My opinion regarding the block-size increase

[Chris]

A few weeks ago started a conflict between bitcoin developers concerning the decision of Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn to share their Bitcoin Improvement Proposals. BIP: 101

This conflict brought to divide the bitcoin community about what is right and what is wrong..

About block size increase

According to my calculations if an block size increase is not reached the next 2-3 years it will pass a major crisis..that major crisis can raze bitcoin
I am confident that an increase would happen if not now certainly later so it would be good to adopt bitcoin xt now so that we can fix problems that may incurred in the future all this will give us a smooth network operation without problems..

Day-to-day bitcoin become more popular more business accept bitcoins and more peoples learn about it and use it for the advantages which it can offer which is too many

But what would happen if the network reached a point where the load will not allow him to cope the daily transactions?
To quickly becoming the transactions should give high fee or to increase the block size (Bitcoin Xt)

Many merchants want or need to accept payments within seconds rather than minutes or hours:
XT Accepts this fact and does what it can to minimise the risk, then help sellers judge what remains.
Many users can not wait until 30 minutes to confirm their transactions on restaurants shops etc:
XT Make the transactions more quickly
Many users can't put high transactions fees:
XT Don't require high fees

Certainly those who are against bitcoin XT they will invoke everything to prevent users to use Bitcoin XT

I personally heard a lot like:
Gavin andersen hijack bitcoin Wrong
Bitcoin XT is altcoin Wrong
Bitcoin Xt is trojan Wrong
and more...



Surely the advantages of Bitcoin XT must not be left unused
A hard fork is required if not now certainly in the future

The slow transactions + high fees + double spend that can turn people's against bitcoin and this could damage it
A proverb says before hungry to cook

This is my opinion Each noticed accepted

[btc]

Gavin andersen hijack bitcoin CORRECTAMUNDO
Bitcoin XT is altcoin CORRECTAMUNDO
Bitcoin Xt is trojan CORRECTAMUNDO
and more...

FTFY

[Ledge]

Gavin andersen hijack bitcoin CORRECTAMUNDO
Bitcoin XT is altcoin CORRECTAMUNDO
Bitcoin Xt is trojan CORRECTAMUNDO
and more...

FTFY

Wow, you completely changed my view of XT with your compelling argument!

[btc]

Wow, you completely changed my view of XT with your compelling argument!

i'm only here to serve.

but yes it is true!

you too can be a paul revere and ring the bells about how bitcorn needs to stay as a little baby corn until bandwidth and storage is a lillllllll bit cheaper. oh and china rules btc (and ltc) and has lots and lots of free electricity and slave labor to mine and make asics with. so technically, none of anybodys opinions matter about any of this blocksize debate, because china gonna be china.

[helloworld]

Nice summary.

[Meta] Mods should step up their game removing troll accounts. It would be a shame if this forum degraded to bitcointalk levels.

[rogerver]

[Meta] Mods should step up their game removing troll accounts. It would be a shame if this forum degraded to bitcointalk levels.

Any specific accounts or posts you were concerned about specifically?

[Ledge]

Wow, you completely changed my view of XT with your compelling argument!

i'm only here to serve.

but yes it is true!

you too can be a paul revere and ring the bells about how bitcorn needs to stay as a little baby corn until bandwidth and storage is a lillllllll bit cheaper. oh and china rules btc (and ltc) and has lots and lots of free electricity and slave labor to mine and make asics with. so technically, none of anybodys opinions matter about any of this blocksize debate, because china gonna be china.

You make literally no sense. There is no such thing as "free electricity", someone is going to pay for it. Slave labor doesn't help when mining bitcoin since you can't do it by hand. Neither does it help when designing ASICs since that requires engineering knowledge and not brute force. And I can't see how any of this has anything to do with the blocksize or XT?

[btc]

You make literally no sense. There is no such thing as "free electricity", someone is going to pay for it. Slave labor doesn't help when mining bitcoin since you can't do it by hand. Neither does it help when designing ASICs since that requires engineering knowledge and not brute force. And I can't see how any of this has anything to do with the blocksize or XT?

have you ever heard of hydroelectric dams? china has loads of them. and china will mine with the asics they made with the free (read: slave) labor and free electricity

EDIT: did you really just ask what does mining, china, and the way they do things there, have to do with the consensus software known as "btc" or the new and improved "xt"?

