Quote from: yugo23 on March 04, 2016, 02:45:19 PM

Quote from: inca on March 04, 2016, 02:42:24 PM

Quote from: yugo23 on March 04, 2016, 02:21:40 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on March 04, 2016, 12:11:39 PM

Quote from: stoat on March 04, 2016, 12:08:51 PM

Quote from: stoat on March 04, 2016, 11:59:37 AM

Polite suggestion to diversify into ...

The currency that cannot be named

Don't bother. They're all out trading eth.

All that is left here is the core fanboys who doesn't understand they just poisoned the well.

I've got to admit there seems to be much less enthousiasm around btc right now...

Seems like something happened. The core fanboys probably did something that will affect btc for long. Just hoping it was the right decision.

When old timers are selling up and new money is flocking to other coins like eth and monero you know they haven't got a clue.

How many times does simple economics need explaining to supposedly intelligent programmers? Limiting network transactions now is the same as limiting the number of users in the future. Not a great way to scale the project for the next 5 years. Fools.

Yeah I really don't see the point of this whole debate.
You limit number of txs? It means you limite the number of users!

It can't have any other consequence!

LN blah blah.

The reality is that everyone understands that bitcoin cannot infinitely scale with bigger blocks. But it can scale upwards enough to help the currency reach critical mass and then additional payment layers make a lot of sense. Severely restricting the protocol now is idiotic, frankly.