Fun fact: Ver's twitter account https://twitter.com/rogerkver/ has the "Government agent" grey checkmark.
Early Bitcoin Investor Roger Ver Charged with Tax Fraud
91–100 of 114 posts
Re: Early Bitcoin Investor Roger Ver Charged with Tax Fraud
#92Re: Early Bitcoin Investor Roger Ver Charged with Tax Fraud
#93Re: Early Bitcoin Investor Roger Ver Charged with Tax Fraud
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don't you think it's possible?
It is possible, but absurd. Why more layers if layer 1 works fine just increasing the maximum block size? Bitcoin Cash did it and works flawlessly. Just try it.
It's called the blockchain trilemma.
Bitcoin cash pays the price through centralisation. It can still only manage 100 transactions/second so certainly isn't flawless.
Far better to make the base layer slow but very robust, and then add layers to scale.
Re: Early Bitcoin Investor Roger Ver Charged with Tax Fraud
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is possible, but absurd. Why more layers if layer 1 works fine just increasing the maximum block size? Bitcoin Cash did it and works flawlessly. Just try it.
It's called the blockchain trilemma. Bitcoin cash pays the price through centralisation. It can still only manage 100 transactions/second so certainly isn't flawless. Far better to make the base layer slow but very robust, and then add layers to scale.
> Bitcoin cash pays the price through centralisation
What centralization? If you are referring to the node implementations, it has several [0]: Bitcoin Node, Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin Verde,... Bitcoin BTC has basically one: Bitcoin Core [1]. If you mean mining, it's the same as BTC, same mining algorithm, same miners.
> It can still only manage 100 transactions/second
True for now, but it's way more than it needs right now now [2]. But don't worry, this month upgrades to ABLA [3], and will be able to scale to as many tx/s as needed.
[0] https://bitcoincash.org/#nodes
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin
Re: Early Bitcoin Investor Roger Ver Charged with Tax Fraud
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess it was lucky that it was designed quite badly for the stated purpose and it was actually designed as investment vessel.
Bitcoin (BTC) worked perfectly as currency in the beginning, until Blockstream took over the development team, and they decided to keep the temporary anti-spam 1MB block limit, making 0-confirmation transactions (instant payments) very risky by implementing return-by-fee (which make transactions reversible before getting confirmed), etc.
It's the miners and users who ultimately decided if the 1MB block limit should be kept.
Re: Early Bitcoin Investor Roger Ver Charged with Tax Fraud
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin (BTC) worked perfectly as currency in the beginning, until Blockstream took over the development team, and they decided to keep the temporary anti-spam 1MB block limit, making 0-confirmation transactions (instant payments) very risky by implementing return-by-fee (which make transactions reversible before getting confirmed), etc.
It's the miners and users who ultimately decided if the 1MB block limit should be kept.
Then the miners are clearly smarter than the users
Re: Early Bitcoin Investor Roger Ver Charged with Tax Fraud
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's called the blockchain trilemma. Bitcoin cash pays the price through centralisation. It can still only manage 100 transactions/second so certainly isn't flawless. Far better to make the base layer slow but very robust, and then add layers to scale.
> Bitcoin cash pays the price through centralisation What centralization? If you are referring to the node implementations, it has several [0]: Bitcoin Node, Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin Verde,... Bitcoin BTC has basically one: Bitcoin Core [1]. If you mean mining, it's the same as BTC, same mining algorithm, same miners. > It can still only manage 100 transactions/second True for now, but it's way more than it needs r…
The increased block size increases the amount of storage required to run a full node (and also the bandwidth required to sync nodes). Even at just 100 tx/sec, you need 14x the storage of a bitcoin node (so around 10TB vs 700GB for bitcoin). That puts it out of reach for many people to run and so making it more centralised.
To compete with a payment rails like Visa and Mastercard, you'd need to increase that to 10000+ tx/sec, making running a node complete unfeasible for most people to run.
There's simply no such thing as a decentralised blockchain network with unlimited block-size. At some point if you want to remain decentralised, you have to create layer 2+ networks that can handle the smaller, high-bandwidth transactions, and so you may as well commit to that model now and focus on making the base layer as robust as possible.
Ultimately for a money to attract the most value, it needs to optimise for the very largest transactions, and offer the most robustness (i.e. most decentralisation). This is precisely what bitcoin has done.
Re: Early Bitcoin Investor Roger Ver Charged with Tax Fraud
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the miners and users who ultimately decided if the 1MB block limit should be kept.
Then the miners are clearly smarter than the users
Why? They decided the same. Both miners and users favor the fork where the 1MB block limit is kept.
Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Gold are used and mined very little.
Re: Early Bitcoin Investor Roger Ver Charged with Tax Fraud
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bitcoin cash pays the price through centralisation What centralization? If you are referring to the node implementations, it has several [0]: Bitcoin Node, Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin Verde,... Bitcoin BTC has basically one: Bitcoin Core [1]. If you mean mining, it's the same as BTC, same mining algorithm, same miners. > It can still only manage 100 transactions/second True for now, but it's way more than it needs r…
The increased block size increases the amount of storage required to run a full node (and also the bandwidth required to sync nodes). Even at just 100 tx/sec, you need 14x the storage of a bitcoin node (so around 10TB vs 700GB for bitcoin). That puts it out of reach for many people to run and so making it more centralised. To compete with a payment rails like Visa and Mastercard, you'd need to increase that to 10000+…
If you mean a full non-mining nodes (which only a few people really need, merchants, exchanges, ...), read points 7 and 8 of the whitepaper. For full mining nodes, you need expensive specialized hardware anyway.
Non-mining nodes are just observers that do nothing good to the network. Is like going to war with popcorn as a weapon. Mining nodes are the only ones than can include transactions to a block.