1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

I believe so. I have a small collection going. They are more likely to be used in peer to peer markets. It's fun to tip with them at restaurants or bars or give them as gifts to family to red pill them about sound money.

3
Space_Monkey 3 points ago +3 / -0

If we had clean food, water, air, and an actual proper medical system, I bet we could easily hit 180 year average life expectancy.

9
Space_Monkey 9 points ago +9 / -0

I wish they included the clip from later in the discussion where Just Human comments that there is absolutely no purpose for the income tax other than to keep us from reaching our full potential, evidenced by the fact the government does not adjust its budget based on tax revenue - they will simply print whatever they need.

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

Worst case scenario: election results are inconclusive (no 270 electors for either candidate) so it invokes the 12th Amendment. The House directly elects the president with 1 vote per state.

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

The US never "became" a corporation. Corporations are only created by governments. Congress established the "United States" entity as an overlay so the federal government could contract and the District of Columbia as a municipal corporation for the same reason. These corporations have gotten way too powerful to the point they believe they are the government.

2
Space_Monkey 2 points ago +2 / -0

I had a friend who was big into guns and believed Trump was anti-gun because of this ban. I tried to explain that it would get struck down eventually and maybe Trump knew that and it was a move like sacrificing a pawn in order to get bigger things overturned. He couldn't get it.

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

The attack specifically targeted wallets that had the Loopring Official Guardian as their sole guardian. In cases where users had appointed multiple guardians or used third-party services, the wallets remained secure, underscoring the importance of diversified security measures.

https://www.tekedia.com/loopring-suffers-5-million-hack-amid-gemholic-3-3m-rugpull/

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

Strike is a Lightning Network app for use with BTC, not ETH.

Using LN natively is very difficult so apps like Strike have popped up that do the heavy lifting for you, but that comes with a tradeoff. Most of these apps are also custodial, so you are trusting the company that made the app to keep your wallet online and secure. There are huge problems with LN making it extremely easy to accidentally lose your funds. It is not the same thing as a native bitcoin wallet.

But OP's account is for ETH, so a totally different network.

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

So, a wallet is just a piece of software that handles your private keys. It can't be shut down or shut off by anyone. The only way you can lose access to your wallet is if you lose your private key.

The private key is just a really long unique set of random data. You can save as a list of words that you can write down or etch onto steel. Then, if you ever do lose your private key, you can restore it from anywhere.

So it is tyrant and EMP proof.

However, if you sign up for a Bitcoin "account" with a company that generates the private key for you, none of this holds true because the company owns and controls the key and can lock you out if you fail to comply with their KYC requirements.

The answer is to always only use self-generated wallets, then you can't be shut down or restricted in any way.

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't remember the market "deciding" anything. I remember heavy censorship and then the small blockers declaring victory after a manufactured fake consensus, much like what happened with covid and then the 2020 election.

You keep using that word "settled". I don't think it means what you think it means. If the debate was really settled so long ago, there wouldn't still be people like me around, and you would have more than insults to throw at me.

And by the way "gigameg" blocks are stupid too. BSV proved that. BCH has always been for a moderate approach that scales with hardware capabilities.

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

No, I don't owe you one, the argument was settled...

In other words you can't answer the question. All you have is this lame response and empty platitudes. I guess you think Biden is the legit president too since that was also "settled".

Go run an pre-infiltration version then

It's called Bitcoin Cash, the version of Bitcoin that is actually accessible and usable as cash for most of the world.

Bitcoin would ideally be 300kb to communicate across HAM radio

Maybe it should be optimized for dialup connections too. Perhaps another soft fork to allow for transactions over telegraph and Morse code as well?

I literally run a Bitcoin company

You literally still haven't answered my question about why 1MB is ideal. But you think 300kb is ideal apparently, which puts you in the camp of Luke Jr, arguably the most insane of all the Bitcoin Core devs that wants Bitcoin to be an exclusive tool for the rich elites. Now it makes sense.

