pull down to refresh
inflation isn't theft
OK boomer
enjoy your snark, bro. the rest of us are excited to rugpull the bankers
400kb blocksize... that's gonna be a big fucking YES from me dog
you really think this rugpulls bankers?
What makes you think that 400 kilobyte blocks will increase centralization?
the only argument about smaller block size decreasing centralization i think of off the top of my head is smaller chain size therefore easier to maintain your own node
thats cool but at the cost of 'reassigning coins' and pre launch investments aka premines.
yeah naw.
there is literally nothing stopping a larger 'banker' entity (m assuming you are referring to the finance bros and the ETF stuff) from getting into this if they wanted.
paul wants drivechains and has for years.
for the longest he tried to convince other and get it into bitcoin.
he must of had enough of it, and just decided to fork.
WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT WE TELL PEOPLE TO DO.
you want some stupid fucking rules in bitcoin.
fork it and let the market decide.
so good for him.
the specific argument I am familiar with is that tiny blocks enable participation by miners with lower bandwidth (they can more quickly get a new block and start mining from it on a 3G connection, because the block doesn't take as long to download)... and enabling low bandwidth miners is commensurate with enabling lower hashrate miners (i. e. those minders that aren't well funded)
so when you were referring to rugging the bankers, you meant mining companies?
cause thats how im interpreting it now since we are talking mining specifically.
ill admit, mining and that whole part isnt my strong suite, so i dont have much of a rebuttal in that sense.
i think MOST people here can see the desire for smaller blocks, and to be honest, your descriptions of smaller blocks helping small miners/ low bandwith miners is great. but once again at this cost(redistributing coins, premine etc) its just not worth it.
just my 2 sats.
I'm down for good discussion about it.
i only heard of drivechains a few years ago, but they've been an idea for 10+ years. when I heard of them, I immediately felt "this is sus & shitcoins"
in the last few years I've been bummed to see SBR & MSTR & bitcoin backed Fiat loans.
I'm less of a toxic maxi these days and more of a "NGU is cool and all, but have you ever tried orange pilling your local merchants and building a parallel economy to obviate the state?" kinda guy. or maybe I'm still a very toxic maxi, and I would prefer to see the left adopt ecash and get the things we all want (a class struggle instead of a culture war).
so, I think abandoning corporate bitcoin and fiat loans and keeping our day jobs and not getting bought out by Strategay and Blackfuck and whatever the shit... would be preferable if we could bring the clever and creative bluehair devs who went stupid on ETH back into the fold of a new brand that doesn't have all the baggage.
have you read the "why hard fork" section of the website? I think it's worth it to understand what's being encouraged.
I hope ODELL will read it, too... because maybe if I'm too stupid to understand why this is a bad development then I need somebody to tell me how to think
duplicate & spend half of the duplication.
meanwhile, satoshi can spend the other half of the copied set, privately on the ZK chain.
none of the other airdrops enabled that.