Bitcoin Forum

https://i.imgur.com/DNxdXTR.gif

This is a simple animated GIF that visualizes one possibility for how multiple protocol implementations might emerge over time.

Decentralizing development and supporting multiple forkwise-compatible implementations of the protocol is a worthwhile goal that will simultaneously make Bitcoin more robust and more responsive to the will of the Bitcoin community.

Cross-posted: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3nhq5a/deprecating_bitcoin_core_visualizing_the/

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

Forks welcomed

There are currently 3 maintained and well supported versions of the existing Nakamoto consensus protocol:

Bitcoin Core
btcd
thebitcoin.foundation's

Moreover hundreds of person are currently running different versions of Core with sometimes their own patches.

We're waiting for yours Peter

For anyone that cares here's the actual history of Bitcoin Github commits:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=287&v=PfKlee8kLE4

You should find that it supports arguments that current Core repository is enjoying very healthy growth in contributors and peer-review.

Decentralization of Bitcoin development is as strong as it has ever been.

Don't listen to this guy's FUD.

@Peter R
Yup, I'm waiting to see what will happen at the time when the block will always full :)

I'm a bit confused about these forks. Are these esentially altcoins? Will this affect the price of bitcoins?

Yes, Peter is attempting to confuse Bitcoin users by proposing different altcoins with very similar but ultimately irreconcilable rules. 

This would essentially fragment the user base and make them vulnerable to governance attacks that could undermine the value of their coins.

A fork of the code isn't an altcoin until it uses the same blockchain (and the same rules of the majority)

Whatever fork/code that will become the minority (in nodes/blocks/mining power), then it will be an altcoin.

If we imagine that Bitcoin XYZ (whatever fork, with different consensus rules) will become the majority of nodes/miners, than Bitcoin Core will be an altcoin.

If there is consensus to change rules Core will implement them.

Until then, attempts to divide consensus by creating contentious schism forks are to be considered altcoins.

Again, this is nothing against code forks that are bug-for-bug implementations of the existing Nakamoto consensus rules.

If an implementation (Bitcoin XT) proposes to change these rules absent of consensus it could a. be rejected or b. get adopted. As long as economic majority does not bulge from current consensus rules the implementation in question will see little to no support. On the other hand, other different implementations that respect consensus agreement on the protocol rules could see adoption depending on the quality of their code, its features and security.

https://i.imgur.com/nWG10mg.png

The cross post to /r/Bitcoin has now been censored and I've been temporarily banned for vote brigading.

You break the rules and call the actions of moderators 'censorship'? ::)

I concur. A lot of people are running their own versions of the software with additional patches and whatnot. Noone of them are trying to 'divide and conquer' Bitcoin.

---

---

There's no emergence of anything at the moment. Instead of wasting time trying to take over Bitcoin, someone could have tried fixing malleability.

I'm curious to know in what way you believe I've broken the rules.  Indeed I shared links to my submission here, at /r/bitcoinxt and at bitco.in to encourage participation in (what I think was) an important discussion.  I regularly do this as I believe the dissemination of new content is useful. Nowhere did I solicit people to up-vote or down-vote any comments. 

I have nothing against several BIP submissions being done to improve the way things are being done on the development side. These submissions must have one goal in mind, and that is to improve the Bitcoin

protocol. I do have a problem with all these vote brigading and scare tactics and side projects being forced onto people to get them to back their proposal.

Just concentrate on what is best for Bitcoin and not what is best for a individual or a small group of miners or 3rd party service providers. Also leave government requirements out of development... Look at it from

a global perspective, not a national government perspective.  ::)

'Vote brigading' is against the rules. I can not be 100% sure that you did it, nor that it was done at all, but I doubt that this post would have been taken down without a reason. The XT community could have done this as well.

---

---

Update: Your post does not make sense. Posting links to the reddit is not 'vote brigading'. Look it up.

The moderator said it was "vote brigading" because I shared a link to my submission here, at bitco.in and at /r/bitcoinxt.  Nowhere did I solicit people to up-vote or down-vote any comments.  

As a reminder, this was the censored image:

https://i.imgur.com/DNxdXTR.gif

Yeah we get it, now please go away and take your spam along with you.

Welcome to the twilight zone.