[Ledge]

You make literally no sense. There is no such thing as "free electricity", someone is going to pay for it. Slave labor doesn't help when mining bitcoin since you can't do it by hand. Neither does it help when designing ASICs since that requires engineering knowledge and not brute force. And I can't see how any of this has anything to do with the blocksize or XT?

have you ever heard of hydroelectric dams? china has loads of them. and china will mine with the asics they made with the free (read: slave) labor and free electricity

EDIT: did you really just ask what does mining, china, and the way they do things there, have to do with the consensus software known as "btc" or the new and improved "xt"?

What does hydroelectric dams have to do with it? Electricity still costs money. Even if the government uses some of the stored up energy in the dams to mine bitcoin, it would still cost them since that energy could be used for something else that might make them more money. I doubt they make more money using energy to mine bitcoin instead of exporting that energy or saving it for the future. But maybe they do, do you actually have a source for this?

And yes, I do question what this has to do with the block size. Bitcoin is going to have to grow eventually to be a serious currency. That means the transactions per day needs to go up. That means that the blocks have to get bigger OR something else needs to change to make this happen. If China refuses to accept this then users will leave and go to an altcoin which solves the issue. As of right now miners are the only ones with the power to vote, but they still need to make sure that they are not selfish because then the users will leave. Bitcoin is nothing without the users, no matter how much hashpower you control. To say that "none of anybody's opinions matter because China will decide anyway" is ridiculous...

[LiteCoinGuy]

especially to say that Gavin Andersen is hijacking bitcoin or is a CIA agent (yes some people say this) makes me mad

without Gavin bitcoin would not be where it is today. we can thank him that he brought the blocksize problem on the table.

[Chris]

especially to say that Gavin Andersen is hijacking bitcoin or is a CIA agent (yes some people say this) makes me mad

without Gavin bitcoin would not be where it is today. we can thank him that he brought the blocksize problem on the table.

I agree Gavin 6 years now It has offered too many in bitcoin,and should some people's must appreciate this

[Chris]

Gavin andersen hijack bitcoin CORRECTAMUNDO
Bitcoin XT is altcoin CORRECTAMUNDO
Bitcoin Xt is trojan CORRECTAMUNDO
and more...

FTFY

What is trojan ?
A Trojan horse, or Trojan, in computing is any malicious computer program which misrepresents itself as useful, routine, or interesting in order to persuade a victim to install it.

Here is the code of XT https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt please give me the lines of code which in your opinion make xt trojan ? if you have not the appropriate knowledge to analyzing a code avoid to draw conclusions

[btc]

FTFY

What is trojan ?
A Trojan horse, or Trojan, in computing is any malicious computer program which misrepresents itself as useful, routine, or interesting in order to persuade a victim to install it.

Here is the code of XT https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt please give me the lines of code which in your opinion make xt trojan ? if you have not the appropriate knowledge to analyzing a code avoid to draw conclusions

bitconxt is trying to be bitcoin.
when really it should just stay as trying to be bitcoinxt.

∴ TROJAN

[btc]

especially to say that Gavin Andersen is hijacking bitcoin or is a CIA agent (yes some people say this) makes me mad

without Gavin bitcoin would not be where it is today. we can thank him that he brought the blocksize problem on the table.

sorry it makes you mad but cia agent or not he had meetings with them and it upsets many. also the rhetoric used as trying to push xt forward leads many to question his motives and the motives of his puppeteers.

[btc]

have you ever heard of hydroelectric dams? china has loads of them. and china will mine with the asics they made with the free (read: slave) labor and free electricity

EDIT: did you really just ask what does mining, china, and the way they do things there, have to do with the consensus software known as "btc" or the new and improved "xt"?

What does hydroelectric dams have to do with it? Electricity still costs money. Even if the government uses some of the stored up energy in the dams to mine bitcoin, it would still cost them since that energy could be used for something else that might make them more money. I doubt they make more money using energy to mine bitcoin instead of exporting that energy or saving it for the future. But maybe they do, do you actually have a source for this?

And yes, I do question what this has to do with the block size. Bitcoin is going to have to grow eventually to be a serious currency. That means the transactions per day needs to go up. That means that the blocks have to get bigger OR something else needs to change to make this happen. If China refuses to accept this then users will leave and go to an altcoin which solves the issue. As of right now miners are the only ones with the power to vote, but they still need to make sure that they are not selfish because then the users will leave. Bitcoin is nothing without the users, no matter how much hashpower you control. To say that "none of anybody's opinions matter because China will decide anyway" is ridiculous...

electricity does not cost money. this is where your thinking needs to change.

and the miners shall always decide. the day the miners are not the consensus drivers is the day bitcoin is truly DEAD.

