Create account

replied 571d
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 571d
How do you think those businesses will react when the blocks start crapping out anytime they reach 22mb? Bad experience=bad business. Issues need to be resolved while there is less tx.
replied 571d
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 570d
32mb blocks faked by SV. The transactions weren’t broadcasted to network
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9vxsep/psa_bitcoin_sv_engaging_in_social_media/?st=JOBYS6Z9&sh=b41f90eb
replied 570d
Valid questions in reddit comments that are never answered. Sounds like propaganda to me.
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 570d
Lmao
And faked 32mb mined blocks don’t sound like propaganda? lolololol
Common
replied 571d
No such thing. Gigablocks will be sent miner to miner flawlessly, timely.
replied 571d
A little advice - you should propably do a little more research.
replied 571d
I did, but I lost 16 hours of mp3's from that conference, can you find them?
replied 571d
Take a look at this. This is ABC and BU dev meeting/discussion. No technobabble. Real stuff. https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9voqg1/not_sure_who_to_support_in_the_upcoming_fork/
replied 571d
Is it relevant to my point:

Businesses voiced their need to see higher block sizes before starting years long software development on the BCH chain.
replied 571d
Yes, and they will get that with ABC along with the neccesseary optimizations to achieve gigabyte blocks. SV offers no concrete info on how they will fix the bottlenecks.
replied 571d
Ok so you have that info right in your link. Businesses need a clear pathway to higher blocksizes. 128Mb is kind of small but it may do for now. At least showing some progress.