pull down to refresh
Scaling talk is moron-scammer talk.
some people don't understand that Bitcoin's long-term survival does not require all individual people to have active wallets.
even if you think for some ideological reason that all people should use Bitcoin for their long-term savings, most people could get by with far less than one transaction per week, if all they're doing is topping up a "rainy day fund".
I also believe that requiring everyone to actually use Bitcoin themselves, independently, is delusional. Humans are social animals and delegation of responsibility is efficient. Having the right and freedom to use Bitcoin doesn't mean you also have an obligation to do so.
Hipsters virtue signal without thinking much, their entire identity is wrapped in larping with a hardware wallet because they have nothing else
is that really the problem here?
I think the problem is a much larger one, that is very common in economics and probably any scientific discipline, maybe even most human endeavors... people have difficulty imagining just how different an equally valid lifestyle could be.
Yea they're related, since hipsters identity is wrapped up in one aspect, anyone placing value in a different place along the surface is inherently invalid
Many such cases
you might be more familiar with individual personalities or stereotypes here on SN; however I've been "out of town" for a while, so I'm less eager to dismiss people's concerns, even if I agree with you that they are misguided in some way.
I'm just asking questions and voicing concerns in a corner of the internet that I respect, and consider the best place to find legitimate, well thought out answers.
I'm not sure where he's getting his ideas about me from, and he's welcome to have his own opinion about me, but I don't think anything I've said counts as an attack on bitcoin, or is overly alarmist.
I also know there are people here that actively develop for bitcoin, so I'm asking for expert opinions.
Simple as that.
You're asserting things as true that simply are not, that's not asking questions. You're presupposing.
Linked you to 3 different long posts that break it down, and referenced papers from peter gutmann... and all you got is "agree to disagree"
You're not looking for answers, you're looking to confirm your idiotic presuppositions.
All you're asking for is to be flamed by posting nonsense as fact: #1468593
I'm telling people what my understanding is and I've been extremely open to being corrected, and my responses to you are "agree to disagree" because I don't think you're capable of having a reasonable conversation about this.
Flame away, but I'm on the verge of just muting you entirely. There's people here who are capable of acting like adults.
Without a soft fork, roughly only 10% of the population can be on boarded to lightning. This isn't some imaginary made up number, it's a fact.
If you don't think quantum will ever be a threat, then I doubt there's anything I can say to convince you otherwise, so we will just have to agree to disagree.
The number of people that can be on boarded is a function of supply distribution
Your fact is retarded, made up by scammers.
So, unless you're talking about a supply increase, which is never going to happen, there is no solution
There's literally not enough Bitcoin, has nothing to do with throughput.
Read the Gutmann papers, quantum is another hoax by scammers, stop being so gullible.
To open a non custodial lightning channel, you must execute a layer 1 transaction. Layer 1 makes out at 7 tps, which is 220 million per year. If the entire population wanted to open just 1 channel and the network did literally nothing else, it would take over 36 years.
This isn't weird fud or doomerism, this is just math. I also don't think that bitcoin is under any threat whatsoever, there's already proposed solutions, and the whole point of this thread is to discuss which solutions are best, and when people think they should be implemented by.
As far as quantum computing being a hoax, shors algorithm is mathematically proven to break ECDSA. Whether you think it takes 10 years or 50 years to create the hardware ignores the proven mathematical vulnerability.
Your math is retarded for a number of reasons that have already been laid out time and again
You think only 10% of the world can onboard? Wrong, it's more like 2%... and that's more than enough.
"When people want the impossible only liars can satisfy"
--Thomas Sowell on Bitcoin Scaling and Fake L2's
shors algorithm is mathematically proven to break ECDSA
Fortunately quantum computing is as much science fiction as a time machine, the odds of an AI going back in time to wrench attack your mother before you can buy coins are higher than a quantum computer cracking keys
How many quantum proof shitcoins do you own? Man you're gullible.
If your stance is that 2% of the world being onboarded is enough to sustain the network indefinitely, and that quantum is just a fairytale then we will just have to agree to disagree.
As far as what I own goes. I have a nearly 100% allocation to bitcoin in cold storage, and about $12,000 in fiat that I use to trade options as a hobby. I don't own any shitcoins.
Good talk.
we will just have to agree to disagree.
Because you don't know what you're talking about. You're just panic posting because scammers got to you.
👍
Per your other post, this post should be flamed.
There's no scaling issue in the throughput sense, nor solutions in the distribution sense.
Scaling talk is moron-scammer talk.
Same for quantum, it's not real.