Bitcoin is nothing without the users, no matter how much hashpower you control. To say that "none of anybody's opinions matter because China will decide anyway" is ridiculous...

i love how you contradict yourself here. china is the biggest user of bitcoin, don'tcha know

[Ledge]

electricity does not cost money. this is where your thinking needs to change.

I come with an argument to defend my point, and you reply with "your thinking needs to change". This is an argument that goes nowhere and you won't convince anyone with it. In what way does my thinking need to change? In what world is electricity free? Here is my source that electricity is not free in China: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrici ... comparison. It says 7.5 to 10.7 US cents/kWh. Now it's your turn to provide a source that states that electricity is free. I won't argue anymore until you provide that source, since it's literally pointless.

and the miners shall always decide. the day the miners are not the consensus drivers is the day bitcoin is truly DEAD.

And why is that? There is a massive problem with miners deciding the fate of bitcoin. And that is that money decides how much voting power you have. Spend more money -> get more hashpower -> get more votes. Also the only ones voting will be a few large pools and companies. That is not a good way to judge how the network thinks about a certain topic. Still miners will have to make good decisions because otherwise they might lose money when people leave the network for something else.

i love how you contradict yourself here. china is the biggest user of bitcoin, don'tcha know

How do you know that China is the biggest user of bitcoin? Here is a list of nodes per country (I am aware that you can fake nodes, but it gives a rough estimate): https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/. China has 1.54% of the nodes.

As for mining, China might have the majority of hashpower split between their largest pools. But that doesn't say anything about how many users are actually using bitcoin there. I can't find stats about bitcoin users per country or hashpower per country, but maybe you know about the stats?

[LiteCoinGuy]

especially to say that Gavin Andersen is hijacking bitcoin or is a CIA agent (yes some people say this) makes me mad

without Gavin bitcoin would not be where it is today. we can thank him that he brought the blocksize problem on the table.

sorry it makes you mad but cia agent or not he had meetings with them and it upsets many. also the rhetoric used as trying to push xt forward leads many to question his motives and the motives of his puppeteers.

yes he met them some years ago and talked about Bitcoin. he explained it to them. whats wrong about that? he even informed the community in advance about that!

in my point of view, that was a clever move and the right thing to do. back in 2011/2012 nobody even disclosed his real identity in the forums. actually he was the face of bitcoin and bitcoins best advocat.

gavin is talking about the blocksize since 1-2 years. he is pushing XT because he thinks the blocksize issue is a major problem for bitcoin which must be solved in the next months. he clearly has good intentions. proof me wrong.

now other devs start working on solutions. without him nobody would talk about that and there would be no meetings about that.

edit:

in the end iam optimistic that there will be a solution within bitcoin qt. that is the best for all.

[Chris]

sorry it makes you mad but cia agent or not he had meetings with them and it upsets many. also the rhetoric used as trying to push xt forward leads many to question his motives and the motives of his puppeteers.

yes he met them some years ago and talked about Bitcoin. he explained it to them. whats wrong about that? he even informed the community in advance about that!

in my point of view, that was a clever move and the right thing to do. back in 2011/2012 nobody even disclosed his real identity in the forums. actually he was the face of bitcoin and bitcoins best advocat.

gavin is talking about the blocksize since 1-2 years. he is pushing XT because he thinks the blocksize issue is a major problem for bitcoin which must be solved in the next months. he clearly has good intentions. proof me wrong.

now other devs start working on solutions. without him nobody would talk about that and there would be no meetings about that.

sure blocksize issue is a major problem for bitcoin i have mentioned about that on the topic..

[Chris]

[Meta] Mods should step up their game removing troll accounts. It would be a shame if this forum degraded to bitcointalk levels.

Any specific accounts or posts you were concerned about specifically?

Not this is not possible.. This forum offers something different everyone should express their opinion without restrictions..
Forum It is a service of an electronic board where online users with common interests to technology and bitcoin,they can place their views and notes on one or more topics..
But needs to be a conversation about block zise increase to give people to understand what is right and what is not,a conversation with proof rather than indications.. certainly should not become a mirror of bitcointalk or https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/

[JordanT]

This is required reading: http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/wh ... s-bitcoin/

The funny thing in this whole debate is that in the end one person can't choose or decide. Only if the majority decide a change will be implemented.

Decentralization and security of the network are key. I don't see how anyone can think that Bitcoin transactions will remain free. BIP 101 sounds good on the surface, but we will need fees to keep the network secure in the future.

