Quote from: danielpbarron on March 19, 2015, 02:58:08 AM

Quote from: RoadStress on March 18, 2015, 11:17:46 PM

The system should be crafted around a mix of security and easy of use.

No; security should be the #1 priority of the network. The "ease of use" side should be provided off the block chain. Those who favor easy over secure can have their cup of punch without there being a turd in the bowl.

true

Quote from: danielpbarron on March 19, 2015, 02:58:08 AM

Even if that "6k" figure were accurateⁱ, it should still be a great concern; that is a shockingly low number! It isn't going to get larger by making the cost to run one greater. The government I am talking about is the U.S. Government; the one currently in control of the world's reserve currency; the one that stands to lose a lot when bitcoin takes over. How do they do it? It's too late for them to kill it via the hashing route, and shorting it hasn't worked. They seem to think they can kill it by breaking it from within. People like you, whether on their payroll or just stupid, are helping them by pushing this bad idea that the rules need to change. I don't trust the technology? You're the one who wants to change it!

i : it isn't

Quote from: #bitcoin-assets

mircea_popescu: there are 1433 nodes with 90% uptime
mircea_popescu: there are 323 nodes with 99% uptime.
mircea_popescu: and just 60 with 99.9% uptime.
thestringpuller: MP where are you getting these stats?
mircea_popescu: people keep derping about uh oh, 7k nodes. BULLSHIT. we're down from 270k to 61.

well... with a p2p network uptime is not really important.
its the amount of connectible nodes that count.

though 6k is not much. for that reason i started a node.. (well only one... btw why does mp not fire up a few? he has way more resources than me)