Topic: Why is BTC based notary services considered bad netiquette in the community? (Read 166 times)
February 12, 2019, 03:30:22 AM
It is actually not that bad in my opinion, though there might be some problems with the size of data being added for processing. These could lead to some delays in the processing speed. That is why probably others who are using the blockchain wouldn't agree on it. But if something like the word "melons" mentioned in the article doesn't give justice to its placement as an added data then for sure people would argue about it, especially if it is just none sense.
February 11, 2019, 02:54:20 AM
Bitcoin is not intended to be a notary blockchain service, there are plenty of alternative choices for that service, the best being Deep Vault which even has browser plugins to make it easy
February 10, 2019, 09:14:46 PM
if you want arbitrary data on the blockchain. then use a blockchain thats not aimed to be just peer-to-peer cash
Some other posts in regards to this lead me to this blockchain that does what I need. No where near the hash power as BTC, but it has enough market cap that transactions should be relatively well trusted. 
February 10, 2019, 07:06:18 PM
if you want arbitrary data on the blockchain. then never dare enter a debate about bitcoins blockchain is too big.
if you want arbitrary data on the blockchain. then use a blockchain thats not aimed to be just peer-to-peer cash
those that do argue that blockchain is too big and that other networks are needed to take the burden off the network.. but then go on and say that adding arbitrary data is ok.. are just flip flopping
they need to go back to basics and research the whole point of bitcoin. learn its usecase and then stick to the single narrative of that usecase. rather than promoting other features unrelated to the use case and then promoting other networks to provide the usecase, to then make bitcoin not utilised for its usecase and instead promoted as something different
if you want arbitrary data on the blockchain. then use a blockchain thats not aimed to be just peer-to-peer cash
those that do argue that blockchain is too big and that other networks are needed to take the burden off the network.. but then go on and say that adding arbitrary data is ok.. are just flip flopping
they need to go back to basics and research the whole point of bitcoin. learn its usecase and then stick to the single narrative of that usecase. rather than promoting other features unrelated to the use case and then promoting other networks to provide the usecase, to then make bitcoin not utilised for its usecase and instead promoted as something different
February 10, 2019, 06:21:03 PM
I honestly don't see how there can be a simple and clear-cut response to this one. Everyone seems to have different opinions on where to draw the line. At what point does use become abuse? If it is an abuse, how should it be handled? Is it a design flaw? How much is too much? Are some people being unnecessarily greedy? Is fairness or freedom the more important quality to preserve? There are just so many questions this issue raises and it's almost impossible to get people to agree on the answers.
As a loose analogy, if you went to an 'all-you-can-eat buffet' and ate so much food that there wasn't enough for the other paying customers, you could probably understand why some people might be a little annoyed about that.
As a loose analogy, if you went to an 'all-you-can-eat buffet' and ate so much food that there wasn't enough for the other paying customers, you could probably understand why some people might be a little annoyed about that.
February 10, 2019, 03:57:53 PM
Why is BTC based notary services considered bad netiquette in the community? What services would be the correct service to use if not a BTC based `OP_RETURN`?
Jump to: