Create account

Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 575d
Sk8eM dUb
Ok no problem. I thought you were looking for an open minded conversation. My mistake. I’ll leave you to your own beliefs. Have a good night.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 575d
lol you're the one who's parroting a narrative unwilling to look at the forest for the trees. Tell me something I haven't read a thousand times and I'll be interested.
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 575d
I stated a fact. I’m sorry that it was something you have heard before. I suppose that the bottleneck issue is something that is mentioned often cause it’s a priority issue.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 575d
Problem is that they're "fixing" bottlenecks that don't exist and ignoring ones that DO exist. Like the damn blocksize limit itself.
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 574d
I would encourage you to do more research. All due respect. What your saying is simply false. I just posted a Q&A video with Bitcoin ABC that should clear up a lot of your confusion.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 574d
When someone says "we can't increase the blocksize because mining will become too centralized" I start heaving in convulsions and breaking out in hives.
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 574d
No one said that. The 128mb blocksize increase was already said by ABC to be in the plan for the May upgrade in 2019.
First fix the 22mb bottleneck then upgrade to 128mb.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 574d
DSV and CTOR have nothing to do with that 22mb bottleneck. CTOR s all about preventing large pools from doing slow block and garbage block attacks because they might get to 51%.
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 574d
The way your talking confirms that you didn’t watch the video I referred you to. Please DYOR because you seem to have been misguided somewhere along the line
Sk8eM dUb
replied 574d
I'm only going off what I've previously heard Aumary and J Toomin say. If the narrative has changed in your video tat would also be suspicious.
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 573d
The video is 2 months old and the most recent CoinSpice debate is a couple weeks old. Neither are saying what you have been describing.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 573d
So this is no longer true because it's two weeks old?
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 573d
🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♂️ Omg 😒😒😒😒
jim
replied 573d
in crypto 2 weeks old is same as 2 years old in real life.
in a hashwar 2 weeks old is same as 2 centuries ago, perhaps longer.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 574d
I'm going to watch it but I'd like to point out that all the boogeymen that ABC warns about are not transaction bottlenecks, they're all just possible mining centralization issues.
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 574d
During the entire video there was no talk of the so called “boogie men” and ABC never once mentioned anything about mining centralization issues.