I prefer a very slow increase and would rather wait and see what happens with Lightning Network and other protocols built on top of Bitcoin.

[ladoga]

In China the electricity transport infrastructure is lot worse than it is in Europe or US. At times when local demand is low hydroelectric dams often produce excess electricity that can't be fed into the grid. The choice is either to let the water flow thru or use that "free" electricity for something useful like mining bitcoin. So actually there are cases where electricity costs for miners are zero. They have contracts where they simply give part, for example 20%, of mined bitcoins to the hydroelectric company and the mining operates when free surplus electricity is available. It's win-win for both parties.

[JordanT]

In China the electricity transport infrastructure is lot worse than it is in Europe or US. At times when local demand is low hydroelectric dams often produce excess electricity that can't be fed into the grid. The choice is either to let the water flow thru or use that "free" electricity for something useful like mining bitcoin. So actually there are cases where electricity costs for miners are zero. They have contracts where they simply give part, for example 20%, of mined bitcoins to the hydroelectric company and the mining operates when free surplus electricity is available. It's win-win for both parties.

Something similar I also thought was cool:

"#Bitcoin enables Chinese entrepreneurs to export coal by burning it and using the energy to mine."

https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/6 ... 8727361536

[ladoga]

bitconxt is trying to be bitcoin.
when really it should just stay as trying to be bitcoinxt.

∴ TROJAN

Bitcoin XT is Bitcoin just as much as Bitcoin Core is, both are compatible with bitcoin protocol and have the same genesis block and the same blockchain. It's just another client. This is a fact, not an opinion.

sorry it makes you mad but cia agent or not he had meetings with them and it upsets many.

CIA asked someone to brief them about bitcoin and Gavin did it, so what's the big deal? He was very open about it and you can read all about that meeting in bitcointalk.

also the rhetoric used as trying to push xt forward leads many to question his motives and the motives of his puppeteers.

What rhetoric? That blocksize limit needs to be increased in order for bitcoin transaction volume to grow? That is better to do this sooner than later so we are not caught pants down if there's a sudden surge in adoption. I tend to agree with this. Instead of constructing strawmen you could try to explain points in that rhetoric, which you disagree.

Who are these "Puppeteers"? Some tin foil hat fantasy? If you have some evidence then please show us as it sounds like a fun conspiracy theory. How is Gavin more likely to have some shady puppeteers behind his back than any other of Bitcoin developers? Problem I have with these arguments is that they are a poor attempt at character assassination without any proof.

Also the thing about open source is that in the end the personalities don't matter. I don't really care if Gavin was Darth Vader himself, because the code is there in the open for everyone to see. If something that I don't agree about appears into the code I will compile without it or use another client.

Currently XT has the features I want so that's my preferred bitcoin client. It probably won't be true always and then I can switch to something else.

Now what was the problem?

[helloworld]

Any specific accounts or posts you were concerned about specifically?

Not this is not possible.. This forum offers something different everyone should express their opinion without restrictions..
Forum It is a service of an electronic board where online users with common interests to technology and bitcoin,they can place their views and notes on one or more topics..
But needs to be a conversation about block zise increase to give people to understand what is right and what is not,a conversation with proof rather than indications.. certainly should not become a mirror of bitcointalk or https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/

Banning trolls, scammers and spammers are completely normal. Otherwise you get a cesspool of lunacy like on bitcointalk.

[ladoga]

I think moderation is always a slippery slope.

IMHO you should not ban accounts or delete posts unless they are outright spamming. Suspected scams can be labeled by moderators as such (in a thread title or post), but not deleted. Trolls should remain free as long as they don't spam. That's what the ignore button is for.

If you decide to ban trolling, then you have to ask who defines trolling. As a good example, If we'd ask popular opinion of BCT Wall Obreserver thread participants if Jorge Stolfi (aka trolfi) is a troll, I think the answer would be positive. Yet he has made some of the most insightful posts on BCT and knows more about bitcoin than your average bitcoiner. He might be trolling (or not), but even when you don't agree with him, his posts are certainly worth reading.

Also many of us have been called Gavinista/XT/altcoin/younameit trolls and shills on BCT. You wouldn't want to do the same here, right? Lets just try accept that there are different opinions and if someone really gets to your nerves, then you can always click ignore and take a deep breath.

[btc]

electricity does not cost money. this is where your thinking needs to change.

