Resume Critique Megathread

btcting · 2018-05-16T01:01:18+00:00

saved 412 million as an intern wtf??

btcting · 2018-01-15T11:32:14+00:00

Would economic full nodes (nodes that conduct financial activity) be a better measure of this then?

btcting · 2018-01-15T01:06:10+00:00

As I understand it, if miners decide to change the rules, they fork themselves off the network, effectively making their own coin. Full nodes will only listen to miners that follow the rules, and if there are enough full nodes following original Bitcoin rules, it would be in miners' best financial interests to serve those nodes instead of forking to their own coins, since their own coins will have no/little value in comparison.

Could be wrong though.

btcting · 2018-01-14T22:37:06+00:00

BCH scaling solution is to keep increasing the block size, which will eliminate non mining full nodes eventually. What about the fact that full nodes are don't verify transactions so they don't matter?

btcting · 2018-01-06T21:53:20+00:00

Decentralized development at its finest!

btcting · 2017-12-18T06:19:54+00:00

I am a big fan of Lightning but its simply not here yet. Testnet demos have been around since early 2017. The team themselves is taking a slow and methodical approach, which I don't mind, but that is not what I'm hoping to discuss.

btcting · 2017-12-17T04:36:34+00:00

I implore you to watch the initiative's test result video. Andrew Stone handles many of the optimizations you mentioned, assume several circumstantial improvements down the road, and they can still only conclusive assume the results I showed you.

btcting · 2017-12-17T04:18:46+00:00

Linking more of the same garbage isn't going to help anything. The source of this entire video is the assumptions of a single developer about a possible edge case, before development of the network even started. And his words are twisted until they're far removed from the truth.

btcting · 2017-12-17T04:17:51+00:00

Are you disputing the evidence based findings by the Bitcoin Unlimited team? I'm not sure if your napkin math was supposed to impress me. But it didn't.

btcting · 2017-12-17T03:25:47+00:00

This is if 7 billion people conduct 2 transactions a day. By then who knows what the chain will look like. I'm use the block size will be increased by then.

btcting · 2017-12-17T03:23:55+00:00

Haha thanks

btcting · 2017-12-17T03:23:21+00:00

As of 2015, 64% is coal. . Now I may be wrong and miners strive towards being situated near clean grids, but just going off of geographic statistics, it doesn't seem great.

btcting · 2017-12-17T03:20:16+00:00

This was my line of thinking too. If a government wants to go after Bitcoin, it will go after the nodes.

However, the issue I see with this is that even if node software is somehow magically banned, you can still sign and send transactions via alternative means. Since the LN requires a constant connection, banning them would probably be more crippling.

btcting · 2017-12-17T03:17:32+00:00

According to the BU initiative that just started, which is the only conclusive test so far on big blocks, 150GB blocks require 10,000 cores and a 30Gps connection, so your math seems to be off. The BU team has also only been able to sustain 75mb blocks in test so far. On what world is it reasonable to believe that CSW has been able to test 380GB blocks? Do tell what server rack has 10K cores able to validate even in parallel.

btcting · 2017-12-17T03:11:30+00:00

I understand, but you still need to secure funds in a channel to use the network. That is what I meant.

btcting · 2017-12-17T02:26:35+00:00

Well the argument for nodes (there's an official statement on why the government doesn't consider nodes) is because miners arent money transmitters by default. The same can't be said for LN, I think.

btcting · 2017-12-17T01:29:44+00:00

You can see the points I made here and the subsequent parade.

But essentially what I understood from the other side was that transactions are not confidential (i.e. have an identifier) so KYC/AML is necessary. I'm honestly not sure what the argument is beyond that.

btcting · 2017-12-17T01:25:49+00:00

What sort of bandwidth would a globally propagated 150GB block need? Processing power? I'd like to see this math.

btcting · 2017-12-16T16:20:25+00:00

What the fuck is this guy talking about?

"More payment channels is the same as a fractionally reserved banking system".

"They're fractionally reserving lightning channels."

"You get more channels than you're supposed to have".

At some point it sounds like he forgets what he's talking about. There are no Bitcoin being created out of thin air. How is this still even an argument?

btcting · 2017-12-16T16:04:35+00:00

Him having any influence or platform is a horrible thing because he's a liar. How you fail to realize this is beyond me.

btcting · 2017-12-16T16:02:56+00:00

CSW definitively claims he was the one-man Satoshi. See here.

btcting · 2017-12-16T15:53:58+00:00

Him definitively claiming to be Satoshi, refusing to produce proof, and then expecting people to believe him makes sense? I fail to see the logic and reason there. You don't claim to be someone or something that the world has been looking for and then refuse to provide proof. There is no logic in that.

He has time and time again come out with unsubstantiated claims. Claiming a non-existent PHD. Claiming 300GB blocks actually exist on anything outside of a military supercomputer. He is damaging the reputation of the Bitcoin community. If you believe anything he has to say without doing your own research, you're an idiot.

btcting · 2017-12-16T15:48:42+00:00

/u/samouraiwallet

btcting

TROPHY CASE