Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 09:59:29 AM

Quote from: redsn0w on September 23, 2016, 09:55:50 AM

Exactly, it's just a spin-off of the actual bitcoin blockchain

.
I don't care about the name bitcoin classic, unlimited or I don't know...

So introducing confusion in addition to the media portraying Bitcoin as a joke due to that is what you want?

Quote from: redsn0w on September 23, 2016, 09:55:50 AM

the important thing is that they increase the blocksize and add other few interesting things.

Fun fact: Neither one of those teams have developed anything worth incorporating into Bitcoin Core. Don't get me started on idiotic ideas such as "header-first mining". Roll Eyes

We never wanted a split, we just want bitcoin to be available to everyone.

It's you who wants to artificially limit bitcoin. Go ahead, limit bitcoin, but we will leave you and your Cripplecoin behind and fork bitcoin to get bitcoin back as it was supposed to be. A currency for the people.

Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 02:34:11 PM

Quote from: zimmah on September 23, 2016, 02:28:50 PM

No it's not. We can safely increase the limit to at least 4MB right now, and there won't be a problem.

Yes it is and no we can not.

Quote from: zimmah on September 23, 2016, 02:28:50 PM

It has been tested on testnet already. Stop spreading misinformation. There's nothing dangerous about bigger blocks.

The BU testing methodology is garbage and should not be used as 'evidence' for anything.

Quote from: zimmah on September 23, 2016, 02:28:50 PM

The reason of the blocksize limit was not decentralization, not safety, but anti-spam.

Both safety and anti-spam.

Quote from: zimmah on September 23, 2016, 02:28:50 PM

The blocks aren't full of spam

You can't prove this and you know it.

Quote from: zimmah on September 23, 2016, 02:28:50 PM

Also it's ridiculous to say 2MB blocksize is dangerous while saying we should get 2MB later. f it's not dangerous later it's not dangerous now either.

No, it is not. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Quadratic validation time without Segwit. I highly doubt you even understand the big O notation.

Of course everything you disagree with is garbage in your eyes.

The facts still state that you are wrong, and 4MB blocksizes are perfectly safe. 20MB with xthin is also perfectly safe. But i'm happy with 4MB for now, or even 2MB until we need more.

I do know (and so does everyone else) that the blocks grew over time and for the past several months most blocks have been 900+ kB. mostly legitimate transactions.

No one has the money to set up a several months long non-stop spam attack. This is all legitimate users and you know it.

If you claim to not know this is legimate users, you're just plain stupid.

Quadratric validation time doesn't matter if you just limit the transaction size to 1MB or lower.