1027900+ entries in 0.632s
JohnSmith777: evoorhees: You guys at BitInstant need
to get your site at
the
top of Google's "Bitcoin" search results.
evoorhees: but let's count what I've given
them as well, shall we ;)
rg: you just like
them cause
they gave you $40k
Luke-Jr: evoorhees: I don't really like
the forums. Perhaps ask in #bitcoin-dev ?
evoorhees: can you PM me on
the forum and we can discuss?
Luke-Jr: JohnSmith777: no, because any miner who accepts
the
transactions loses all fees plus subsidy
evoorhees: Luke-Jr - if you have a recommendation, I'd like
to hear it
Luke-Jr: well,
that's why it'd make sense
to hire someone who already develops for Bitcoin
Obsi: I'm in for a few BTC donation
to make
the network more robust.
evoorhees: honestly I don't know enough about coding, or
the problems involved,
to even know where
to start
Luke-Jr: evoorhees: Satoshi's p2p code is all synchronous, so it will mostly need
to be significantly refactored
to do it..
Luke-Jr: evoorhees: if you're really NOT
trying
to kill Bitcoin, how about hiring a developer
to fix
this problem?
JohnSmith777: We might as well
throw in
the
towel if we can't survive without becoming somebody's pet project
JohnSmith777: now I am not here
to advocate FREE MARKETS!!!111 and Murray Rothbard
JohnSmith777: that private companies have reduced
their emissions
rg: the more bad blocks hat are gouing
to be found
Luke-Jr: rg: it's killing pools
that accept
their
transactions
rg: if it continued
to run witout intervention, it would cause an issue
Luke-Jr: but when you find a bug accidentally, you don't CONTINUE
TO EXPLOIT IT
Azelphur: and
the blockchain is only gonna get bigger
Luke-Jr: rg: great, I agree
that bug needs
to be fixed
rg: i dont want
to hear any of
that free market shit in here.
rg: we should fix
the problems now
rg: bitcoin is supposed
to get huge and run on an ancient platform?
rg: luke-jr: but dont you see
the problem with
that
Luke-Jr: rg: no, Bitcoin is not meant
to scale before it's adopted.
Luke-Jr: SatoshiDice is nothing but a DDoS attack on Bitcoin abusing gamblers
to finance its attack
rg: hes
the satoshidice guy
evoorhees: that's almost like printing money
to help
the economy ;)
rg: for
the good of bitcoin
rg: we're going
to assasinate evoorhes
rg: luke-jr : rally
the bitcoin militia
rg: im sorry you had
to find out
this way
rg: evoorhees: we're gonna have
to
take you out
Luke-Jr: since every node must download
the whole block,
then verify every signature in it, before
they will even START uploading it
to
the next node
Luke-Jr: big blocks = minutes
to propagate
the p2p network
Luke-Jr: rg: because Satoshi's code is buggy and not simple
to fix for 0.7
Luke-Jr: rg: no, because including SD comes with a huge risk of orphaned blocks, losing both
the fees AND
the 50 BTC
usagi: Do
they really need
to have games with maximum bets of 0.05
BTCHero: if you mean having accounts and not so many
txns
BTCHero: usagi: but
that is what it has going for it
usagi: the issue imo is
that satoshidice should offer a less direct service
BTCHero: coffee filters wouldn't filter out
the good shit, but i imagine running butter
through a coffee filter was insanely slow/didn't work
rg: otherwise
the coffee filters are gonna filter out
the other shit
rg: we made a
ton fo butter
too
jcpham: i make
the best brownies
rg: i havent
tried one cause itll make me fall aseep
rg: we made herbal brownies
today!
rg: that's why i always connect
to
the bitvps node
rg: when you connect
to a bunch of DSLs
BTC-Mining: Most modern games
take more
than
that on a computer
to run
rg: even
though pools break
the idea of btc
rg: so its better
to keep em running
kakobrekla: i dont
think
that many pools pay out fees but yeah
evoorhees: the players have paid roughly
that amount also
rg: its kind of a lot
to ask..
rg: asking someone whos new
to bitcoin
to download a program plus a 2GB block of data
BTC-Mining: I don't see any issues with
the blockchain size either
BTCHero: Luke-Jr: won't process SD
transactions
rg: since fees will be incl in
the block
rg: isnt SD
technically better for miners
evoorhees: and also, people should expect
that everyone using BTC will use
the desktop client
rg: since most people pay a lot of
tx fee for satoshidice
evoorhees: because
that's what keeps stacking up
evoorhees: the blockchain size doesn't need
to change - it's
the block size
that does
rg: im curious what
they've got in store
to fix
the blockchain size
evoorhees: SD just makes
the devs fix it sooner instead of a year or
two later
evoorhees: in any case,
these problems are all fixable
rg: evoorhees: i
think
that in another 6-12 months
evoorhees: SD isn't really an issue now, but it exposes how close we are
to running into some issuues
rg: and
the amount of
transactions we have were
the normal number
rg: but its better
this shit gets worked out now
rg: the load
time is pretty ridic
BTC-Mining: I
thought
the main issue people had was
that
the whole blockchain
took
too large and long
to download...
rg: it'll get fixed, bitcoin-dev need
to get off
their asses and work with evoorhees
JohnSmith777: evoorhees: If
the Bitcoin network can't handle Satoshi Dice, it wasn't fit for
the future.
evoorhees: but lots of people are upset about
the
traffic from SD
BTC-Mining: I doubt
the extra block sizes would ever matter... but yeah I wouldn't mind
trimming of data
BTC-Mining: If data storage and
transfer capabilities keep increasing at
this rate...
evoorhees: that
the block sizes are
too big, and
the data needs
trimming
evoorhees: kill
the ratio, yes, but not kill
the profitability
evoorhees: if bitcoin can't adapt
to handle 100 satoshidice's, it will fail
BTC-Mining: It's just
that bitcoins going mainstream would probably kill your ratio
evoorhees: Well SD is currently over 1/2 of all
transactions... just sayin
BTC-Mining: Which is also over 1/30th of
the current bitcoins in existence
BTC-Mining: You value yourself as over 1/70th of all bitcoins
that will ever be created... ~340000 - 350000 BTC
evoorhees: FYI -
to address
the comment from before,
the number of shares is
totally irrelevant, it's just a matter of notation. 1m, 10m, or 100m shares... doesn't matter. All
that matters is price per share X
total shares. 100m is a nice round number so I chose it.