Quote from: TooDumbForBitcoin on September 07, 2015, 12:05:58 AM

Quote from: brg444 on September 06, 2015, 11:59:41 PM

Quote from: Peter R on September 06, 2015, 11:29:49 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 06, 2015, 11:05:48 PM

Quote from: Peter R on September 06, 2015, 11:02:59 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 06, 2015, 10:46:33 PM

You tendency to confuse Bitcoin with free market is largely misguided.

To quote davout:

Quote

Do you think there should be an "artificial, centrally planned limit" on the amount of wood people are allowed to chop from the rainforest?

Do you think there should be an "artificial, centrally planned limit" on the amount of endangered species' specimens one is allowed to kill?

Are you saying we need centrally planned limit to keep Bitcoin decentralized?

YES!

Thank you for answering honestly and not beating around the bush. It is my opinion that most of the small-block supporters feel the same way (i.e., that we need a centrally-planned limit to keep Bitcoin decentralized).

Quote

I notice you didn't answer my(davout) questions. You wouldn't be against centrally planned limit on big game hunting would you Angry

?

I don't believe in killing endangered animals; I think it's terrible, personally. So I guess I am glad there is a centrally-planned limit for killing bears in the mountains around Vancouver, for instance. But this isn't about what I believewe're discussing what will actually happen. A centrally-planned limit on big game hunting requires that the organization implementing the limit also act to enforce that limit--with violence if necessary. I'm not going to wade into whether this is right or wrong, what I'm pointing out is that to enforce a quota that goes against the free market outcome requires the backing of strong organization or government willing to use physical force if necessary.

Do you think Bitcoin Core is strong enough an organization to enforce a quota that goes against the natural free-market outcome? With 85% of the network nodes, it is already fairly strong. However, how will this organization physically force users not to defect to other implementations of Bitcoin that support larger block sizes to satisfy the demands of the market?

That's ignoring the trick under our sleeve Wink

We'll have a whole suite of financial instruments and software boasting agile privacy and instant and unlimited transactions all supported by wealth of the scarcest and most decentralized crypto-commodity on this face of "the market". Open source and trustless. All brought to us by the good folks at Blockstream.

I'm sensing you expect the good folks at Blockstream to code/review/test at a faster pace than they have been coding/reviewing/testing revisions to Bitcoin core. If I sense your expectations correctly, on what do you base these expectations for vigor and rigor?

money

plus they promise to hire and form more core devs. isn't that brilliant Wink