Humans do not even have the power to maintain the existence of their own mind.
When you think all humans are stupid and error-prone, it makes it much easier to catch your own stupidity and errors.
"Check my wheelbarrow" is a wonderful phrase. I'm going to start using that one.
There's plenty of room for dangerous cranks here!
You are an individual, and your fulfillment comes from staying as close to love as possible.
The real story is that I should have been allocated 50% of the NPC coins, since I'm drawing half the audience.
There's a difference between rational-woo and woo-woo.
Thomas Sowell. Weston Price. Norman Wildberger.
Practitioners trust researchers 10,000x more than they should.
"The seen and the unseen" is one of the most important concepts in economics, and it has even bigger implications in science and philosophy.
Until I can model somebody else's mind within my own, I have more to learn from them.
Humans have never built anything remotely complex.
The modern, technocratic version of the divine right of kings is the divine right of mathematicians.
To be skilled with numbers is to speak the language of God, and in the technocratic mind, that justifies ruling over others.
I know a guy in Ethiopia who I'm pretty sure is a lawyer.
Agreed. Seems like the most consistent position is to reject the caps and let miners determine the size.
Are the incentives strong enough to keep Bitcoin from breaking? I think so, but this is why people say it's an economic question, not a technical one.
But VISA levels are global not cash tx levels (would need ~600mb blocks for that), nor do they deal with micropayments at all. Micropayments alone could generate orders of magnitude more txs than cash txs.
32mb blocks are still tiny blocks at scale.
If you think 1mb is too small, where do you draw the line? Seems like any capped blocks will eventually run into the same problems at scale.
I don't think the cost of running a node made any difference, to be honest.
The way I see it, miners protected the network from Amaury's attempted takeover - something I wish they'd have done in BTC in 2017.
I'm also glad we have a choice. History demonstrates that users do not have a say in consensus rules in BTC. The devs unilaterally decided for everybody - and even for the entire industry - that blocks would be capped at tiny sizes, despite their wishes.
The fees won't be a problem so long as you're cool with custodial BTC.
"It is plain that what is sensuously thought is the representation of things as they appear, while the intellectual presentations are the representations of things as they are."
-Kant