I come with an argument to defend my point, and you reply with "your thinking needs to change". This is an argument that goes nowhere and you won't convince anyone with it. In what way does my thinking need to change? In what world is electricity free? Here is my source that electricity is not free in China: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrici ... comparison. It says 7.5 to 10.7 US cents/kWh. Now it's your turn to provide a source that states that electricity is free. I won't argue anymore until you provide that source, since it's literally pointless.

and the miners shall always decide. the day the miners are not the consensus drivers is the day bitcoin is truly DEAD.

And why is that? There is a massive problem with miners deciding the fate of bitcoin. And that is that money decides how much voting power you have. Spend more money -> get more hashpower -> get more votes. Also the only ones voting will be a few large pools and companies. That is not a good way to judge how the network thinks about a certain topic. Still miners will have to make good decisions because otherwise they might lose money when people leave the network for something else.

i love how you contradict yourself here. china is the biggest user of bitcoin, don'tcha know

How do you know that China is the biggest user of bitcoin? Here is a list of nodes per country (I am aware that you can fake nodes, but it gives a rough estimate): https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/. China has 1.54% of the nodes.

As for mining, China might have the majority of hashpower split between their largest pools. But that doesn't say anything about how many users are actually using bitcoin there. I can't find stats about bitcoin users per country or hashpower per country, but maybe you know about the stats?

why is everyone here so stupid? i try not to go ad hominem on you guys but wow. get a fucking clue. don't quote prices of electricity in china in dollars and cents you troll. you obviously don't understand that money is worthless. and that the value of the electricity is in of itself. china is the biggest user of bitcoin because they have the most hashrate. if that isn't your definition of use then sorry, gtfo. they are the guardians so that doublespends and coups like XT are not possible. *btc out*

[btc]

bitconxt is trying to be bitcoin.
when really it should just stay as trying to be bitcoinxt.

∴ TROJAN

Bitcoin XT is Bitcoin just as much as Bitcoin Core is, both are compatible with bitcoin protocol and have the same genesis block and the same blockchain. It's just another client. This is a fact, not an opinion.

sorry it makes you mad but cia agent or not he had meetings with them and it upsets many.

CIA asked someone to brief them about bitcoin and Gavin did it, so what's the big deal? He was very open about it and you can read all about that meeting in bitcointalk.

also the rhetoric used as trying to push xt forward leads many to question his motives and the motives of his puppeteers.

What rhetoric? That blocksize limit needs to be increased in order for bitcoin transaction volume to grow? That is better to do this sooner than later so we are not caught pants down if there's a sudden surge in adoption. I tend to agree with this. Instead of constructing strawmen you could try to explain points in that rhetoric, which you disagree.

Who are these "Puppeteers"? Some tin foil hat fantasy? If you have some evidence then please show us as it sounds like a fun conspiracy theory. How is Gavin more likely to have some shady puppeteers behind his back than any other of Bitcoin developers? Problem I have with these arguments is that they are a poor attempt at character assassination without any proof.

Also the thing about open source is that in the end the personalities don't matter. I don't really care if Gavin was Darth Vader himself, because the code is there in the open for everyone to see. If something that I don't agree about appears into the code I will compile without it or use another client.

Currently XT has the features I want so that's my preferred bitcoin client. It probably won't be true always and then I can switch to something else.

Now what was the problem?

just saying.

everyone could be a little more honest with how to push forward code and inform people of changes and RUN ACTUAL TESTS and take into account BANDWIDTH AND STORAGE COSTS. I am not saying XT is bad, just that it is BAD RIGHT NOW and BAD THE WAY THEY ARE PUSHING IT FORWARD.

don't forget about the small pushes hearn and gavin have always been making here there. hearn has forked "on accident" before and gavin just wants the USA to own bitcoin. you don't just push blacklists into the code to blacklist tor out and LOG BITCOIN USER IP ADDRESSES.

DO YOU SEE

[btc]

In China the electricity transport infrastructure is lot worse than it is in Europe or US. At times when local demand is low hydroelectric dams often produce excess electricity that can't be fed into the grid. The choice is either to let the water flow thru or use that "free" electricity for something useful like mining bitcoin. So actually there are cases where electricity costs for miners are zero. They have contracts where they simply give part, for example 20%, of mined bitcoins to the hydroelectric company and the mining operates when free surplus electricity is available. It's win-win for both parties.

pinging: Ledge

Something ridiculous about china having to PAY 7 to 10 American Cents for their electricity

thanks for this, ladoga

[Ledge]

why is everyone here so stupid? i try not to go ad hominem on you guys but wow. get a fucking clue. don't quote prices of electricity in china in dollars and cents you troll. you obviously don't understand that money is worthless. and that the value of the electricity is in of itself.

