What accounts for this?
China has no retailers, no Coinbases, Bitpays, Grayscales, Panteras, developers or, dare I say it, much emotional investment so they'd run a node for altruistic reasons? It's just exchanges and mining farms.
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19477. (Read 26656910 times)
January 31, 2016, 11:30:16 AM
What accounts for this?
China has no retailers, no Coinbases, Bitpays, Grayscales, Panteras, developers or, dare I say it, much emotional investment so they'd run a node for altruistic reasons? It's just exchanges and mining farms.
January 31, 2016, 11:26:00 AM
I haven't perused that list for quite some time. It makes for some enlightening reading. 1876 nodes in the US. 96 in China. 3 in the whole of India. Malta has more.
I'd say the low number of reported chinese nodes is due to the version message from bitnodes.21.co:0.1/ not getting through the GFC or the response timing out. Im sure the ones that do respond are cleverly proxy'ed.
You think there are more but they're hidden somehow?
January 31, 2016, 11:24:05 AM
I haven't perused that list for quite some time. It makes for some enlightening reading. 1876 nodes in the US. 96 in China. 3 in the whole of India. Malta has more.
What accounts for this?
January 31, 2016, 11:22:00 AM
I haven't perused that list for quite some time. It makes for some enlightening reading. 1876 nodes in the US. 96 in China. 3 in the whole of India. Malta has more.
I'd say the low number of reported chinese nodes is due to the version message from bitnodes.21.co:0.1/ not getting through the GFC or the response timing out. Im sure the ones that do respond are cleverly proxy'ed.
January 31, 2016, 11:11:44 AM
I haven't perused that list for quite some time. It makes for some enlightening reading. 1876 nodes in the US. 96 in China. 3 in the whole of India. Malta has more.
January 31, 2016, 10:29:42 AM
January 31, 2016, 10:01:37 AM
January 31, 2016, 09:45:32 AM
FORK PwC
January 31, 2016, 09:41:53 AM
That PwC association with core smells so rotten... I cant imagine something more opposite to the BTC original spirit.
Fork this
Fork this
January 31, 2016, 09:31:21 AM
@BMB: Now we see the violence inherent in the system!
I can't decide if my post was more insubstantial or off-topic. :-
Stand in that corner and think about it, while other [better] children giggle.
P.S. Thought upon reading wachtwoord's post: we really should start
Yeah, people who can't appreciate such an intelligence tour de force as: "...ignorant Gavinista fuckwit ramblings..." really should sit down and reconsider their hostile and preconceived attitudes towards the beauty of the enlightened mind.
January 31, 2016, 09:08:19 AM
@BMB: Now we see the violence inherent in the system!
I can't decide if my post was more insubstantial or off-topic. :-
Stand in that corner and think about it, while other [better] children giggle.
P.S. Thought upon reading wachtwoord's post: we really should start
January 31, 2016, 09:07:54 AM
Innovation is not burning a gigawatt of mining power to process less than 4 transactions per second. Especially when we could increase that capacity by a factor of eight with almost no additional costs.
In economics, sometimes it's helpful to try and calculate the true cost of something by factoring out the subsidies. In this case the subsidy is the block reward and the cost is paid by investors/speculators.
if users actually paid the full cost of their transaction now, it would be several dollars each. That's a horribly inefficient system and not one worth investing in, IMHO. The fact that it could potentially be much more efficient if some minor changes were made is irrelevant if there is no process for making those changes.
The governance model needs to change, so until Bitcoin Classic or something like it achieves a clear majority of support by nodes and miners, we have to assume the rough consensus mechanism of a small minority having effective veto power is going to continue, which means nothing is going to get done. Blocks will fill up. Fees will increase. There's really only two outcomes without a higher or removed max block size: stagnation or network congestion failure.
In economics, sometimes it's helpful to try and calculate the true cost of something by factoring out the subsidies. In this case the subsidy is the block reward and the cost is paid by investors/speculators.
if users actually paid the full cost of their transaction now, it would be several dollars each. That's a horribly inefficient system and not one worth investing in, IMHO. The fact that it could potentially be much more efficient if some minor changes were made is irrelevant if there is no process for making those changes.
The governance model needs to change, so until Bitcoin Classic or something like it achieves a clear majority of support by nodes and miners, we have to assume the rough consensus mechanism of a small minority having effective veto power is going to continue, which means nothing is going to get done. Blocks will fill up. Fees will increase. There's really only two outcomes without a higher or removed max block size: stagnation or network congestion failure.
The $7/tx subsidy only illustrates how ridiculous the coffees-on-the-blockchain idea is, and how critical it is that BTC become high-powered money rather than yet another retail payment rail.
Those four tps are the most precious rare things in existence. The ability to store and/or transfer value quickly, securely, and without permission is unprecedented. A gigawatt is a small price to pay for the provision of such a modern miracle.
It's adorable you think Honey Badger cares about ignorant Gavinista fuckwit ramblings and desires for a contentious hard fork and governance coup.
Please take your Negative Nancy 'zomg Bitcoin is GOING TO DIEEEEE WITHOUT 2MB RIGHT MEOW' bullshit over to BitcoinObituaries.com.
Posts like this give reminds me we have (some) intelligent people left on the forum. Thank you
January 31, 2016, 09:02:11 AM
@BMB: Now we see the violence inherent in the system!
I can't decide if my post was more insubstantial or off-topic.
January 31, 2016, 09:02:00 AM
January 31, 2016, 08:56:22 AM
Why is dogecoin going to the moon 
'Cause when every crypto is stupid you go with the stupid crypto
January 31, 2016, 08:39:07 AM
Why is dogecoin going to the moon
January 31, 2016, 08:37:08 AM
Terry Wogan died, take a look at the norwegian headline: "Terry "Norway Zero points" Wogan er død"
http://www.aftenposten.no/kultur/Terry-Norway-Zero-points-Wogan-er-dod-8339241.html
Refuse to believe that's a real language. "død♌ efter ♑t kort s♎keleie, 77 år ga♋mel"?! Really?
You guys are too much
@BMB: Now we see the violence inherent in the system!
January 31, 2016, 08:34:36 AM
But for this to work it has to be tethered to the BTC chain...and there we'll have our Bitcoin world war II
In fact, I foresee considerable opposition to implement sidechain hooks in Bitcoin Core. But sidechains can add so much value to Bitcoin that the change is likely to be implemented. If not, Bitcoin might soon become obsolete and give way to an equivalent network that implements extensibility via sidechains.
I wonder what happens when the regulators realize that sidechains can put privacy and anonymity back ;-)
I think this is a really good question. How centralized does development have to become before it becomes liable? What exactly can Blockstream be held accountable for if CT sidechain is implemented? Just wondering out loud...
January 31, 2016, 08:32:59 AM
Terry Wogan died, take a look at the norwegian headline: "Terry "Norway Zero points" Wogan er død"
http://www.aftenposten.no/kultur/Terry-Norway-Zero-points-Wogan-er-dod-8339241.html
Huh, that's sad. It would, however, explain the $5 between the Eurovision-area exchanges (e.g. BTC-e) and the non-Eurovision exchanges (Stamp, Finex). It looks like Tel has a lot of fans in China, too.
January 31, 2016, 08:20:37 AM
Terry Wogan died, take a look at the norwegian headline: "Terry "Norway Zero points" Wogan er død"
http://www.aftenposten.no/kultur/Terry-Norway-Zero-points-Wogan-er-dod-8339241.html
Jump to: