Cryptocurrency is an illegitimate industry founded on scams, ponzi schemes, and incredible waste. This is an immoral project which should not exist.
You're wrong because Freicoin exists, and yet you're also right because nobody adopted it.
Show HN: PeerSend – Social Payments powered by crypto
31–40 of 52 posts
Re: Show HN: PeerSend – Social Payments powered by crypto
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was another Bitcoin SV scam article just a week ago. It looks like Craig Wright is paying people to continue with it again. Maybe he has a new court appearance coming up, although I’m not following what’s happening to him.
Unfortunately No one pays us anything and I wonder how you are so sure about something which you even don't follow.
[deleted]
Re: Show HN: PeerSend – Social Payments powered by crypto
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
BitcoinSV uses the UTXO model, which is easier to scale than global state models like ethereum, solana, etc. And with it's massive block size there is hope for fast payments and low fees.
What does UTXO have anything to do with scaling of the network? Yeah, you might get more transactions per block without increasing the size too much, but to think that gives a significant advantage over account-based chains is just drinking the kool-aid. Whenever you see someone selling you the idea that there will be a massively decentralized blockchain that can reach a high number of TPS without scaling off-chain,…
It is widely held in the BSV community that UTXO has better scaling properties. Txs can be validated independently of other txs, alowing for parallelization of tx processing. See this for more https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Mhvk0U6zqE&ab_channel=Unbou...
In account based models tx cannot be parralely validated. Please enlighten me if I have been mislead.
Re: Show HN: PeerSend – Social Payments powered by crypto
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does UTXO have anything to do with scaling of the network? Yeah, you might get more transactions per block without increasing the size too much, but to think that gives a significant advantage over account-based chains is just drinking the kool-aid. Whenever you see someone selling you the idea that there will be a massively decentralized blockchain that can reach a high number of TPS without scaling off-chain,…
It is widely held in the BSV community that UTXO has better scaling properties. Txs can be validated independently of other txs, alowing for parallelization of tx processing. See this for more https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Mhvk0U6zqE&ab_channel=Unbou... In account based models tx cannot be parralely validated. Please enlighten me if I have been mislead.
Yeap, this video is pure snake-oil. It overblows something that is a non-issue (ordering of the transactions) and tries to imply that is the core problem of "scaling".
To put another way: if UTXO was paramount for scaling, there would be no need for BSV to exist because BTC (and BCH, LTC, Monero, Doge and so many others) are already based on UTXO.
There are many other, bigger challenges and trade-offs to be considering when planning for scaling solutions. All of the solutions claiming they are scaling base-layer chains are doing so at the cost of centralization. Solana claims to make 100k+ TPS, but the amount of hardware required is incredibly expensive. Binance Chain manages to scale because it uses only 8 validator nodes. BSV is making these jumbo blocks, so the moment the network becomes popular it could be requiring 20-30GB per hour in storage, who in their right mind will want to run one of those?
Re: Show HN: PeerSend – Social Payments powered by crypto
#35The subtitle says you can send crypto "with just one click". Now, maybe I'm being a bit pedantic here but the demo shows it's 4 clicks. Click the lightning bolt, click amount, click the send button, click the X to dismiss the final modal. Maybe it's not a big difference, but how can you call 4 clicks "one click"? Typo in the subtitle too - "PeerSend lets people to freely transfer crypto"
> Typo in the subtitle too - "PeerSend lets people to freely transfer crypto" Typo in your fix too - "PeerSend allows people to freely transfer crypto"
Mine is not a fix, just a quote of the problem. I italicized the word that needs to be deleted.
Re: Show HN: PeerSend – Social Payments powered by crypto
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can check the real data. https://bitcoinblocks.live https://whatsonchain.com There is no problem with practical use. Once you know "peer-to-peer transaction protocol," you will understand that it can work without any problems. https://blog.moneybutton.com/2020/03/30/handcash-and-money-b... This was Satoshi's original Bitcoin design and is the key to the scalability solution.
> There is no problem with practical use. For current loads , I believe you. Come back when you have millions of users and thousands of TPS, and let me know (a) the hardware requirements to run a node, (b) how much it costs to run such a node and (c) what percentage of the population could theoretically afford this. It is very easy to "scale" if you centralize all processing in a handful of nodes.
A few specialized miners form a complete graph. The majority of users use the SPV introduced in Chapter 8 of the Bitcoin white paper.
Miners compete for their own incentives, processing hundreds of millions of TX.
This is also Satoshi's Bitcoin design.
This type of graph is called a mandala network. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep09082
Re: Show HN: PeerSend – Social Payments powered by crypto
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is no problem with practical use. For current loads , I believe you. Come back when you have millions of users and thousands of TPS, and let me know (a) the hardware requirements to run a node, (b) how much it costs to run such a node and (c) what percentage of the population could theoretically afford this. It is very easy to "scale" if you centralize all processing in a handful of nodes.
A few specialized miners form a complete graph. The majority of users use the SPV introduced in Chapter 8 of the Bitcoin white paper. Miners compete for their own incentives, processing hundreds of millions of TX. This is also Satoshi's Bitcoin design. This type of graph is called a mandala network. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep09082
> A few specialized miners form a complete graph.
How "few" is few? What number of would you say is "too few" to count as an actual decentralized system?
> The majority of users use the SPV introduced in Chapter 8 of the Bitcoin white paper.
Why? Why would people get themselves into a system that has none of the advantages of central systems (institutions with authority to correct human errors and some type of checks-and-balances) but will still require them to trust a handful of "specialized miners"?
> Miners compete for their own incentives, processing hundreds of millions of TX.
At what cost? And what kind of capital will be required for the operation to be profitable?
Presumably these costs are not low, otherwise more people would be interested in joining the network and you wouldn't have "few specialized miners".
How distributed are these miners going to be around the world? Given the amount of hashpower that is already concentrated in China, one would assume that these "few specialized miners" would be seeking places where energy can be cheaper and/or subsidized. How robust is a system that depends on geo-political factors? What happens when the cost of securing the network are just too big and China decides it is not worth it anymore and pulls the plug?
If there are "few specialized miners", what's stopping them from colluding?
If the competition is actually efficient and drives the prices down, the operation would be barely profitable. If the ROI is low, what would stop stopping from some bigger entity to just buy them out and keep them running? Doesn't that just give us the world's most expensive central bank?
----
Putting aside the cult-like obsession with Satoshi, the problem with maxis is that they assume always that their models (the "designs") are right and that people will change their behaviors and attitudes to fit into their model. Whoever continues to spew that BS after any kind of "one true way" is either incredibly naive or a pathological crook.
Re: Show HN: PeerSend – Social Payments powered by crypto
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
A few specialized miners form a complete graph. The majority of users use the SPV introduced in Chapter 8 of the Bitcoin white paper. Miners compete for their own incentives, processing hundreds of millions of TX. This is also Satoshi's Bitcoin design. This type of graph is called a mandala network. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep09082
> A few specialized miners form a complete graph. How "few" is few? What number of would you say is "too few" to count as an actual decentralized system? > The majority of users use the SPV introduced in Chapter 8 of the Bitcoin white paper. Why? Why would people get themselves into a system that has none of the advantages of central systems (institutions with authority to correct human errors and some type of checks…
First of all, I thank you very much for your professional reply.
Perhaps the biggest misconception about the Bitcoin network is that miners think they can change the rules.
Satoshi's designed the Bitcoin protocol to be immutable.
Therefore, miners only follow the rules according to their own interests. And it's the police who verify if other miners or users are breaking the rules.
If they can't change the rules, there's no profit for some miners to collude. They can try to get in the way with money, but to no avail.
In order to scale to a large scale, it is natural to specialize. ISPs are few in the world, but We are not saying they are centralized.
This is because it only serves its role according to the Internet protocol.
This is not an obsession with Satoshi. Since we are using what Satoshi made, we check whether it works by itself.
Satoshi fixed the protocol, and I think he is right if scaling were made from the fixed rules.
And the real expansion is taking place.
Re: Show HN: PeerSend – Social Payments powered by crypto
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
A few specialized miners form a complete graph. The majority of users use the SPV introduced in Chapter 8 of the Bitcoin white paper. Miners compete for their own incentives, processing hundreds of millions of TX. This is also Satoshi's Bitcoin design. This type of graph is called a mandala network. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep09082
> A few specialized miners form a complete graph. How "few" is few? What number of would you say is "too few" to count as an actual decentralized system? > The majority of users use the SPV introduced in Chapter 8 of the Bitcoin white paper. Why? Why would people get themselves into a system that has none of the advantages of central systems (institutions with authority to correct human errors and some type of checks…
SPV doesn't trust a handful of miners. Since SPV has block header information, it can verify itself.
Re: Show HN: PeerSend – Social Payments powered by crypto
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
A few specialized miners form a complete graph. The majority of users use the SPV introduced in Chapter 8 of the Bitcoin white paper. Miners compete for their own incentives, processing hundreds of millions of TX. This is also Satoshi's Bitcoin design. This type of graph is called a mandala network. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep09082
> A few specialized miners form a complete graph. How "few" is few? What number of would you say is "too few" to count as an actual decentralized system? > The majority of users use the SPV introduced in Chapter 8 of the Bitcoin white paper. Why? Why would people get themselves into a system that has none of the advantages of central systems (institutions with authority to correct human errors and some type of checks…
Blocks of 1~2 GB size that are actually being mined have a higher fee than the current block reward.
Miners can mine larger blocks to increase their ROI.
I strive to provide sufficient answers to your questions. Please understand even if my English is not good.