Dude chill. How can I "get a fucking clue" when all you say is "this is how it is, trust me without any proof whatsoever". I will never trust anyone without proof, and neither should anyone else. Ladoga came with a statement that partially explained how the electricity for miners are "free". There's still no hard proof, but it makes enough sense to actually be true. You have just been saying "it's free!" without explaining why.

Do you know what a Kalman filter is? No? Do you know how to use the Riccati equation to calculate an optimal controller for MIMO-systems? No? Oh, you must be stupid! "Get a fucking clue". You obviously don't know these things that I do, and apparently that makes you stupid. Do you see my point?

china is the biggest user of bitcoin because they have the most hashrate. if that isn't your definition of use then sorry, gtfo. they are the guardians so that doublespends and coups like XT are not possible. *btc out*

Again, you didn't come with any argument. You simply said "this is how it is, gtfo". And no, I do not share your definition at all. Miners will mine in whatever country that has the best environment to minimize their costs. That does not mean that many inhabitants of that country uses bitcoin. Let's say that electricity was free on Iceland. That would be a miner paradise since it's cold almost the entire year (less heat to remove from the miners) and mining there is free! A bunch of miners will set up there and the hashrate coming from Iceland will be huge. Does that mean that many people living in Iceland will use bitcoin? Of course not! High hashrate != many users.

(Now if you want to defend your point please tell my WHY the above is wrong, and WHY you are right. Don't tell me I'm a stupid troll if you can't hold your own in a simple debate.)

[btc]

why is everyone here so stupid? i try not to go ad hominem on you guys but wow. get a fucking clue. don't quote prices of electricity in china in dollars and cents you troll. you obviously don't understand that money is worthless. and that the value of the electricity is in of itself.

Dude chill. How can I "get a fucking clue" when all you say is "this is how it is, trust me without any proof whatsoever". I will never trust anyone without proof, and neither should anyone else. Ladoga came with a statement that partially explained how the electricity for miners are "free". There's still no hard proof, but it makes enough sense to actually be true. You have just been saying "it's free!" without explaining why.

Do you know what a Kalman filter is? No? Do you know how to use the Riccati equation to calculate an optimal controller for MIMO-systems? No? Oh, you must be stupid! "Get a fucking clue". You obviously don't know these things that I do, and apparently that makes you stupid. Do you see my point?

china is the biggest user of bitcoin because they have the most hashrate. if that isn't your definition of use then sorry, gtfo. they are the guardians so that doublespends and coups like XT are not possible. *btc out*

Again, you didn't come with any argument. You simply said "this is how it is, gtfo". And no, I do not share your definition at all. Miners will mine in whatever country that has the best environment to minimize their costs. That does not mean that many inhabitants of that country uses bitcoin. Let's say that electricity was free on Iceland. That would be a miner paradise since it's cold almost the entire year (less heat to remove from the miners) and mining there is free! A bunch of miners will set up there and the hashrate coming from Iceland will be huge. Does that mean that many people living in Iceland will use bitcoin? Of course not! High hashrate != many users.

(Now if you want to defend your point please tell my WHY the above is wrong, and WHY you are right. Don't tell me I'm a stupid troll if you can't hold your own in a simple debate.)

*chilling* ok, chilled. i don't take time to prove things that are common knowledge, that would take too much work. if you don't know how 4th world china is then i feel bad for ya, son. i do know about kalman filters and their use on spacecraft (I work with nasa and jpl people) and riccatis, (what is this high school?) i find it hard to believe that you know of such fascinating and complex things but you don't know how *free* things are for those in china who choose to abuse the system and the people along with it. call me crazy. it might be tough to find subsidized power in iceland at the scale that china has it (let alone i'm sure everyone in power there skims a little bit of everything off the top). i knew a miner mining in a startup incubator here in los angeles and he had free power most of the time because they were generating a lot of it extra so they gave it away for free. one day he got a bill because i guess power wasn't subsidized for that month. $2k bill and there was no way the bitcoin he mined that month could cover it. or maybe he already spent the money i forget. but anyways that could very well be the reality in iceland. china though. i'm sure the dam managers/owners just have asics on 24/7/365/foreverrrrr till the rivers run DRY

and the users never mattered in the equation. all that mattered was highest hashrate (usually) wins and it should be decentralized (distributed if possible) and definitely not centralized. but yes i guess i cede and you are correct, high hash != high users. but bitcoin never cared about the users. all bitcoin wanted, was to exist, and nothing more.