It's not decentralised or even democratic. And it will even less be so if people switch to Gavins' fork.
Gavin now can directly influence marketprice and wants to be the only one to decide on the code like a king which will become a reality if people switch to XT.
Bitcoin will be truly Gavincoin if people go to the XT fork.
Gavin also does not care about node count so the network itself will become a lot less decentralised on his Gavinfork.
I don't think the XT/Gavin fork will have a lot of value in the end of the day.
Ha! congrats on the non noob account. But you either don't understand what XT is or choose to be obtuse. If you are confused about the issue, whey we need it, and why the other devs oppose it you should look here and here. Those are some pretty good threads. Of course you are not going to look because your only purpose is to spread FUD. I suspect you are even one of the money grubbing devs that is causing this problem in the first place. Get in line and stop hurting the community with your horrible greed. |
|
|
|
Okay, seriously these threads are getting ridiculous, it is the same flame gavin and pro fork supporter threads over and over. Flame and troll all you want but keep in one damn thread please.
Yeah, but at least they took my advice and bought a member account to spam FUD with. It makes them look slightly mroe credible. Kudos guys great job. A bit late though everyone has already caught on. A cult, you guys are getting even more ludicrous, and I didn't that that would be possible. Is it a cult if I don't want my bitcoins to become worthless? Because that is what will happen if the block size problem is not addressed. Find a conflict of interest that Gavin has and maybe I might consider the opinions of his money grubbing opponents. Until then you guys just keep getting sillier, its almost becoming entertaining at this point. |
|
|
|
Think about it.
If you were a large institutional investor, say a hedge-fund manager, you would probably pay an analyst to, well, analyze bitcoin. I'm sure one of the punch list items that needed fixed PRIOR to investing would be the scalability issue.
Ergo, bitcoin needs to be seen as to be able to scale properly.
Maybe the CIA/CFR told Gavin that he needed to get bitcoin fixed up ASAP and ready for the near future as they are just itching to crash the global economy and institute their NWO.
Want Bitcoin to go to the moon? , well then these big hedgefund guys need to feel safe about the scaling.
I never thought of it that way, but it could be a side benefit of larger block sizes. Bitcoins are gaining awareness around the world, I suppose it is only a matter of time until big wall street money gets involved. I just hope that I can accumulate some more of them before it happens. |
|
|
|
Has Caitlyn stated that she uses Bitcoin or something like that? If not, I don't see the connection between them, and this thread should be in the Off-topic section.
No, this is just one of the FUD spammers, feel free to ignore him. Bitcoin is not undergoing a big change. The problem of 1mb size limit is being addressed. There are different ways to do this but time is running very short. Gavin wants to fix things BEFORE the crap hits the fan, not after. The other devs have a conflict of interest which is why they don't want a simple and easy solution. |
|
|
|
|
The more I think about it the more I am inclined to believe that bitcoins will become more common online, but may not ever be all that common for every day users. It could replace the dollar for international purchases. Once in a while I buy software from other countries, such as from Europe or China. It would be massively convenient to use bitcoins in stead of having to worry about currency rates. Also I buy from reputable companies so I would have no problem sending them a payment before receiving my products.
I too an interested in what others think. This is a great topic.
|
|
|
|
I think you should all go. Then come back after I buy on the dip  But seriously bitcoins are not going anywhere. What we are seeing is just a bump in the road. |
|
|
|
|
The only benefit I see from a large scale bitcoin bank would be the possibility of faster transactions. The bank could theoretically reduce the number of confirmations for a transaction because it is a trusted entity. Of course the main draw would be for black money, but there may be side benefits for the rest of us. Not that I would use such a bank for my coins. It sort of defeats the purpose.
|
|
|
|
|
I was gonna say that too. I think that the increase in block size is a temporary solution to a problem that needs to be solved. However doing nothing is worse than upgrading the block size. It seems pretty obvious that the upgrade is needed as it will take some time to implement and there seems to be no legit alternative out there.
|
|
|
|
Check out the interview in this thread. Gavin explains when he wants it to happen and why. It is a pretty good interview and should help make things a little easier to understand. But it needs to happen soon or there will be serious problems on the horizon. |
|
|
|
OP, may i bring to your attention that we actually currently enjoy a consensus about 1MB blocks because ... you know ... it's actually running ...
Sure and if something is not done soon then bitcoin will be in some serious trouble. Is that what you want? I certainly want bitcoin to continue its success as a useful currency. Why are you spreading all of this fud? Nothing is going to happen with Gavin's solution. Bitcoins will just keep working. Plus there seem to be a conflict of interest in case anyone wonders why the team is against Gavin. Kinda makes you wonder who is behind all of these noob fudders that keep popping up doesn't it? |
|
|
|
It's time this clown disappears into his altcoin shitcoin project and leaves the bitcoin community alone before he really ruins it! He has been exposed on all fronts. Resignation is the only thing left for him. We should start a petition somehow!
