No, network consensus, i.e., almost all the nodes on the network are ready to accept a new version of blocks. Are we talking about clients, relays or miners ? |
|
|
|
|
Adam Back lies you all in the face and pretends like nothing has happened.
What he says has nothing to do with original Bitcoin social contract designed by Satoshi. The original vision was that majority of miners and majority of users decide. Users decide by running their clients and miners decide by mining the longest chain. If users start using a client with another chain that is the longest, miners switch to that.
It is really simple. Users decide. MAJORITY of users decide. Where the hell did he get the "minority" from ?
Also, please remember that even if you don't understand Bitcoin technically, you can still vote correctly in the blocksize debate:
How ? The only thing that you actually need to consider is the actions taken by both sides of the debate.
There is only one side of the debate here that repeatedly tries to stifle discussion by resorting to censorship, DDoSing, outright lying while simultaneously pretending that nothing is actually happening. Check out yourself.
If they wanted the best for Bitcoin users, they wouldn't have to lie, censor and directly attack their opponents. Such actions clearly show their evil intentions and their ulterior hidden agenda. Words are often meaningless. Words are cheap. These days you can actually detect bullshit and real intentions of evil people only by watching their actions.
This is at least a 2000-year old truth. "You will recognize them by their fruits" it said in some ancient book.
So basically, the side of the debate that resorts to censorship, lying, manipulation and attacks, is 99,99% of the time the dishonest side which is trying to do something evil while pretending to do something good.
|
|
|
|
Then, I guess, perhaps we could agree that, hard fork the network with the support of just 6 pool operators, and one month "grace period", while completely disregarding the response of the network of full nodes at the time, like what the Bitcoin Classic people are very clear about what they are trying to do, is very undemocratic and should not be supported?
If the pool operators were the only ones interested in >1MB blocks then this would fail since most users and merchants would reject their larger blocks. this is not the case however...these companies are supporting it too: Coinbase OKCoin Bitstamp Blockchain.info (Peter Smith) Xapo Bitcoin.com Foldapp Bread Wallet Snapcard.io Cubits Vaultoro Coinify Bitso Bitnet BitOasis Lamassu BlockCypher BitQuick.co itBit BitAccess Coinfinity Chronos Crypto Not more? Consensus is certainly at 1 MB then. As I suspected. To break the rules of the blockchain, e.g. by increasing the blocksize, increasing the money supply or inflation rate, etc, 10% is not enough. Neither is 51% or 75% or even 90%. You need 100% consensus. 100% consensus is most probably unachievable because of the ability of a single powerful miner to destroy consensus. I assume we are talking about miner consesus, right ? 1. But that is not really important. The last time hard fork happened (because of network malfunction), the network upgraded, resolved itself & reached "consensus" in around 6 hours. So miner consensus can happen almost instantly. Nobody wants to be on the losing side of the fork - that is pretty obvious. 2. Lately "consensus" means whatever Adam Back wants it to mean. Check out these links: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/434spq/adam_back_on_twitter_understand_bitcoin_social/https://twitter.com/adam3us/status/692756252418576384.@jnxpn understand #bitcoin social contract: majority MUST NOT be able to override minority. that is how political money fails. #consensus So basically now he claims that consensus is what minority (Blockstream) wants. He has lost it and is completely mad with power. Last time I remember, Bitcoin was all about what majority wants. When minority wants to change rules of the game then it is called a HARD FORK and they go their separate way. |
|
|
|
More please.
More of what? Arguments. all I have is facts You have nothing. A screen that can be really easily faked is not a fact or proof of any kind. Also your inability to post may be a technical malfunction. EDIT: Again, offtopic. Not continuing this any longer. What's with the offtopic making, people ? Can't you really stay straight for an hour ? |
|
|
|
More please.
More of what? Arguments. Seriously, are you a child ? Start the arguments or leave the train. Or you can also state: "You are right, my arguments were incorrect" and that will do it. EDIT: This thread has been archived for posterity: https://archive.is/6Oqgk |
|
|
|
/r/btc is not censored. You may be shadowbanned from reddit, or from that subreddit. You may also be a troll which has been banned from /r/btc. Anyway, this is not enough proof to make an argument. More please. EDIT: This thread has been archived for posterity: https://archive.is/6Oqgk |
|
|
|
3. I did that only because you watered down the topic again using your offtopic tactics.
Stop with the nonsense please - if you want to properly debate something then let's do it. You are stalling again. Start with the arguments. Only then will you gain my respect. |
|
|
|
So you just keep repeating your original post.
That shows that you have no interest in actually debating a single thing but instead want to just insert your opinion,
1. Actually I do both. 2. Strayed offtopic again. No new arguments. 3. I did that only because you watered down the topic again using your offtopic tactics. |
|
|
|
...
I mean what the hell are we even talking about ? Are you even familiar with the events of last 2 weeks ? The events of last 10 days should be enough for every good, honest & truthful person to hate Blockstream & Bitcoin Core for eternity !
