Quote from: jbreher on October 05, 2017, 02:41:17 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on October 05, 2017, 01:07:03 AM

Quote from: jbreher on October 04, 2017, 10:03:25 PM

Currently it would take over 30 years to send each person on earth a single Bitcoin transaction. Think about that.

I doubt that it is worthy of very much thought, and I doubt that the facts are even accurate... especially once we et a bit more lightning network tools into place...

No. Lightning does absolutely nothing to alleviate the issue I raise.

Incidentally: you doubt my facts are accurate? That's supposed to convince anyone? What are you - eight years old? They're accurate within engineering tolerance. Run 'em yourself and tell me what sort of numbers you come up with. Only then will we have a basis for communication.

Quote

Quote from: jbreher on October 04, 2017, 10:03:25 PM

Lightning does nothing to alleviate that.
Segwit does nothing to alleviate that.
Schnorr sigs does nothing to alleviate that.

Your saying it does not make it true, either.

Irrelevant. It is true whether or not I say it.

Quote

Quote from: jbreher on October 04, 2017, 10:03:25 PM

The only metric that matters in this is transaction throughput - pure and simple. To a first order approximation (i.e. with already minimal-size transactions), this is directly and linearly proportional to block size.

Yeah, you talk in a lot of hypotheticals rather than looking at the actual transaction on the blockchain.

No. I speak of facts. If you wish to argue that my purported facts are incorrect, then provide evidence. If you wish to argue that my reasoning is flawed, then provide evidence. But jamming your fingers in your ears and shouting 'I can't hear you' doesn't make you right, it just makes you deaf to reason.

Makes you look stupid, too.

Seems to me that you are the one that has the burden of proof and the burden of production because you are proposing that there is something that needs to be changed - eg increase the blocksize to 2mb or greater.

I Maintaining the status quo and saying that there is no problem (which is largely my position) and asserting incremental changes within existing system (which is largely my position) requires no proof or logic because it is already the system that exists.

Your fancy attempts to assert a bunch of nonsense without proof, while asserting that you have proof, remains the part that needs both evidence and logic....

And the first evidence and logic that you need to show is that there is some kind of current need to increase the blocksize limit - beyond the evidence of the ongoing spamming that is taking place.

Furthermore, I am not the one that you need to convince.... You and your notjob BIG BLOCKERS need to convince core, and so far you have either refused or failed to convince them, and that seems to be part of the reason why you bunch of cry babies go off and threaten and attack and attempt to destroy rather than working within existing governance systems because your real goal is not at all about the technology and the nonexistent problems that you keep asserting but your goals to sabotage and to overturn and to make bitcoin easier to change... you hope to get your ways by deceiving people that you actually have valid goals and that is why you are posting your nonsense in this bitcoin thread rather than going to your XT, Classic, BU, Bcash, Segwit2x and other dumbasss alt coin proposal threads... you instead want to complain about the real bitcoin rather than creating your own. Roll Eyes