Hi mr noobie. Its not an altcoin. There will not be a new coin. There will only be the same coins that we already have. The change over will be more or less seamless and should not be a big deal for the average user. I suggest you read here and here before spreading more of this nonsense. And if you do post more of this fud, like I know you will, at least please do us all a favor and try to make it a little bit coherent. |
|
|
|
Another newbie? Geeze. And this one is trying to find out how effective the noob-swarms are at spreading fud. There are 2 threads here and here. Start with those and you may find that you no longer need all of these fuds, even these noobs. And don't give this guy free research. Make him pay you for it! |
|
|
|
Just WTF. I am not sure why so many people are so strongly against the fork to allow for 20 MB blocks. Especially random newbie accounts. It seems that someone might be using shills to make it look like more people are against the fork then what really are  Yeah and I am surprised that they don't pony up a few coins to buy some FM and senior member accounts, the cheap bastards. The noob accounts make it pretty obvious what is going on. How does a noob have such strong opinions on things? I didn't even know wtf the blockchain was when I first signed up, let alone be familiar with inside details about the developers. |
|
|
|
Well, now this is an interesting theory. If it is true it shows a significant conflict of interest by the people that oppose a bigger block size. I am not technically versed enough to make 100% sense of this but what does everyone else think?
Indeed nice find, really depresing in a way. Bitcoin should be above personal interest. I am trying to post in FUD threads in the hope of calming everyone down. I wish people would take the time to read up on the issue and realize that there really are two sides of the argument, and believe it or not both sides have merit. Of course this conflict of interest makes it easy to choose sides. Blockstream will generate income otherwise it would not be bankrolled with 21 mils. Where will that money come from? My guess is not thin air. |
|
|
|
Why are other developers against a move to Bitcoin XT?
Because they have a conflict of interest.I suggest everyone should go listen to the audio recording in this thread. The OP is full of it. There is no deadline. Also I want to respond to the idea that increased block size will not solve the problem because the size will need to be increased. First off it is a problem that need to be addressed. If we ignore it then things will get truly bad for bitcoin. Second technology is increasing all the time. My first computer had 300MB hard drive when I was a kid, and cost (adjusted for inflation) about twice what my current laptop cost. By the time the block size get too big to handle my guess is that technology will have surpassed the point that it needs to be in order to handle more bandwidth, storage, and computing power. Third it may be a temporary fix but it is better than giving in to developers with a conflict of interest or doing nothing. |
|
|
|
|
No, because the team that opposes him has a HUGE conflict of interest. They will benefit from strangling the bitcoin, they will profit from your pockets. Its called blockstream and it is the reason for this mess. Not Gavin. He is trying to look ahead and fix problems before they happen. I wish everyone would educate themselves on the matter and not spread FUD. There will be no alt coin, there will be no double coin, in fact the switchover should be invisible for the casual bitcoin holder/user. I hate having to type these things over and over, but I will keep doing it as long as the cancerous fud spreads.
|
|
|
|
Bookmarked. Thanks for this link I had no idea that there was such a service. I usually use GMX or mail.com for temp emails. But even those guys will stop giving you addresses after a while. |
|
|
|
When will you idiots listen?
I've been telling you guys million times that ALL Chinese exchanges are faking volume and manipulating trades.
Your response was " where is the evidence"
Here is an idea dumbass: by the time you see evidence, it would be too late.
Maybe you should pay attention on Chinese culture abit more and understand why.
You can find accusations about anything that say lots of things. I can understand that people would want evidence. What if I said that your local grocery store was putting carcinogens in your food? You would want evidence. It is hard for people to just take a strangers word about these things, especially on these forums. I am not familiar with Chinese culture, but what is it about the Chinese that I should not trust ANY exchange? If you don't have hard evidence then at least explain your beliefs. I am curious because I use Chinese exchanges from time to time so if there is a real concern and reason to avoid all of them then please share. I do not however store any money with them. |
|
|
|
God damn this forums must be all newbies or what? I had to log in to make this thread to stop all the nonsense from you newbies for the past few days. Let me break it down to you what is happening, and why a fork might not be a fork!
+ You currently dont have to choose Core or XT, both are just wallet clients using the same database (blockchain)
+ You can run both wallet clients if you dont know to support blocksize increase or not
+ Gavin and Dev core using 2 clients to sort out the consensus of the network, who will support blocksize increase and who wont.
+ As the XT becomes 90% of bitcoin nodes, Gavin will implement the blocksize increase. This is like soft fork, you will know by then because i'm sure all major bitcoin services will announce they will support the blocksize increase or not.
+ The Core will be obsoleted and the bitcoin network has reached the consensus.
Here is the BS being spread around here:
- You can sell your coins of weaker chain : NO you WONT, i can tell you no exchange will support a weaker chain and risking their business
- Price will be halved because you now have doubled your coins: No it wont, because you cant sell coins on the weaker change on any exchanges. Unless you can find some retard on the forums to sell to, and if you can, you should fork your own bitcoins now and be rich.
Gavin's proposal is to increase pressure on decision making of the Core team. As at the current pace, we will not have enough time left and bitcoin network will face bottleneck. The damages might be too great then and risk all investors involved.
I think this is a brilliant idea. Everyone (bitcoiners) will learn about this and start voting. Look at how many confused members on here, i think it works already.
Let me see if I get this. So the hard fork (actual split o the blockchain) will only happen once the nodes run in XT are 90%+? who did say 90%? Gavin? show me the quote. In this case it would make sense, since running a XT client would be considered as 1 vote. 1 node = 1 vote. If you want to the fork, run the XT client, if you dont want the fork, run Core. It sounds cool, as soon as that majority is respected, in other words, 51% is not enough, and 90% would be obvious that a fork is preferred by people that actually care about BTC enough to run a node. Hi, check this thread for a really good interview with Gavin. It helps explain some things and should make people feel a little more comfortable. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1075510.0Some good posts as well in that thread. I think you will see that everything is ok and this is just a bump in the road. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks guys, there is an awful lot of FUD out there and we need more posts like this. I was very alarmed at first but after reading more details about what is going on I have come to understand that the issue is not as nuclear as I first thought.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
