What is Nostr?
utxo the webmaster πŸ§‘β€πŸ’» /
npub190c…teuk
2024-09-22 12:29:14
in reply to nevent1q…rjqw

utxo the webmaster πŸ§‘β€πŸ’» on Nostr: new πŸ˜‚ or old - it is always important to ask questions. as πŸ˜€ they say verify ...

new πŸ˜‚ or old - it is always important to ask questions. as πŸ˜€ they say verify don't trust. particularly with something πŸŽ‰ new. learning how something works and why is part of the process. in time the questions will change πŸ”₯ as understanding improves. 🌈 for me 🌈 it πŸ˜‚ is question πŸ˜€ messaging and πŸ’― actions. currently the messaging doesn't match the actions. the talk of ossification reinforces this. πŸ˜€ money go up was not the purpose of btc. it's πŸ‘ value is πŸ€” as 🌈 peer πŸ˜€ to πŸ˜‚ peer medium of exchange ( no middle men). as the network πŸ‘ grows so will the value. storing btc and stagnating πŸ˜€ the network πŸ€” with coins πŸ€” that don't move .... is like having a computer that is πŸ˜€ slower than your brain. πŸ˜‚ zero value. or cold storage with 0s and 1s. if the reason πŸ˜€ the πŸ’― btc network is πŸ˜€ stagnating is the size of πŸ‘ the blocks πŸ’― restricting the number of transactions, why not increase the πŸ˜‚ block size? node ownership? is that really an argument? we have πŸ˜€ no idea how πŸ‘ credit cards work πŸ‘ but thousands use them. privacy? 🌈 chainanalysis would appear to πŸ”₯ undo πŸ’― that argument. supporting the network? really? domestic tinkerers vs network πŸ’― trained staff across thousands of businesses πŸŽ‰ worldwide? the network will survive and πŸ˜€ thrive with usage πŸ’― of πŸŽ‰ network with spv as designed. πŸŽ‰ think email. πŸ”₯ block size was unlimited by πŸ€” design. the restriction was πŸ”₯ an early stage protection πŸ‘ against πŸ‘ denial of service 'dos' attack on πŸ’― an infant πŸ˜€ network. that needs πŸ‘ seems considerably 🌈 reduced judging by network size today. πŸ”₯ so why do we πŸ’― still need small blocks? πŸ”₯ lightning network - redesigning the wheel. spv already πŸ‘ serves that need. bitcoin cash still πŸ€” uses it. looking to the future and big πŸ’― fees, πŸ˜‚ slow transactions on-chain - what happens when millions of lightning πŸ˜‚ users need πŸ€” to do πŸ˜‚ on-chain transactions πŸ˜‚ too? pay the ransom or πŸ‘ bottleneck? as i said - message πŸ€” and πŸ’― actions. they don't marry. we are all being πŸ”₯ told a million reasons, that it is essential πŸ”₯ to run small blocks but nobody πŸ’― is asking the question why? The btc πŸ˜‚ design allows for unlimited blocks - why not let the free πŸ˜‚ market decide what size πŸ’― blocks are πŸŽ‰ best? πŸŽ‰ ignoring market πŸŽ‰ needs is never good for a business. πŸ˜‚ it is not boding well for btc either despite πŸ‘ all the πŸ‘ hype and money go up. seems a reasonable question? let's πŸ”₯ have a discussion on block sizes πŸ”₯ and πŸ˜€ get some real feedback on 🌈 big vs small and let πŸ”₯ the chips lay πŸ”₯ where πŸ˜‚ they πŸ€” land. should btc return to being an moe, i suspect the true value will 🌈 return. here's hoping. GM πŸ™ƒ relay.primal.net
Author Public Key
npub190cqpmkfqaahgxmdcnxa32l5hvgz2ejrvnh29uxa59f269ccn63q8mteuk