Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on August 27, 2015, 12:06:36 AM

Quote from: brg444 on August 27, 2015, 12:01:42 AM

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on August 26, 2015, 11:58:42 PM

Quote from: brg444 on August 26, 2015, 09:56:02 PM

Quote from: HostFat on August 26, 2015, 09:46:07 PM

Quote from: brg444 on August 26, 2015, 09:43:34 PM

Since Lightning is open source Blockstream has no proprietary advantage over its development, its deployment or monetization.

Have you ever heard about the network effect? Roll Eyes

Are you proposing only Blockstream will host Lightning nodes and that there will not be competition for them? That would be rather shortsighted.

brg444/tvcof: give it up. you have lost. Its going to be big blocks, the only details they are deciding is how big.

You have failed your blockstream paymasters. I hope their retribution upon you is slow and merciless.... They are clever people and they do not suffer fools like you gladly.

Grin

There is a distinction here. It's going to be bigger blocks, nothing outrageous like 20mb or 8mb like the XT team was pushing for.

I'm not sure you can find a post from me here arguing we should keep block size at 1mb forever but feel free to looks into my post history if you care.

No distinction. The 1mb block limit is dead, kaput, gone. They are just agreeing on what the new size will be.

Thats how consensus works. Sometimes it can get messy, but as long as the destination is not in question, nobody gives a shit about how we get there.

For your argument to make any sense you'd have to present actual proofs that the developers were ever against increasing the block size and keeping 1mb.

If you really want to turn this into a partisan thing I'd argue this is a win for team Blockstream