Quote from: Decoded on February 25, 2017, 09:15:04 AM

Quote from: Lauda on February 25, 2017, 09:05:56 AM

Quote from: Bonnyi on February 25, 2017, 08:13:12 AM

You gotta be kidding me, right?
Core is lost the war already. Even BU is lost, we can't let core to win.

Obvious and delusional shill account. Roll Eyes

Quote from: hv_ on February 25, 2017, 09:01:48 AM

The growing bounty in the mempool and the greed of the miners will solve the stalling at some critical point like its done in a typical phase separation manner when ice (1MB freeze) melts into liquid.

Keep watching

It almost seems like *they don't* want to scale it. As I've mentioned several times before, the path forward should be pretty *simple*: Segwit now -> HF to increase the base size after -> LN and other second layer solutions.

After segwit activation, will the hard fork revert the changes?

I honestly see no problem with segwit, nor BU. The real problem is that we need a change soon. We need one now.

Quote from: piramida on February 25, 2017, 06:10:24 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on February 25, 2017, 05:09:48 AM

No; unlimited was created because there shouldnt be a maximum blocksize that is part of the consensus rules.

The idea/argument that larger blocks will centralize hashing power in areas that have faster propagation
times is silly and does not hold water since A) such areas already have that 'advantage' , B) miners can
always choose to solve smaller blocks, at least for several decades, and C) the bitcoin relay network already
purports to mitigate propagation issues, claiming global latencies as low as 100ms, which compared to an
average block interval of 10 minutes (which is 0.016%, or about a hundredth of a percent) is insignificant.

Unlimited was created with only one purpose - to boost an ego of a single person who's silly idea was not accepted by core. That person is neither a dev nor understands anything about economics, that is why he keeps pushing this most outrageous idea of on-chain scaling to infinity - and now that he has spent significant amount of money on pushing this silly idea, it has become a matter of principle for him.

The fact that you monkeys jump around him does not change the fact that exactly zero people (of the ones that matter in bitcoin world) do support that fork. It will never ever be accepted, just deal with it and move on do something useful. What he might succeed in is blocking real thought-through proposals indefinitely; in that case bitcoin remains immutable and all innovation goes into additional layers. Works this way, too.

*sigh*

I really don't get what's wrong with you core diehards.

Thats the chisma.

If you think bitcoin is only store of value, nothing needs to be changed at all. Price is up.
Fees are up, adoption for rich is up.

If you think bitcoin is more than that (I am) you need to scale.

Not sure if anybody can 'dictate' the direction, I think greed does it finally. Individuals are dammed to discuss (helps?) or analyse and watch.