This proves that they will upgrade in a timely manner. the fork you're pointing to had no grace period, it was an unexpected fork, and when it came time to upgrade they did so in a matter of hours.
They could have prevented that from happening had they upgraded to a newer version in time, but they didn't. Regardless, you are just speculating and hoping the everyone will rush into upgrading within 28 days. Again, pretty much everyone who has a somewhat better understanding disagrees with the grace period (including Garzik, who is a Classic supporter). Coming to a Bitcoin Core Node near you! This is the real tech and real scaling that the core team is capable of.
This is what a real team of developers is capable of and should focus on.
Humor time: Pieter Wuille facts. |
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Paypal only.
|
|
|
|
Just because someone's username is Satoshi Nakamato does not mean he is the real one. I came across Bill Gates on this forum today, but I know the real Bill won't waste his time posting on forums.
There was no need to bump this old thread. People tend to use various usernames online, so one should not be surprised if they encounter "satoshi" in a lot of places. The user account satoshi was the legitimate Satoshi. FTFY. |
|
|
|
Quite an interesting follow-up. I didn't expect it to be an 'inside job' even though this a likely possibility. This is why only certain people need to have security clearance. But isn't it strange that all of the exchanges that have been breached till now have claimed that it has been an inside job.
No. That is the easiest way in, after human stupidity of course. |
|
|
|
Actually to claim that 100% of the 'games' in IBG are scams is false. I'd hazard a guess that 99.9% are.
Correct. As with everything, there is always an exception. It would be an unreasonable burden on forum moderation to expect staff to ban those they believed were scams because, as we know from the assholes who routinely post these threads, they don't give up on their scamming dreams easily.
Not really, no. It would be a burden if we allowed such 'games' but removed the section. Otherwise, nuking those newbies isn't that hard nor does it require much effort. I do think it would be worthwhile considering banning anybody under full member or even senior member level from opening new threads in there though.
I've seen those 1 post newbies asking for "investment" into some random BTC address. |
|
|
|
if your node is not servicing other poeple ( ex. coinbase's node ) then you fall in the home user side and i dont care if you upgare or not, if you dont upgrade you'll be bumped of the network and that only affects you really...
I never said that my node didn't process other peoples transactions. I said that my node is not responsible for other people's "stuff". I run it for personal reasons and in order to help with the decentralization (unlike those datacenter-concentrated nodes). you're being paranoid, did you lock yourself in your basement for the Y2K bug ?
yes its safe to assume that ( coinbase, bitpay, bitfinex, Purse.io etc etc) will all upgraded in time.
Like it was safe to assume that OKPay would be prepared, back in 2013, yet it didn't (at least 1 known double spend occurred)?  |
|
|
|
I saw the road map previously. I think it is the April 2016.
Yes, that is the initial estimate for the release of the code. That does not mean that it will be merged nor activated in April. I hope it will have been tested throughly later this month.
It is being developed and tested since the start of the year. |
|
|
|
if your node is responsible for handling other people's monies you have a responsibility to run a well oiled machine.
No, I do not have such a responsibility. You're saying it like my node is supposed to 'serve' other people. node operators have not be faced with a HF before, of course i would expect them to not upgrade on every minor release, if it doesn't affect their ability to service their clients they probably hold off upgrading to allow that new build to be tested by everyone else and or plan to upgrade after a few minor releases have been piling up.
Speculation as always. You don't have the data, nor does the network have experience. It could end up being a disaster, you never know. |
|
|
|
no?
75% are ready and willing, and then 28 days is plenty of time for the other miners that voted against it to get ready.
worst case sanoir only 25% "get left behind". but its not as tho that 25% can't simply say " OH Shit i should have upgraded in time! better late than never..."
The 75% consensus threshold represents only hashrate, i.e. the miners. Miners are only a part of the ecosystem. With a grace period of 28 days, the majority would most likely be left behind (e.g. users, merchants). the only poeple slow to upgrade will be home users that dont really need to have their wallet running all the time.
False assumption. Nodes operators do not update as frequently and as fast as you think; you can verify this yourself. If you don't think that these nodes are not important ('non-mining nodes') then you have come to the wrong 'neighborhood'. |
|
|
|
Što se tiče konkretne vrijednosti coina, odnosno Ethera, ima li potencijala dostići barem trećinu max vrijednosti bitcoina?
Sve ima potencijal da dosegne neku cijenu ako pitas ove "altcoin lovere" (iliti idiote). ETH ima neke sanse da postigne vecu vrijednost jer: 1) Drugaciji je od Bitcoina. 2) Korporacije su zainteresirane (npr. Microsoft). |
|
|
|
what it this bitcoin core guys?
It is the main Bitcoin implementation right now. It is just one client out of many (e.g. Electrum, Armory). |
|
|
|
hi, I meant a fork when transactions collide and orphans are created in the end
I don't understand what you want to ask. TX "collision", orphans and forks can be very different and individual events. Nobody can give you a fixed answer anyways, as it depends on a lot of factors. |
|
|
|
|
Why is this even a question? Why would this slow down anything? If person X leaves that doesn't matter that number of transactions that other people make are going to go down. He's not that important even though I value his contributions and effort.
|
|
|
|
Depends on who you ask about it. However, if it were to be removed then investor-based "games" should be banned completely else something like this will happen again: Some time ago the "Investor games" polluted the Games board.
|
|
|
|
Rose of Versailles
This is not part of One Piece. Why are you posting that here? |
|
|
|
-snip-
say you rent 60% hashing power and fork to 2MB block while >75% of users disagree with it, they will simply ignore your fucked up blockchain and continue hashing away with 40% on what they consider the valid chain.
That is exactly what Classic is proposing. Replace 60% with 75% and you have the same answer. Basically, the BIP that Gavin has proposed is just designed very wrongly. It goes against the things that have been learned over time. With a grace period of 28 days, there is almost a certainty that the majority of the ecosystem would be left behind. |
|
|
|
It isn't really any different. I have no idea what is up with him.
Mempool at 1.6GB, another futile attempt to induce false urgency to increase the block size limit. |
|
|
|
|
Is this for real? Do you have any relevant links? It is certainly a nice gag.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
