pull down to refresh
121 sats \ 0 replies \ @kruw 28 Feb \ on: RBF vs First-Seen-Rule bitcoin
It's not technical, it's entirely economic: If there are transactions in the mempool that double spend the same coin, rational miners have an incentive to confirm the one that pays the highest fee rate.
FSR proponents are simply retards - They propose miners should always confirm the transaction they saw first and censor conflicting transactions that pay higher fee rates.
I'm not making any claims, you are. The troubling part is that the claims you are making have already been proven false in real life:
Say someone came to you and said "If we raised the maximum block size of Bitcoin with a hard fork, that will give the network more utility and cause the price to increase."
This is at least a credible hypothesis. However, you don't have to rely on any future predictions when arguing against this person because this hypothetical hard fork event ALREADY HAPPENED. The outcome was already measured in real life and determined to be false.
More people have been dying due to extreme heat events. Storms, hurricanes, droughts, floods, extreme weather swings, and wildfires have been increasing as predicted.
This prediction did not match the real world outcome of humanity's expansion of carbon dioxide production:
^ Global warming cultists, like BCH/BSV cultists, will look at their chart going straight to zero and say "Yes! It's exactly like I predicted!"
Meanwhile, the real world lives on in prosperity because they chose to bet against these fanatics.
You said the UN's science is "directionally correct", how would you know if you didn't even look in the other direction? Clearly, the UN's predictions about global warming was proven false, so it's worth looking into the ACTUAL results that came from performing the scientific method.
That seems like the default I would expect from imprisonment.
In a libertarian framework, the function of imprisonment is to force the prisoner to repay their debts. Denying the prisoner access to any value creating opportunities stands in the way of that goal. If a friend or a charity wants to gift something like books or basketballs to the prisoner, I don't see any justification for superseding the prisoner's ownership of those things.
In a statist framework, the function of imprisonment is to inflict punishment on the prisoner. Since suffering is the intended purpose, I don't want to give the government any good ideas on how to maximize it.
Ask the opposite: Is group confinement in prisons a human rights violation? Not having a criminal for a roommate seems like a perk.
"I grew out of the habit of explaining things" is the easiest way to summarize the aging of my personality.
If you read the rest of the article, you see the desertification and droughts right there mentioned next to it.
Yes, I read the part of the article where the UN's claimed there would be "dust bowl like conditions", which was falsified as well. My point remains untouched: Why didn't you mention the benefits of a warmer planet? If you can't defend the UN's falsified hypothesis, then you should at least steelman how humanity gains from a warmer climate.
The UN did not predict "unprecedented droughts" and they did not predict "an uptick in wildfires, hurricanes, and floods". The UN's hypothesis was that nations would be "wiped off of the face of the earth".
Why didn't you mention the benefits of a warmer planet? If you can't defend the UN's falsified hypothesis, then you should at least steelman how humanity gains from a warmer climate.
I sincerely believe that climate change will severely impact the quality of life in most regions of the planet in the next 30–50 years unless humanity musters a staunch response to it.
I have good news! Your hypothesis of global warming was already proven wrong using the scientific method:
UN scientists in 1989 shared your theory that global warming would "severely impact the quality of life", but it turned out false. No nations were "wiped off of the face of the earth" in the year 2000 like the scientists foretold.
The most obvious anomalies have to do with large gun presence in some places; Switzerland or Finland (even Canada!) have plenty of guns but few murders, while the UK has almost no guns but an abundance of murders.
This premise contradicts the author's conclusion that gun violence "just happens" because guns are physically present.
I've not even read it, nor do I care.
Maybe you should read and care about Bitcoin privacy so you stop losing so much money on Monero.
Still waiting on an answer for how much BTC you've lost on your Monero bags: #879638
Have fun staying poor, shitcoiner.
Recovering funds from Wasabi Wallet into other software is a unique case because Wasabi uses BOTH Segwitv0 and Taproot derivation paths under a unified balance. It's not difficult to recover since it uses BIP39, you simply have to restore your seed twice.
You don't have to worry about recovering your funds if Ledger goes bankrupt: Their project is closed source, so they will simply rug pull your private keys before they let themselves go broke.
The existing friction is that there seems to be additional wallet recovery formats being created as time goes on instead of consensus being formed around one format. Electrum has their own standard, BIP39 is the dominant standard, LND uses 'Aezeed' seeds, and now SLIP39 is being pushed as a replacement of BIP39 by its creators.
You offer no viable alternative to democracy- because these is no other system which solves the problem of government better than democracy can.
I do have a viable alternative to democracy: Freedom
We already know freedom succeeds in practice, in the real world, thanks to the true story of Bitcoin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIWViimqRMU
Democracy is where all adult citizens get a vote in the election of their government.
Now consider what happens to the people who lose the election: They are now at the mercy of the winners of the election, which is the exact outcome of your previous "strongest steal and enslave the weak" fears.
In order to prevent the strongest from stealing and enslaving the weak, democracy must be abolished.
Most people can see this and do not want to live in a state of lawlessness and anarchy where the strongest will steal and enslave the weak.
"The strongest steal and enslave the weak" is the exact definition of Democracy. The parasites have formal terminology for this process stealing and enslavement which they call "Democratic Elections", or "Voting".