Re: Blockchain, block size and interledger (was: How do bank payments actually work?)

On 27 January 2016 at 03:33, Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com> wrote:

> What do people here think about the potentially incumbent collapse of
> bitcoin as a crypto-currency itself and the block-size issue?
>
>
> I think this BS and you should stop spreading it.
>

+1


>
>
> https://fixingtao.com/2016/01/point-by-point-response-to-mike-hearns-final-bitcoin-post/
>

What a fantastic article

The best way to fight a troll is not to feed it

The second best way is, take their head off


>
> Cheers,
> Greg
>
> On Jan 26, 2016, at 12:59 PM, Fabio Barone <holon.earth@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> As suggested, I am starting a new thread for this topic.
> I apologize if I am coming over as verbose and/or cluttering your inboxes.
>
> ****
>
> What do people here think about the potentially incumbent collapse of
> bitcoin as a crypto-currency itself and the block-size issue?
>
> The question is related to the blockchain itself, not bitcoin.
> Block size is ultimately a "political" decision of the community, and
> there appears to be a scism because of that.
> Not wanting to discuss that in itself (it's probably being discussed
> elsewhere),
>
> but what do you guys think this means for blockchain technology itself?
>
> Will we see a proliferation of different blockchains, making ILP even more
> interesting and important?
>
> Could this be a blow to blockchain technology itself (unlikely IMHO),
> because limitations of this technology are becoming apparent?
>
> What developments do you foresee happening in this field, also maybe not
> underestimating a potential collapse of the global economy this year?
>
> On a side note, I like Ethereum's basic tenets but I am worried about a
> lock-in of some sorts...
>
>
>