i say it's a fact that the miners decide.
thats why i say we need monetary incentives for them to act in a good way (e.g. making smaller blocks).
thats why i say we need monetary incentives for them to act in a good way (e.g. making smaller blocks).
Except it isn't a fact at all; it's a silly assumption -- a lie perpetuated by who-knows-who. There already is a monetary incentive for miners to make smaller blocks, in that MPEx customers will not buy their newly minted coins produced on a counterfeit "larger blocks" chain. If the miners want to stay in business, they will keep doing as we say. Don't get me wrong, the miners secure the network; we couldn't get by without them. There will always be a chain mined by a lot of hashing power, but the miners don't get to decide which chain that is. They will go wherever the profit is, and that is determined by demand for coins.
P.S. this isn't my argument, but since you are blind to things written by billionaires, I took the liberty of paraphrasing it for you.
why would he want to buy more coins? afaik he already has too much? and mpex customers... well they seem to already have enough coins too.. otherwise they couldnt afford the 30btc entrance fee for nothing really intersting
and no: i am not blind to things billionaires write. i am just not interested in the opinion of somebody who makes death threats to people who dont share his opinion.
btw i dont believe him at all. because if the fork happens that means that 80% of all miners mine the new chain. he cant even use his legacy old chain anymore - because without miners he cant transact...
i am very sure he will bribe miners OR switch to the new chain (=Bitcoin)