[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 176 KB, 960x696, 1524304050221.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9054306 No.9054306 [Reply] [Original]

Big Blockers are Bitcoin's version of climate change deniers.

They're either lying to protect their interests, unable to follow the technical arguments, or just plain resentful of experts and their high-falutin fancy words.

With 1MB blocks, as things stand, the network can process a handful of transactions per second. So doubling/tripling/multiplying by 20 the block size really doesn't scale in a useful way.

But by pretending that big blocks are the solution, Big Blockers can forestall the real scaling solutions (segwit and the tech it enables), and have a cadre of useful idiots cheer them from the sidelines.

>> No.9054330

>>9054306
Can I ask when you first heard of / bought / participated in the community of, bitcoin?

>> No.9054342
File: 74 KB, 625x423, 1506786636491.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9054342

>>9054306
>real scaling solutions
>segwit

>> No.9054383

>>9054330
Not relevant. Let me explain to you a very important concept though. The security of the Bitcoin network is ensured by mining as represented by the hashrate. The more petahashes the network maintains, the more secure the network is to attacks, that is, the more costly attacks become. Think of the hashrate as the height of the walls around a fortified city. When Bitcoin first started out, its walls were small enough that a 5-year-old could walk over them. That is, it would’ve cost a trivial amount of computing power, and therefore money, to take over the network. Today, of course, the walls of the Bitcoin network are Babylonesque and the cost of taking over the network can no longer be calculated in worthless government trademarks.

>> No.9054401
File: 116 KB, 988x1059, 1518382178079.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9054401

>>9054306
Bitcoin isn't a leftist safe space. Any change in climate is caused by that giant fireball in the sky we call the sun. Bitcoin Trash is a meme coin traded to dupe noobs out of their Bitcoin. That tiger looks delicious.

>> No.9054600

>>9054306
You're trying to talk sense to paid shills and impressionable low IQ people easily distracted by shiny things and marketing. Stop.

>> No.9055082

Big blockers know we cant increase blocksize forever. We just didn't want a shitty, rushed software patch(segwit) because we knew it would be futile.

>> No.9055103

>>9054306
this

>> No.9055110

>>9054383
It’s totally relevant newfag.

>> No.9055140

>>9054600
Bitcoin holders need to stop being so complacent or someone (maybe not bcash) will eventually eat your lunch.
If you are new to crypto it is genuinely difficult to figure out which one is the real bitcoin. BTC and BCH book look equally legit.
t. Feburary nucoiner

>> No.9055847

Anyone who takes segwit seriously as a scaling solution and not sees it for what it is, a fix to allow lightning network (tm) to work and thus fill blockstream pockets, has no right talking about technical arguments.

>> No.9055918

>>9054306
kek corecucks confirmed for reddit

>> No.9056408

The first sentence after the introductory parts of the whitepaper defines Bitcoin as a "chain of digital signatures", but Bitcoin Segwit is a chain of digital hashes, meaning it is not Bitcoin

>> No.9056517

>>9054306
>>9054342

"real" scaling solution.

Can anyone tell me what a Scaling solution is?

Cuz damn, both limiting signature info AND increases block size both seem like they would help scaling.

It's very disingenuous to deny the value of bigger blocks a priori. How can you know which solution is better?

If you cant answer this question, you're just a core shill faggot, and should KYS, you're never going to make it.

>> No.9056722

>>9054330
Address the argument, not the person. You've basically just lost it by going down the rout of finding a flaw with the person and using it to avoid his argument. He may be a newfag, but you're a useless piece of shit of an ideologue.

>> No.9056844

>>9056517
a scaling solution is when the difficulty of increasing something (in this case TPS) does not increase exponentially as you increase that thing.

For example the problems that you face in going to 60MB from 30MB are going to be even greater than the problems that you faced in going from 1MB to 30MB (this is called an exponential increase)

>> No.9056928
File: 558 KB, 1280x720, 4ca2e10f4a7ceae017e3437481ea7ab698c78986ffb920d0bdfffe4966b9eec3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9056928

>>9054306
>thinks climate change is real and not just a globalist scheme to cripple industrial economies
Pic related

>> No.9057010

>>9056844
you missed the point.

I know what scaling means. What i am saying is, how do you evaluate the relative merit of one scaling solution versus another.

Ie, which scaling solution is better, or to use the OPs mongoloid locution "which is the REAL scaling solution"

>> No.9057068

>>9057010
You're seriously asking
>How do I evaluate arguments
and expect someone to put the effort in to answering that comprehensively on a biz post? Well step one is "don't be retarded" so you're already off to a bad start

>> No.9057139

>>9057010
i just told you how. A good scaling solution is one which scales linearly.
i.e. the difficulty in going from 1000 TPS to 2000 TPS is just as difficult as the solution to go from 2000 TPS to 3000 FPS.

>> No.9057170

>>9057068
>1 post by this ID

>just came into the thread to shitpost

>> No.9057194

Not even owning bcash but 10-20 MB blocks was literally the only thing Bitcoin needed to take maximum advantage of last bullrun and explode in terms of adoption. Instead it made it look like an unusable pile of shit.

>> No.9057246

>>9057170
Yeah m8 sorry I'm not in every thread all the time. Unlike cashies I don't get paid to argue on the internet.

>> No.9057304

>>9054306
Is Bitcoin Cash really the answer to BTC's problems?

>> No.9057393
File: 2.29 MB, 2168x1390, blockwars.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9057393

>>9057194
The network was under constant attack by bcrashies, while at the same time the prices were getting manipulated AF by wash trading bots.

Unless you really think the last bullrun was organic... Surely you can't be that dumb so as to think 10x in 6 months was a fully organic bullrun and still able to solve a captcha, can you?