Quote from: sgbett on February 07, 2015, 02:05:14 AM

More simple, he posted on his blog. details here In summary, he believes bitcoin is something that only the wealthy should want/need to use and that it isn't meant to be for everyone. Hence why he sees no need for the change.

I did post my view on MP's post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=941331.msg10377700#msg10377700 and will re post it for visibility

Quote from: RoadStress on February 06, 2015, 03:42:22 PM

MP is a sensationalist and he likes drama and attention. In my view in business and in ecosystems there are no people, there are only ideas. Starting his article mentioning the person behind the idea is simply bad intended from the start. Right after that he starts praising MPEx which again has absolutely nothing related to the main idea and to the main subject of a bigger block size.

After filling half of the article with useless nonsense about MPEx he reverts to a journalistic move in order to divert the attention from the subject which is to reveal something sensational and he chose to reveal that regular users will need 914TB of storage in order to pay for their coffee. I have already answered to this stupid and non-existing issue. We will develop a way of not needing that amount of storage for regular coffee buyers.

Afterwards he starts pushing his view of the blockchain. For a decentralized thing people trying to limit things their way isn't so good. Gavin is only trying to not limit things and to have large open doors for everyone. Keeping a 1MB block limit is a bad intended and limiting move.

In the end of the shit article MP closes with:

Quote

If Bitcoin can't pay for its own security, it is best to find this out sooner rather than later.

Bitcoin security will be insured by the services running on top of it and allowing services to run on top of Bitcoin by increasing the block size limit will definitely insure security no matter what.

P.S. Sorry for the post spam. It's for better visibility.