I think your hijacking this tread too. (I'm sorry theymos closed down the thread where this debate was happening, some times when the truth is a treat authoritarian interests have to silence it and delete posts.) 

Bitcoin XT is the only viable implementation of BIP 101, that is the only reason miners and node hosts are switching, if you had been paying attention this debate it about avoiding dictatorships not supporting them.

Mile knows as well as you that fungibility (no black green or red lists) is essential for bitcoin to succeed as money, he discussed an idea and yes I agree with you, that he even entertained the idea is a little disturbing.  

if he is as clueless as you it will be much easier to not employ his changes than it is to improve bitcoin with BIP101.  

These developers are listed on Blockstream's "Team" page: Adam Back (President), Greg Maxwell, Pieter Wuille, Matt Corallo, Mark Friedenbach, Rusty Russell, Patrick "Intersango" Strateman, Jorge Timón, and Glen Willen. There may be others. Luke "Tonal" Jr works for Blockstream as contractor. Peter Todd works half-time for Viacoin, an altcoin that claims to be bitcoin done right -- e.g. with 25 times faster confirms.

Who is paying Wladimir's salary now?

You just negotiate a deal with the NSA where you provide chinese miners as slaves in return for access to the mothership.

Or find common ground with the XT team and agree on an update. Or just do what Gavin and Hearn is doing.

Nahh.. NSA/Mothership.

Decisions are made through agreement between Mike and Gavin, with Mike making the final call if a serious dispute were to arise.

Aren't they all working on sidechains, LN, Eth, and XT?

... there is no reason why the core devs can't update the fork when the dust settles.

There are no devs working on Bitcoin atm. They are all working on altcoins if you also include XT in that category.

Advice: Just think of XT as a security valve. If the core deadlock continues, the miners will opt out

The chinese mining pools are not happy with status quo and push for 8 mb limit. Will be exiting to see what they choose in january. At that time, I guess Wladimir has been pushed to come up with a core solution. (No, not the "wait for lightning"-solution, he he).

The light is built into the system. If a group of developers fail to deliver, WE replace them

If there is so little significant support for XT, what are you afraid of? 

I can keep track of XT elsewhere. Wall observer thread is not the right place.  

Everybody and my mother were surprised with the dump. XT could have easily been seen as the savior and price could have skyrocketed.

Manipulation, manipulation, manipulation...don't you guys ever get sick of crying manipulation? It's the way markets work, big money moves the markets.

What's up with these bs rally and fades right back down to the beginning of the rally point? Pretty annoying. Plus XT talk has killed this thread as well.

Bad times we are living in

The core devs have discussed this topic for years. Hopefully, XT will push them to action. If not, we will just opt them out.
A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. I can't help you, if you don't understand this.

I aggree it's kicking the can down the road. It's a temporary solution to a problem that can become significant next year. Adoption of bitcoin can suddenly grow exponential if it becomes popular. Gavin and Mike plan for success. In the future, I hope a scaling solution will be subsets of nodes verifying subsets of the transactions. (Today, everybody must verify every transaction.)

None of the BIPs you talk about have been put in effect. That's why we have XT today.

EDIT: And yes, I trust Gavin more than Wladimir.

indeed, if you don't trust Mike and Gavin's XT code, but (for some unfathomable reason) you do trust Adam and Greg's Core, and Wladimir, Jorge, Pieter, Matt, Todd, Mark and all the others

Agent A : “Ok team, listen up, I’ve assembled you here today because we haven’t a moment to lose. These are the direst of times and we’re running out of options.”
Agent C : “I have the same sense, so what’s the plan ?”

Agent A : “We’re going to fast-track our proposed ph0rk, wind up the media marionette, and squeeze the price signal with everything we’ve got. I don’t know if it’ll be enough, but we have to do something. We can’t just take this laying down. The stakes are simply too high.”
Agent C : “I’m already on the phone with Agent E(conomist).”

Agent D : “I have Agent B(itfinex) on hold.”
Agent E : “Agents G(avin) and H(earn) are standing by awaiting your orders, sir. What shall I tell them ?”

Agent A : “Tell them to fire when ready. Hell, tell them all to fire, fire, fire. What choice do we have ? What else can we do ? Good God I hope this works. The People are counting on us…”

Agent B(BC) : “Bitcoin could split in debate over currency’s future”
Agent B(usiness)I(nsider) : “A bitcoin civil war is threatening to tear the digital currency in two”
Agent E(conomist) : “A spat between programmers may split bitcoin”
Agent G(uardian) : “Bitcoin’s forked: chief scientist launches alternative proposal for the currency”
Agent V(ox) : “Bitcoin is on the verge of a constitutional crisis”
Agent W(all)S(treet)J(ournal) : “Bitcoin’s Noisy Size Debate Reaches a Hard Fork”

someone want to explain the "HODL" backstory to me and it's full meaning?

I'm assuming just another way to say buy and hold and never sell 

Back clearly does not understand economics. Mining gets more centralized because of economies of scale. this is unavoidable unless you intentionally want to keep mining as a hobby. Look at gold mining. At the beginning of the California Gold Rush, anybody with a shovel and a pan could make a buck. After the low hanging fruit all got picked,you had to invest more and more capital and have more knowledge and specialized knowledge.

Back's basically saying that he doesn't want to scale up at all, but if we are to scale up it should be as little as possible. He offers valid concerns, but in practice, that means that "reasonable" block size increase means no increase. 

Mining centralization is unfortunate and unavoidable but there is also limits to centralization in an open network. The barriers to entry are hardware efficiency, cost of hardware, cost of electricity, technical skill and other things like bandwidth.

Every single barrier can be overcome if the price of bitcoin gets enough. The same thing happened a few years ago when gold prices jumped so high that placer mining became profitable again. Smart rich people from lower margin industries come in and compete--But that WON'T happen if most bitcoin transactions go off blockchain because of economics.

Adam Back: The worry with extremely large blocks is that they can be used to exacerbate a selfish mining attack. If you’ve got a large miner or a couple of large miners, they can create very large blocks and other people won’t be able to receive them or process them in time. So, they will gain an advantage in mining.

Bitcoin chose its parameters to make the advantage minimal so that it’s a level playing field between small miners and large miners. Right now, the interval between Bitcoin blocks is ten minutes. And the approximate time it takes to propagate, or send a block after it’s found, across the peer-to-peer network is about 10 or 15 seconds. You want the ratio between the propagation time and the block interval to be high enough, because, as a miner, while you’re waiting to receive a block, or while you’re processing a block to check it’s valid, you’re unable to mine. So, you lose money.

By having larger blocks, it’s going to take a longer time to process them. So, it’s going to favor miners with higher bandwidth or who are more centrally connected via high speed links to other miners. It gives them an advantage.

If you increase the block size rapidly, the level playing field is eroded. If it gets eroded too much, once miners are able to create blocks that only they and a couple of other big miners can mine, they can exclude everybody else because [other miners] can’t keep up.

I'm totally on board with the guy who doesn't know how to spell brakes. Obviously a Top Mind™.