I got the feeling we are not on the same page here.
Go easy on the meds. If you are advocating hard fork in this environment, you better sell all bitcoins, because if it happens it will be over for bitcoin. Other coins will fill the void. Either way, people who want hard fork now thinking the price will shoot up are not thinking straight. For me bitcoin was NEVER about the money. The original principles and vision was what attracted me to bitcoin. I see efforts to destroy this vision. If you think core is harming bitcoin, wait for classic (and number of hard forks, altcoins: Bitcoin Unleashed, Bitcoin Hard to Kill, Bitcoin II, Bitcoin Fort Knox, World Wide Bitcoin etc.) and see what happens. Do you even know what are you advocating? Not on topic. |
|
|
|
So basically, by saying that "Bitcoin shouldn't be used for normal transactions" you are actually saying that all of these companies should go out of business. (because Bitcoin shouldn't be used for buying coffee or some other ridiculous thing).
Why is it that you want to keep putting "words into my mouth" which I don't do to you? A basic standard of respect is not doing that. So I am simply going to not respond to you now as you can't even manage a basic level of respect (you have to shove words into my mouth to make your points). Man, You're good at this. You managed to stray everybody off topic again.What you said before: No-one is using Bitcoin for normal txs and that isn't going to change this year or next year. So, this was your original argument. And it is complete bullshit, because (there's a lot of proof) there are multiple companies making millions by doing "normal txs".Please go to the next argument, this one is used up. |
|
|
|
FYI: Companies such as Bitpay, InPay, Coinbase, Purse.IO process tens of thousands of normal people's "normal transactions" every month. Are you arguing that we don't need that ?
I am not in dispute about the existence of such companies. Yes you are. Perhaps you don't realize that. Normal shops are probably never gonna bother with accepting Bitcoin directly, the same as they will not bother with accepting VISA or Mastercard directly. That's what payment processors are for. So basically, by saying that "Bitcoin shouldn't be used for normal transactions" you are actually saying that all of these companies should go out of business. (because Bitcoin shouldn't be used for buying coffee or some other ridiculous thing). EDIT: Anyway, that is absolutely ridiculous argument and I hope you understand that this argument has no power in this discussion. Please skip to the next one. |
|
|
|
I'm sorry - the image of some old, fat (possibly angry) woman is supposed to mean?
"whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat ?". So, you are seriously claiming that nobody is using Bitcoin for "normal transactions" today ? How did you even come with such a ridiculous argument ? FYI: Companies such as Bitpay, InPay, Coinbase, Purse.IO process tens of thousands of normal people's "normal transactions" every month. Are you arguing that we don't need that ? |
|
|
|
No-one is using Bitcoin for normal txs  Is this even supposed to be a serious argument ? Enlighten me, because I really don't know how to take this. |
|
|
|
Sorry, my mistake.
These two are only strongly affiliated with blockstream. Not employees.
I will have proof in a minute, working really hard here.
A Ty jaką masz wymówkę, by nie wychodzić z piwnicy? I don't have time for this offtopic. Also, this discussion is in english. |
|
|
|
So what is exactly the percentage of Core Devs that work for Blockstream?
(I guess this should be the key issue here)
Correct. Proceeding with developer list. Please note the metric used (number of commits) is far from perfect: #1 laanwj1, 205 commits #2 sipa 640 commits#3 gavinandresen 484 commits #4 theuni 330 commits #5 TheBlueMatt 288 commits#6 jonasschnelli 223 commits #7 luke-jr 199 commits#8 gmaxwell 133 commits#9 fanquake 117 commits #10 MarcoFalke 112 commits #11 jtimon 106 commits #12 petertodd 91 commits #13 cozz 70 commits #14 sdaftuar 65 commits #15 morcos 55 commits That does not show who works for Blockstream - so is there another post I am waiting for from you? Sorry, my mistake - the bold ones are from Blockstream. Better version from reddit (pasted above): https://i.imgur.com/jM6oxr3.png |
|
|
|
So what is exactly the percentage of Core Devs that work for Blockstream?
(I guess this should be the key issue here)
Correct. Proceeding with developer list. Please note the metric used (number of commits) is far from perfect: #1 laanwj1, 205 commits #2 sipa 640 commits#3 gavinandresen 484 commits #4 theuni 330 commits #5 TheBlueMatt 288 commits#6 jonasschnelli 223 commits #7 luke-jr 199 commits#8 gmaxwell 133 commits#9 fanquake 117 commits #10 MarcoFalke 112 commits #11 jtimon 106 commits #12 petertodd 91 commits #13 cozz 70 commits #14 sdaftuar 65 commits #15 morcos 55 commits EDIT: This is a better one, tought not done by me:  |
|
|
|
Okay - can we just hit "reset" then? All my aggression towards you has been deactivated. Please proceed with the topic. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
