Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: Why Blockstream is against "contentious" hard forks - Control
by
franky1
on 06/06/2016, 21:33:35 UTC
"mean" is far more useful to estimate how many transactions are likely to fit in a block.
Nobody said that it wasn't.

translation
"Q:guys how do we hide the fact that transaction sizes will bloat when people do calculations of the potential blocksize vs potential transactions per block after all the proposed features are included..?
"A:dont talk about averages, dont use 'mean', we can manipulate numbskull opinion by talking as if we are suggesting average but actually quote a median number.
"Q:how does that work
"A: well if we had 0,1,2,226,227,228,229 the median is 226.. if we have 0,0,0,226,5000,10000,500000 the median is still 226... if we have 0,226,1023435453 the median is still 226
"Q:so why should we pick 226 as a special number..
"A:because that is a safe minimum transaction size, its not the absolute minimum, but its a safe minimum people expect to see.. and if we try to talk about this minimum in a way that makes people presume 226 is expected atleast 50% of the time. or the majority of the time.. we dont have to explain real data because then it is revealed that us blockstreamers are actually the "bigblockers".. where we offer less transactions per megabyte then the simple blocksize increase alone
Q:so 226 is useless as a relevant number for people who actually want to do multisig, or LN lockins/settlements or numerous other things like paying more then a couple people..
A:yea 226 has nothing to do with what a person should expect on average.. its just a arbitrary number to shift the debate away from real maths of real data and peoples real expectations of reality.. but dont tell anyone.. lets keep misleading people and then insulting those that do show real averages to make them sound like they are wrong and we are right"