point is this forum and r/bitcoin are called after bitcoin. not bitcoinxt.
hence i suggest people stfu with this pathetic whining and altcoin shilling.
So it's settled then. We kneel at the feet of your overwhelming insight. You will kneel before Satoshi's economic majority, or you will kneel before Hearn's "final call."  I prefer to serve Master Satoshi, but wish you good luck over at https://voat.co/v/bitcoinxt. |
|
|
|
I guess your prefer a r/Bitcoin frontpage full of "WHERE IS MY BLOCKSIZE INCREASE? I WANT IT NOW. STOP CENSORSHIP"
That's what it's looked like all summer.  Time to swing the mighty banhammer and clean house. The sooner the Gavinistas are herded into /v/bitcoinxt to circlejerk themselves the better. And why are you still here, in cypher's world of free speech, instead of running with your soulmates, the supressors and illiberals?
This is theymos's world of free speech. Like us, Frap.doc is a guest here, even though he usually acts like he owns the place and gets to decide what's on the stereo, what we're eating for supper, and what color to paint the garage. You'd think someone as old and with as many BTC as him would be a Donator, but no...  |
|
|
|
I don't know if you guys been on reddit today but it's amazing the level of sensible and reasonable discussion that can be had when we cut out the "censorship" and "xtears" crap.
If I'd care enough to use changtip I'd buy theymos a beer right about now.
I see now you aren't Napoleon at all, that's ice. You are Winston. I wonder at what point will you start to question your role at Minitrue? If thermos's forum and sub are such Orwellian epitomes of authoritarianism, why do you visit and legitimize them by participating? Perhaps https://voat.co/v/bitcoinxt is more to your liking and more in keeping with your stated (but not yet demonstrated) noble ideals? Go on, scramble your password and show us what first-mover defection from Bitcoin Core's socioeconomic majority actually looks like. Running an XT node doesn't count anymore, ever since NotBitcoinXT + PseudoNode became a thing...  |
|
|
|
...
LOL, Dash shuts up Monero trolls with releases and new things all the time. At dash's side our developers actually doing some crypto coding, while Monero do what they do best cry*p*to about it here on forums LOOOOOL
A lot of people, and not just some Dashers, are going to get caught by surprise if they assume that Monero development is measured by the over 8 month old "official" binaries. Monero is being very actively developed right now. The real action is going on GitHub https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero and one needs to compile the code to see what is really going on. In the meantime those who have chosen to bet against Monero can live in a false sense of security by focusing only on the "official" binaries. Can we start giving new builds exciting names that sound like powerful engines? Dash does it and it makes the coin sound really cool. |
|
|
|
 Thermos has really exposed himself and the rest of the intentions of the LN crew in this post! All your huffy, poutraged talk of socioeconomic defection is cheap. Let's see you back it up with some action, like leaving your Legendary account. You only empower Thermos's demonic dictatorship when you post on here and his subreddit. https://voat.co/v/bitcoinxt is calling your name. Here's what I think of threats to take your ball and go home, because Thermos and the LN crew are so awful:  |
|
|
|
So brg444 thinks those were the words satoshi has waited so long to tell us. How about you iCE?
He always rose above the political BS
Sure, except for that one time when he gave "political BS" the starring role in the very act which created Bitcoin. Of course the Gavinistas are never going to accept even the slightest possibility it is him seeing the butthurt induced by his comments.
Confirmed. |
|
|
|
About the Satoshi comment: Zeke says:
It's a brilliant comment, made even better by its plausible deniability. If the author really is SN, and he signed it to prove authorship, then he would be invoking personal authority rather than reason to influence the debate. And would also completely undermine even a reformed Gavin, b/c now we would know that SN is waiting in the wings to offer divine guidance. Instead, we have a comment that points out with convincing reasoning that regardless of originalist doctrine, SN's early opinions are not canonical. Furthermore, it is equally plausible that a present-day SN would disagree with the approach of coercing a hard-fork to XT. When you think about it, if Satoshi really had something to say that is exactly how he would do it. Of course the Gavinistas are never going to accept even the slightest possibility it is him seeing the butthurt induced by his comments. Yeah, the real SN would definitely invoke Barack Obama Alistair Darling, Chancellor of the Exchequer. Confirmed Fixed your comment by removing the butthurt.  |
|
|
|
Simple function, 1000 words.
