame it is similar. Nobody is using Mozilla anymore.  Yeah, it's different, but it's hard to dumb down this conflict for the idiot masses without losing some of the essential elements. It doesn't mean it's an intentionally misleading analogy.

Coin



Explanation

Agreed.

Good morning Bitcoinland.

I see we're still hovering around $420. At least $400 seems to be holding (for now).

After a week and a half of pretty steady price rise, you'd think we'd see a slight correction but maybe this rise isn't done quite yet.

Come on Bitcoin, let's keep this moving up.

Agreed. Anarchists are like atheists, they have millions of unique voices and perspectives. I understand your perspective and respect it.


Who says I support Core or Blockstream technocratic hegemony? I have repeatedly supported a diverse set of implementations with separate developers, and separate repositories. This is why further work in libbitcoinconsenssus is so important. I will not make the sloppy and misleading assumption that implementations that break consensus rules are akin to choosing between different browsers on the internet. This is a flawed analogy and a dangerous one as well. Choosing between implementations that diverge on consensus rules is akin to choosing between protocols in a distributed consensus system which is dependent upon agreement.  I encourage experimentation in different coins and protocols and will never interfere with your right to HF at any moment, but lets not pretend that this is merely about creating a diverse set of developer communities when multiple implementations have existed peacefully for a long time now.


I wouldn't consider myself a libertarian , but you do realize that anarchists can and do have solidarity with other anarchists. I invite you to meet some in person.

This is funny indeed. I love how the libertarian in this discussion keeps using the words "we will" and variants on that. Sounds really weird!

What the hell? That guy is a full on dreamboat. Who wouldn't want a roll in the hay with him? His warm proclamations for all humanity get me wetter than a winter Tuesday on the North Sea.

I'm not going to humor you. You don't understand the words you are using! GET OUT!!! Wherever you are!!! GET OUT!!!

You don't speak for all AnCap's. I absolutely support forking to bigger blocks and I have been consistently anarcho-capiltalist from my first post on this forum.

Anarchists want no rulers, so why would you support Core's technocratic hegemony? Regardless of the technical arguments against bigger blocks, why would you allow anyone to have veto power over any upgrade?  As anarcho-capitalists, we know that concentrated power can be abused and inevitably will be abused eventually.

LoL..... tell me about the dangers of people who want to empower each other to have both sovereignty and solidarity in a voluntary manner.
Your insinuations are humorous and will not deter our goals. 70% of mining power is not enough ... we are looking to create consensus and solidarity with many more miners and in discussions with Bitmain.

I still love you and hope you find happiness sir!


Probably ... that guy creeps me out and not someone that I would associate with.

^2

I think I can see Mircea Pompouscu's shadow in the background there, right?

Classic around 26% Node of Core..
More Rejoice!  

https://coin.dance/nodes/all

Sure is nice to know.

Can we get an inkling on who these benevolent non-feeling educators are?

Edit:

Ah!


Crap!


Mission Failed

I am glad you can find humor out of this   If the byproduct is happiness that that is a consequence I can accept.

My words are being written without aggression and lack any emotional fervor. They are written with a calm and confident resolution attached to some well reasoned principles.

They aren't even intended for many of the individuals I am responding to but to educate other readers lurking to our perspective.


No one is willing to throw anyone under the bus. I empathize with your position and will not interfere with your choices or vision of bitcoin. That is the beauty of bitcoin, its voluntary nature of participation and involvement.

"We" principally refers to those that believe bitcoin should become a settlement network because of the cold hard reality that it cannot scale completely on the chain. "We" are those that believe we need to work together in solidarity and through consensus rather than democratic majority imposing their will upon minorities.

I was just trying to break the wall of mindless pompous crap.

People who talk like you is why Bitcoin is important.

BTW, who are "we"? Who are these people who are so willing to throw everyone under the bus to get it their way?