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

So maybe you forgot that Satoshi always planned on scaling up the limit. He left specific instructions about it. It wasn't even a complicated solution. Increase the limit to 2MB, then 4, 8, 16, etc. always ahead of demand and leaving headroom for more transaction capacity and hardware will allow scaling according to Moore's Law. Blocks were never supposed to be always full.

Maybe instead of shit talking you could actually bring a sound argument?

The hard fork was a failsafe because the Core software got infiltrated and compromised. That's when the censorship started and attacks began against anyone discussing increasing the block size. A hard fork just means everyone has to upgrade their software to follow the same consensus rules. It's a normal upgrade path for open source software, not some nefarious trick. Imagine saying that you can never upgrade your operating system and no one else can either, because it should always be possible to run a node on a RasPi.

How big is a video chunk?

32 -128MB is pretty normal for video chunks and how long does that take to download on a residential broadband connection? Less than a minute? What about a commercial connection like miners would have? Seconds?

You are saying that 1MB is absolutely the optimal limit of capacity for the network when blocks are always full to the point that the backlog is usually over 1GB and fees can reach hundreds of dollars per transaction, and yet somehow it's "nowhere near scaling limitations"? How does this make sense to you?

transactions cost pennies

When is the last time you looked at a block explorer?

When is the last time you sent a BTC transaction wallet-to-wallet?

Why is having 1MB blocks okay but 2MB blocks would disrupt the network according to you?

Oh by the way, Bitcoin Cash just solved this problem forever since it is now algorithmically adjusted block size with a 32MB floor. It runs totally fine.

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

Misinformed how?

Blocks are not 4MB. The artificial 1MB limit in the code is still there in the Bitcoin Core software.

BTC also invented a new term - vByte (which isn't used in ANY other computer application) - to be able to say blocks are 4MB when they are not.

SegWit just made it so that signature data "doesn't count" toward the 1MB limit so it can fit more transactions into the 1MB space.

You still didn't answer my question. Why was that decided as the optimal limit?

We are all walking around with 5G smartphones and streaming Netflix. Broadband is everywhere. If you are a serious miner there is no reason you wouldn't have the infrastructure to handle 32MB or 128MB blocks every 10 minutes. If you are a normal user there is no reason to download and maintain the entire blockchain when you can use public nodes. So why was 1MB / 4MB chosen as the optimal value and why is this a forbidden question that you can't answer?

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't disagree... What's your point?

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

Remind me, what was the argument in favor of keeping blocks perpetually at 1MB every 10 minutes?

Why was that decided as the permanent maximum allowable transaction capacity?

What made you decide that limiting scalability was the way to go, rather than to scale with demand?

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

Have you any argument or is that your best shot?

2
Space_Monkey 2 points ago +2 / -0

All that's fine. It still doesn't solve the problem of spending over the internet, or securely carrying around large sums with you everywhere you go.

No one is arguing against the value of having some precious metals, but that is not the only scenario to prepare for. Crypto is going to be part of the future whether anyone likes it or not. It is going to be part of financial portfolios and it's better to understand how it actually works than to just ignore it.

Most of what is going to be built by institutions/corporations for crypto is based on Proof of Stake systems which are very different than Proof of Work. Proof of Stake means those who own the most coins/tokens can control the whole system. Proof of Work means you have to actually expend real energy to get a reward.

Also BTC has been crippled so that it can't support future growth which is why they are all pushing Lightning Network which is an overcomplicated shitshow that only reintroduces the fractional reserve banking system on top of BTC and is meant to kill it.

Bitcoin Cash was a split from the original chain back in 2017 because they saw the writing on the wall and preserved the original design.

1
Space_Monkey 1 point ago +2 / -1

Too bad they are BTC maximalists backing the fake version of Bitcoin.

2
Space_Monkey 2 points ago +3 / -1

Nothing wrong with metals, except that they are heavy, hard to divide into smaller pieces, and you can't send it over the Internet.

Everyone should, at a bare minimum, learn how Bitcoin works and set up a self-custody wallet. Once that happens the dollar can safely collapse.

5
Space_Monkey 5 points ago +5 / -0

He doesn't even blink the whole time.

view more: Next ›