It is called validation because if some peer you are connected to you is going to start throwing huge blocks at you then they are chewing up your bandwidth with rubbish (same as sending you huge txs with no fees, etc.).

Full nodes will necessarily perform such validation in order to reduce potential DoS attacks (am surprised that you hadn't already realised this).

For SPV usage there is much less validation going on (which is why SPV mining is such a bad idea).

Unfortunately as is once again shown in this topic - the issue of block size is being thought of as the issue of XT (and that was actually the reason behind my creating this topic as opposed to creating a topic about block size).

Quite simply it is not as their are numerous other options for increasing block size that don't involve XT at all and XT includes numerous things that are not to do with block size increasing (some of which are quite contentious).

What XT really is - is just a way for Mike Hearn to "take control of the Bitcoin project" (and he has admitted as much).

So if you are a supporter of XT then you are "not a supporter of big blocks" (as you should support any of the BIPs that will increase the block size) - you are actually a supporter of Mike Hearn becoming effectively the CEO of Bitcoin (and this is the antithesis of what Satoshi had described in his paper).

You can only try - and assuming you can prove your side of the story apply public pressure (like via this forum) to the entity in question.

As the major Chinese exchanges have all stated that they do not support the BIP then your statement about "all the exchanges" is obviously rubbish (there is no such agreement between all the exchanges).

There is only *one* main company (which isn't even an exchange) that is pushing this XT agenda.

To add a little bit of "logic" to this let's just look into why there is this sudden need to increase the block sizes.

Are they getting full now? In general no (around 50%) and when they have been full that has been only at times when spam attacks are happening (so nothing to do with actual consumer demand for BTC txs).

Another typical argument is: the average person isn't adopting Bitcoin so we need bigger blocks.

Hmm... but if the average person doesn't even earn any Bitcoin then why on earth are we expecting a huge number of new txs?

I've pointed out before that the remittance market is the biggest and most suitable match for BTC but it barely even has had any impact in that multi-billion dollar industry.

If the amount of effort that was being put into trying to push XT was actually put into to trying to get BTC into the remittance market then maybe we'd actually have a "real reason" to need bigger blocks quicker.

Yup - yet the shills keep on trying to say that what matters is "nodes" not "miners" (and tend to go off into "freedom of choice" tangents from there).

How about you quote the misinformation rather than just making such statements?

Basically I think we are all getting sick and tired of the XT shills that don't even understand the technical arguments but just seemingly want to have Mike Hearn as their leader.

Thanks for supplying some actually relevant information (we don't get much apart from "freedom of speech" idiocy from the shills).

And keep on trying to make the "time" variable a thing - it isn't.

Manchuria?

Did you not read anything about history?

Exactly - there is no widespread support for BIP101 as has been proved by the blockchain.

Proof please?

Again - there is no "need for a timely manner" this is just another bullshit "shill" thing.

You should consider running as a politician in Australia as they spout the same sort of nonsense that you do (and just look at how much Australians respect politicians).

Yes - everyone who has a brain "knows" this but the shills keep trying to push this as they hoping that somehow the ignorant masses might get behind them.

He is a "shill" as we have shown - so I think we don't need to accuse him of being retarded - he is just doing what he has been told to do (I guess he is being paid to post).

The small blocks are the "current thing" so they are not something that is to be "forced upon anyone" (they are the current situation).

This is typical "double-speak" from a shill (if you don't want to be so obvious a shill then improve your attacks).

Again - look at the *reality* of what is happening now.

The only full blocks have been because of spam attacks (not real demand).

There is ample time to work on improving performance - the whole idea of making this out to be a crisis is the FUD from your masters.

So you have shown you don't get it at all - China *leads* and *you follow*.

If you don't follow then you simply "fork off".

Funnily enough China is not the country trying to introduce a corporate takeover of Bitcoin and introduce blacklists, etc. only the US is trying to do that (it seems that China actually *gets* Bitcoin but the US does not).

You don't seem to understand - China is where the money is (am guessing you must be American as only Americans would make such stupid statements).

You know what is the funniest thing - you don't have any Chinese exchange on your side.

The Chinese are actually smarter than Americans and they know exactly how to screw Americans which is why they don't take your side.

They are going to wait and see and then "fuck you up".

(Americans seem to forget that they can't threaten China at all)

Personally I am looking forward to December to see that you guys will fail and then will re-announce you are going to try the same shit next year (and you'll fail then also).