Quote from: Iranus on March 27, 2017, 03:48:16 PM

Quote from: artik123 on March 27, 2017, 12:43:06 PM

Quote from: Iranus on March 27, 2017, 12:28:28 PM

Quote from: artik123 on March 27, 2017, 12:03:39 PM

There is a lot of misinformation out there (i.e. part of BU as being a closed source, which they actually stated that they will PREVENT such thing), so one has to do his own research.

I'm not familiar with the intricacies of it, but I'm probably the only one who doesn't see any problem with miners taking over.
Most people are clueless on how economy works (Andreas included).
Vertical monopoly (as opposed to horizontal monopoly) is actually a good thing,
which would probably lead to a lower fees, so it would benefit both the miners and the users.
(Think of buying a cellphone. The cellular manufacturer forces you to also buy the camera, which if you had bought them separately it would cost you more.)
Users could have BU *and* LN so they could choose the best path for them which means more options to the user. What's wrong with that?

The thing is that people are "all for decentralization" but want BTC to rule... I see it as an oxymoron.
I really don't have a problem with BTC failing. That being said, crypto world is too centralized around BTC anyway.
Everything is traded against BTC and we need some more options. If BTC fails it fails... After the dust settles we would be in a better place.

Decentralisation can mean a lot of different things. Bitcoin is decentralised - we don't need hundreds of Bitcoin rip offs doing the same thing on another pointless network (or worse, the cryptocurrencies that are quite centralised). There's no point going on a website and deciding whether to pay with Bitcoin, Ethereum, DASH etc when even the more original ones like Monero only make petty modifications to the network which Bitcoin should be able to make if needed anyway through the fact that it's open source.

I do agree that it's good for miners to have the choice - but they don't really, because they know that if there's a hard fork and other people don't support it they'll be mining nothing. In reality, the economic majority makes the decision as to whether the changes will go through and miners will rightfully be influenced by that majority (which is why, despite Bitmain and others' attempt to manipulate that economic majority with their mining monopolies, Core will continue running Bitcoin).

Why are you guys so emotional about Bitcoin?

Quote

doing the same thing on another pointless network

You know better than that... Does ETH a pointless network?

ETH is sort of an exception, but even then not fully. Bitcoin is supposed to capable of change and adapting to different situations. If everyone ran off every time there was a problem (which they don't, fortunately), then everyone would have to convert all their earnings to a new currency every few weeks and potentially lose all of their money in the process. Even though ETH makes some useful contributions to the blockchain technology which Bitcoin is likely to not use, with most cryptocurrencies it's strange that they result in people arguing for the cryptocurrency itself rather than for any of those changes to be made to the supposedly adaptable Bitcoin network.

Quote

ETH is sort of an exception,

I think that you are going to be surprised in the near future.
Just my opinion, but I think that we would see hundreds of different niches filled by different coins.

Quote

Bitcoin is supposed to capable of change and adapting to different situations.

Sure, why not. It's a software after all. But should it be adaptable to *all* different situations?