Attached: 1548820730376.jpg (573x430, 64K)
WE. ARE. PUMPING
Asher Morris
Other urls found in this thread:
news.bitcoin.com
twitter.com
Lincoln Campbell
Holy shit
Nolan Rodriguez
Actually, though
Chase Brown
Jason Edwards
Brayden Young
still we gonna need a few thousand tps to scale everyone knows this. unfortunately btc can't do that. simply can't.
and it's the only trustless permissionless decentralized public ledger to date that is secure. shitcoins that scale can't do that.
this begs the question why exactly people are forcing the idea of paying with btc day to day? we could have a well scaling crypto for daily payments that clings to btc for security and reorg protection. and keep btc as is kinda like digital gold not used in every day payments.
of course i would be all for someone actually solving bitcoin scaling. but ln doesn't solve it on the long run and increasing the block size doesn't solve it on the long run the two together may solve it for a while but not enough.
it's possible to use ln with a 3rd trustful settlement layer i'm saying trustful as in the participants or hubs could run a negative balance to each other backed by legal contracts. in this scenario the end users still use ln to pay but routing is different. it doesn't require channels between hubs rather than one hubs can take on an others liability and pay for it with it's own bitcoins collecting it later and booking it on the settlement layer.
something like that may scale actually. we are back to banks, but with the key difference of trust. banks got to trust each other but we don't have to trust them. they can't screw the customer.
Jaxon Hughes
I'm fine with that
t. Visa stock hodler
Connor Taylor
So many IOTA and EOS shills in those comments.
Zachary Watson
I hope you are still trying to force this narrative in 10 years
Joseph Taylor
Hey user, it's me from the future (1,5h ahead). Pamp is over..
Kayden Sullivan
i'm not trying to force anything. i'm looking at it from a software dev perspective. ln works best as a centralized solution but we don't want a centralized solution. ln falls apart when it comes to routing and flattening the mesh above a trivially small size. it's literally called the routing problem. however you can avoid all that massive amount of btc locked in to channels between hubs that is basically a dead weight on the ecosystem and makes for it's bottleneck via 3rd layer settlement.
it's not as puritanic and elegant, but in this system hubs can only cheat hubs they can't rob the end users. transactions still rely on strong cryptography and endpoint ln settlement still fall to onchain. and by increasing the block size as needed this should scale pretty well especially if the hubs are regional for commerce and balanced as in roughly the same transaction volume of vendors and buyers.
sidestepping the routing problem is definitely a path we can take.
Camden Lee
DOWN.
Jose Jones
>shitcoins that scale can't do that.
never heard of Digibyte
Jeremiah Russell
>1200 MH/s
you call that secure? it's a fucking joke man.
also i tried to look into the whitepaper because you always find the weakspot there that enables them to scale better than bitcoin. the break so to speak but it doesn't have one.
Luke Fisher
whitepaper it doesn't have a whitepaper. i'm fairly sure there is a catch that breaks the "trustless permissionless distributed public ledger that is secure" paradigm because all coins that can scale significantly better than btc break it so far. sure you can increase the block size and frequency i'm not talking about that. i'm talking about orders of magnitudes of scaling.
Kayden Myers
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Austin James
2% pump after 80% dump
The state of /diz/
Luis Kelly
oh, you really never heard of DGB.
5 different algorithm + Digishield technology
have fun trying to get the mayority on each of them
I am not flaming you right now, just pointing the direction for security.
I have to search myself again for details but in regards of security that blockchain is secure.
Cameron Green
it's a centralized shitcoin based on my research so far. 15 sec block times means there is probably a single pool mining it.
Adrian Gomez
Zoom in retard
Aaron Lewis
WE ARE THE DIGIMARINES AND WE ARE NOT FUCKING SELLING
Mason Ortiz
>Digishield technology
what a fucking vaporware that is, shadow mining is barely affected by this crap. why is that all you find of digibytes workings are oversimplified pictures made for 5 year olds? it's like all their supposed inventions boil down to making vector graphics.
Jayden Evans
with 5 different algorithms
not long a go 2 where GPU only the other 3 ASICS,
now all 5 are ASIC infested.
in the near future one will be replaced with an algorithm that changes itself every ~10 days so ASIC won't work anymore, only FPGAs and GPUs.
also:
> a hacker would require the control of 93% hash rate on one algorithm to propagate an attack. A hacker would also require 51% control hash rate on the other four algorithms to initiate an attack.
> a massive attack with hashpower to mine blocks instantly is not possible anymore
>calling it shit
>why is that all you find of digibytes workings are oversimplified pictures made for 5 year olds? it's like all their supposed inventions boil down to making vector graphics.
If you can't attack the idea, attack the person
No need to get angry start throwing insults, all I did was showing that there are secure chains.
Please tell me how you can fuck up that chain and what will be needed, then we can see if it is unsecure.
Luke Parker
>pumping into a billion dollar bot wall
Good luck. Bitcoin was a good idea. But the problem isn't when crypto will replace cash it is when cash will replace crypto.
It's over.
Isaac Diaz
Have another look. It's far from centralised. In terms of utxo it's the best tech I have come across
Ethan Collins
Good advice
Ryder Jackson
I've lost hope that this is anything significant
Jace Jackson
Ln
/thread
Jeremiah White
i will take a look at it in a few years if it manages to get any recognition. from a cursory look at the github history i can't say i'm impressed with the work that is being done on it. seems like all they do is fuck around with versions and parameters. still the lack of actual technical information online (aside from buzzwords and meaningless graphics showing shields and arrows and calling it fast and secure) is disturbing.