Quote from: hdbuck on June 25, 2015, 03:50:37 PM

Quote from: Adrian-x on June 25, 2015, 03:27:58 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on June 25, 2015, 03:23:22 PM

Quote from: Adrian-x on June 25, 2015, 03:08:01 PM

Quote from: necrita on June 25, 2015, 06:16:09 AM

Cypher, you and Trolfi should unite. He's dispensing the gospel day after day on reddit and the forum.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on June 24, 2015, 06:34:26 PM

I see that as burying one's head 100 feet deep in the sand and laying down a foot-thick concrete slab on top.

Transaction fees did not go up, because most clients were not prepared to upgrade their fees, and replace-by-fee is still not a common practice. Transactions that paid the standard fee got delayed for many hours. If the "attackers" had used higher paying transactions, then hiigher-paying transactions would have been delayed too.

The "attackers" had intended to spend 5000 euros on the test, but their own BitcoinD servers crashed under the load and so they gave up after spending less than 500 euros. Even so, the large queues that formed at the nodes crashed Blockchain.info, knocked out bitcoin ATMs, caused problems for BitPay and other services.

The small-blockians have no meaningful technical arguments against the block increase, so they are resorting to personal attacks on Mike and Gavin, and exaggerating the danger of a possible a split of the coin. Which would never be a real risk if they did not make such a fuss about the increase themselves.

Again, I am each day more convinced that Blockstream had promised to their investors that the network would saturate in a year or two, and then the crowds would come knocking at their door for their Sidechains/LN solutions; and that Blockstream had most of the core devs, so that they could make the changes that they needed to the protocol while blocking any changes that their competitors would need. That would explain why they were so upset, and why they continue to oppose it when the major players have all agreed to it.

his mission is to protect people, originally he was trying to understand Bitcoin. He spends a lot of time uncovering scams I find his dedication admirable.

He is just protecting the people who don't understand what is happening by educating them.

He won't use Bitcoin, I once offered him 1BTC to play with so he could test the system.

such good samaritan ^^

Understanding how Bitcoin can be manipulated is a very interesting topic, being paid to do it is an engaging job. Sharing your findings and measuring the feedback loop is science.

If doesn't look like you are paying attention.

It's not findings, it's opinions.

Personally i find this professor pretty boring, if not totally weird, and i would tend to disregard any of his "findings". Because "not invested".
Hence, him being aligned with me of some sort would tilt that red alarm in ma brainz.

But we are not looking for the same thing here.

Sure they are opinions as is the opinion I hope we share that satoshi's white paper is a world changing idea. Jorge doesn't share that one with us.

We just might not share the opinion that Blockstream are helping protect or propagate the idea by wanting to prevent people from investing in alternate ideas like market pegged altcoins.

I value variety of opinion more than consistency, the ones backed by logic and facts are the ones I try to internalize.