The function is simple. Observing the actual XT adoption curve, through the fog of war and despite weaponized version stamps, is another matter entirely. I'm not surprised you'd rather gloat about the funny picture than address what happens when XT is led down our garden path, into premature aggression and subsequent disaster. Using the analogy (throwing the hockey stick) was apt before its time.
Core is using XT's own strength (mob rule popularity contests) to thwart its attack. That's elegant judo, not hockey violence.  |
|
|
|
Can't wait for the split so that I can cash out my xt monopoly money. So does everybody else. Like it or not, xt is dead before being born  Actually there's a rule in XT stating that XT (with larger blocks) won't be "activated" unless over 75% of the network is behind it, meaning that running XT until that day is the same as running core. And in the event of activation, it would automatically mean that 2/3 are on XT and that means it wouldn't be "monopoly money" as you claim. imho either option is fine, and the real "worst case scenario" is having a battle within the community, which could lower bitcoin value, regardless of the fork in question. That "rule in XT" is being hacked to pieces. "In the event of activation" it may mean nothing more than the malicious Gavinista minority is about to get #REKT. Source:This is a special fork for those who do not agree with the blocksize scheduled increase as proposed by Gavin and Mike in their divisive altcoin fork, "Bitcoin XT".
This version can be used to protect the status quo until real technical consensus is formed about the blocksize.
This version is indistinguishable from Bitcoin XT 0.11A except that it will not actually hard fork to BIP101, yet appears on the p2p network as Bitcoin XT 0.11A replete with features, yet at a consensus level behaves just like Bitcoin Core 0.11. If it is used to mine, it will produce XT block versions without actually supporting >1MB blocks.
Running this version and/or mining with XT block versions will make it impossible for the Bitcoin XT network to detect the correct switchover and cause a premature fork of anyone foolish enough to support BIP101 without wide consensus from the technical community.
It prevents correct detection of Bitcoin XT adoption in the wild since usage will be known to have been tampered with and thus all statistical data gathered by getnodes can only be considered unreliable. https://github.com/xtbit/notbitcoinxt#not-bitcoin-xt |
|
|
|
Wait a second…the small block supporters are going to sybil attack the network in favour of BitcoinXT? So your plan is to increase the momentum behind XT, helping to convince miners, exchanges, payment processors and web wallets that larger blocks are inevitable, thereby compelling them to add support for larger blocks sooner than they otherwise would have?
Carry on then...
Yes, that is our plan and (TYVM) we will carry on. But "in favour of BitcoinXT" may not turn out to actually mean what you think it does at the moment...  “ Engage people with what they expect; it is what they are able to discern and confirms their projections. It settles them into predictable patterns of response, occupying their minds while you wait for the extraordinary moment — that which they cannot anticipate.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War “Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War "If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected .” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War “When the enemy is relaxed, make them toil. When full, starve them. When settled, make them move.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War |
|
|
|
Im just here observing your desperation curve, wondering where it will intersect the bitcoinXT adoption curve.
Good luck observing the "bitcoinXT adoption curve." You're going to need it. We have entered the fog of war, with version stamp weaponization ensuing exactly as I predicted. This is a special fork for those who do not agree with the blocksize scheduled increase as proposed by Gavin and Mike in their divisive altcoin fork, "Bitcoin XT".
This version can be used to protect the status quo until real technical consensus is formed about the blocksize.
This version is indistinguishable from Bitcoin XT 0.11A except that it will not actually hard fork to BIP101, yet appears on the p2p network as Bitcoin XT 0.11A replete with features, yet at a consensus level behaves just like Bitcoin Core 0.11. If it is used to mine, it will produce XT block versions without actually supporting >1MB blocks.
Running this version and/or mining with XT block versions will make it impossible for the Bitcoin XT network to detect the correct switchover and cause a premature fork of anyone foolish enough to support BIP101 without wide consensus from the technical community.
It prevents correct detection of Bitcoin XT adoption in the wild since usage will be known to have been tampered with and thus all statistical data gathered by getnodes can only be considered unreliable. https://github.com/xtbit/notbitcoinxt#not-bitcoin-xtYour move, hearn@sigint.google.mil. |
|
|
|
This is such a terrible idea. Why would you want to spoof Bitcoin XT, it will just cause the fork to happen before consensus occurs and if enough people were using that fork, you suddenly just screwed over Bitcoin. Please don't do this, it is such a bad idea. Have you actually considered the consequences of a premature fork? If you haven't, please do think about what could happen to the Bitcoin network if a premature hard fork occurs.
