|
Title: Mining pool political parties? Post by: Tanjima on May 07, 2018, 03:39:15 AM Curious if the separation of pools into political parties has started yet?
It's a win/win since the cut the pool takes is a way of funding the party you believe in, taking the blockchain in the direction you want. The Bitcoin community has already fragmented into the anarchists seeking pure anonymity and the entrepreneurs seeking legitimacy through regulation. Both sides could fund their operations with mining pools. Once the next halving hits I expect this to become the norm since the financial incentive will be reduced yet these people still have a desire to control the future of Bitcoin. :) :) :) Title: Re: Mining pool political parties? Post by: anisuzzaman99apu on May 07, 2018, 03:47:00 AM Smiley Smiley :)Curious if the separation of pools into political parties has started yet?
It's a win/win since the cut the pool takes is a way of funding the party you believe in, taking the block chain in the direction you want. Grin Grin Grin Grin Title: Re: Mining pool political parties? Post by: franky1 on May 07, 2018, 04:09:52 AM there WAS politics. in the form of consensus, which was a feature built by satoshi to allow on-network voting to allow competing idea's to find a compromise that would suite the whole community and if the high majority of the community agreed then the network upgrades to that new feature.
however. core team assured that they had veto power and methods to avoid politics. last year at the bilateral split. where bitcoin core political party(fanboys) went in the direction of segwit/ln/offchain. and the opposition were thrown in the other direction. democratic consensus was not used to activate segwit. this is because the core political party only had 35% of the vote(prior to the bilatral split(civil war)). so instead of accepting they did not get their rule set into bitcoin law, they decided to go to civil war by making 2 opposing states so that all the core political fans went to one state and the others went to another state. thus in the core state, it would "appear" that core got its 95% vote. but the only voters allowed to vote after the bilateral split were core friendly.. thus the fair consensus mechanism was abused. meaning anyone that loves cores political statement (the roadmap) can stay in there boys club and anyone who ever opposes core or decides later to change their loyalty away from being core loyal to not being core loyal will be thrown out. this is why core has centralised the core network. where by things like Fibre ensure the only blocks that get broadcast to the general public are the core following rules. this is why the general public do not see any orphans being passed around https://blockchain.info/charts/n-orphaned-blocks?timespan=1year because everyone on the core network is sheep followin the exact rules or will get banned from the network if they ever tried to use democratic consensus feature built by satoshi that meant to allow on-network competition offering an different option for people to vote for or against.. yep cor ensured that its their rule or get banned |