This is such a wonderful idea. It protects Bitcoin, at the necessary expense of XT viability. " Why would you want to spoof Bitcoin XT?" To cultivate a falsely exaggerated sense of security and encourage premature aggression. It's a trap!Are you the reason that it looks like Bitcoin XT is gaining traction on bitnodes?
There's no way for anyone to know. That's the point! |
|
|
|
Some deep analysis there. Not. C'mon...that's the best you've got?
Patience, my dear. "Deep analysis" might take a day or two. Meanwhile, any response to the immediately obvious red flags, like Conspicuous by its absence from the README is that (AFAICT from the commit comment) incoming clearnet connections will kick a Tor peer off. /u/luke-jr pointed this out below. So don't just trust the description of diffs. ? You rushed out to join the trendy XT fad before knowing WTF is in it. So much for respecting the precautionary principle ("the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action"). No wonder you are now so defensive about it! "If 90% of /r/Bitcoin users find these policies to be intolerable, then I want these 90% of /r/Bitcoin users to leave." https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h9cq4/its_time_for_a_break_about_the_recent_mess/If we as a community have come to needing to ban discussion on something that most of the community feels is important enough to talk about, something has seriously gone downhill. Want to call XT an altcoin? Gavincoin? CIACoin? Fine...bring it on. It is only reddit and only one subreddit at that, but this feels so wrong. How far has bitcoin fallen that censorship is justified? There is no "censorship" here to justify. Cut the "this feels so wrong" diva crap, Meryl Streep. That "90% of /r/Bitcoin users" is exactly the trendy faddish mob I was talking about, and their daft opinions in no way satisfy the precautionary principle. Not that you GAF about that old thing! Even *IF* thermos needed or wanted to justify his moderation, argumentum ad populum would be a poor way to do it. Why not? Because |
|
|
|
what entitles mods to censor discussion of XT which is directly related to bit coin?
Mods are entitled to moderate. They are also entitled to use their discretion as they see fit. If you don't like it, you are entitled to leave their forum/sub. The self-help remedy is to start your own (with hookers and blackjack). You are not entitled to stay on and bitch like a young Hillary Clinton about how much you disagree, forum-lawyer their decisions, or use inflammatory, inaccurate bullet words like "censorship" in obvious social engineering attacks trying to shame them. |
|
|
|
All you are doing is to make XT looks stronger, thank you.
"All warfare is based on deception. If your opponent is vain, flatter him." - Sun Tzu |
|
|
|
This is a special fork for those who do not agree with the blocksize scheduled increase as proposed by Gavin and Mike in their divisive altcoin fork, "Bitcoin XT".
This version can be used to protect the status quo until real technical consensus is formed about the blocksize.
This version is indistinguishable from Bitcoin XT 0.11A except that it will not actually hard fork to BIP101, yet appears on the p2p network as Bitcoin XT 0.11A replete with features, yet at a consensus level behaves just like Bitcoin Core 0.11. If it is used to mine, it will produce XT block versions without actually supporting >1MB blocks.
Running this version and/or mining with XT block versions will make it impossible for the Bitcoin XT network to detect the correct switchover and cause a premature fork of anyone foolish enough to support BIP101 without wide consensus from the technical community.
It prevents correct detection of Bitcoin XT adoption in the wild since usage will be known to have been tampered with and thus all statistical data gathered by getnodes can only be considered unreliable. https://github.com/xtbit/notbitcoinxt#not-bitcoin-xtOMG a spoof node? Gimme! Nobody could have possibly predicted this would happen! BRB lighting up some data centers... Heh, XT now has us right where we want it... |
|
|
|
the answer is to run Bitcoin XT with just the large blocks fork and without the additional items
No, the answer is to avoid contentious hard forks and stick with the BIP process.  |
|
|
|
We need [...] some merchants who keep the Moneros (or at least a part of the Moneros). The merchants who hold Moneros are good for Monero economy as they allow people taking bigger positions in Moneros and when people pay their purchases hopefully the merchants keep at least a part of the coins so that the bagholders do not eat all those Moneros. Could you elaborate why you think a merchant would keep the Monero's it has been paid for the service or product it is offering? From the consumer perspective I am convinced that true anonymity has value. From the merchant perspective not yet. Please convince me, truly interested. Merchants will keep Moneros when their suppliers accept them. True anonymity's value varies depending on the sector of System D being considered. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
