What in Bitcoin is not decentralized? I seem to miss the point of all this? ...
You are not the one missing the point.  The argument is the same as arguing that potcoin or dogcoin will centralize bitcoin. These are just forks that have not been adopted as much. When the fork comes to BTC some will go one way others another. But there is no centralization in the system, Only choices. And the number of nodes means very little. It is clearly a reflection of the community increasingly using online wallets and not running a full node. I predict that the real $#!T storm will happen when the users who panic switch to a silly alt wake up to find that the value has drained out of their holdings. Spoiler alert! Its going to be the fault of Gavin and his shadowy government handlers. lol It's funny how there are 0 problems in terms of democratic decisions since the people choose the fork they want in majority, my concern is that Bitcoin seems like it will never be able to sustain enough transactions per second to be able to compete with VISA, Mastercard etc. combined. |
|
|
|
I don't think there is an official date, but Gavin wants it to happen between 6 months and a year, so around Early 2016.
My question here: Will Gavin wait for Bitcoin XT nodes to be a solid majority before the hard fork so it doesn't generate controversy since it would mean the majority of node runners want the 20MB fork, or will he do the hard fork anyway out of nowhere? He will do it by first soft-forking when there is a majority (>50%) then hard-forking when there is a super-majority (>90%) of nodes using and accepting the new block version. Well, then I don't really see the problem. People decides. Decentralization still prevails. What does a soft fork scenario really means? |
|
|
|
I don't think there is an official date, but Gavin wants it to happen between 6 months and a year, so around Early 2016.
My question here: Will Gavin wait for Bitcoin XT nodes to be a solid majority before the hard fork so it doesn't generate controversy since it would mean the majority of node runners want the 20MB fork, or will he do the hard fork anyway out of nowhere? |
|
|
|
|
I dont think it comes down to what people use or move their coins at. Ultimately, there is not bitcoin without the miners and node runners. It all comes down to how many nodes will Core have vs XT.
|
|
|
|
...
neurotypical
Perhaps these proposed changes should be explained? Clearly enough, "with words small enough so that my grandmother could understand"? *
I have been following (and an owner of) Bitcoin for a year or so. I try to follow BTC's various developments, but controversy without nice explanation can be unnerving... I am not trying to instill FUD, just pointing out that loud controversies re basic properties of BTC is NOT confidence inspiring...
Care to take a shot at explaining the proposed changes?
* Wayne Strand
Proposed change by Gavin: Fork the bitcoin blockchain so we can use 20MB. This will make the blockchain heavier, but we will not be on a dangerous unknown zone by the next year when the 1MB limit is about to be hit. This is not a final solution since we would eventually reach the 20MB limit, it buys us time to think about a definitive scalable solution. Proposed by Gmaxwell: Do not fork, keep 1MB and use Lightning Network to process smaller transactions. The problem is you lose the total decentralization of all transactions. It's also not a final solution, we would eventually be facing a problem and be forced to need to something bigger than 1MB. It just buys us time too. So basically, unless someone proves me wrong, both solutions aren't definitive solutions to the true problem: What we really need is an scalable blockchain that can deal with as many transactions per second needed without having to use secondary blockchains, that will still work 100 years from now. |
|
|
|
|
I don't get this. Can you give us cliffs on how this solves the problem of scalability that 20MB brings and the lack of decentralization that 1MB + Lightning Network brings? (and eventually problems anyway because even with 1MB + LN the 1MB will eventually not be enough).
|
|
|
|
...
OK, as a non-expert, all of this controversy re the future of Bitcoin comes perilously close to discouraging use of BTC...
"Confidence makes a currency."
All of this talk of forks, selling BTC by well-known names, etc. is likely to lead to loss of confidence in Bitcoin. Maybe those intimately involved with BTC development might not see this, but a loss of confidence among the general public (better said: casual users of BTC) will be a serious blow to confidence.
Loss of confidence would cause me (and many others I would guess) to SELL my Bitcoin.
Gavin A and G Maxwells are proposing solutions to a problem, what are you doing? besides saying you don't know what this is about and threatening with selling your BTC? Decentralization implies lack of consensus and different opinions. If you want to support Core run Core nodes, if you want to support XT run XT nodes, simple as that, the people decide. |
|
|
|
|
What would this solve? When will we do once we reach 8MB limit? what wil we do once we reach 20MB limit? are we just buying time with this?
|
|
|
|
|
Right now with all this fork talk I wouldn't risk getting in. The price has gone from 240 territory to 230 lows. We'll see to what extent does all of this have a true impact on the price. I would say we are going to be on a low price until all of that gets settled and we can talk Bitcoin has something solid that may not get jeopardized by block size limit every X years (we cant be forking periodically).
|
|
|
|
Gold will never lose it's shine as this is oldest asset which is trusted by everyone throughout history.If you refer at recent collapse of price then I will say that was hype and was artificial raise in price.Gold will always decide the value of everything.This time when Gold's price will rise that when will be genuine and long term rise.
Gold is definitely the best product for investment. History says it all. And the reason behind it is that people trust gold more as it is a traditional product and gives a good return on investment so at present the prices have gone down but it will raise in the future coming period. Sure, gold is solid, but has low return of investment. You'll never get rich putting 10K in gold. You may be come a millonaire if you put 10K in BTC. Gold is too stablished to give the insane returns BTC and other crypto projects like Maid can give you in the future. |
|
|
|
|
I have the same view. The 1MB limit is simply not enough, we are a drop on the sea of electronic transactions. Actually to even be equal to VISA, we would need a blocksize WAY bigger than 20MB. So 20MB is a joke. Forking every X years is a nightmare and guaranteed failure. We need something scalable now.
|
|
|
|
'End of May - At The Latest'.
Lawsky was lying then the scum bag, fed us a load of crap just before he defected to set up his own crypto advising company.
I wonder when we'll ever see this BitLicense regulation, what's the hold up here?
I fail to see why after all the previous delays it hasn't materialised AGAIN!!!!!
At this point it seems that the project is abandoned? Why isn't this guy addressing it on his twitter? it's like hes avoiding the subject. The thing is, if BitLicense came out, would they embrace the Bitcoin Core or XT? Would it work for both chains? |
|
|
|
|
In theory, a powerful enough quantum computer could bruteforce anything. But right now this is science fiction and a non issue. This is something the future generation 100s of days from now will have to deal with.
|
|
|
|
You need to stop treating Milton Friedman as some sort of godsent know it all guy that defined the be all end all of economics. It's over. Repeat with me: It's over. Automation will reach a point of no return, where it will be simply unnecessary for the majority of people to work, because you'll have an higher quality of life accepting welfare/supply from the machines than trying to pick up a job, ANY job, even if it's unnecessary. No one will pay you to do an unnecessary job. Entrepreneurs are a minority. And the majority of workforce are simple tasks and those will be the first ones that disappear. There will be a time when we don't even need more machines, so "trying to compete with your own machines so to speak", will be just silly.
What we need to end this "the rich will own all the machines" bullshit is simply have decentralized, open source machines that supply people with what they need, and everyone is free to improve upon them. Automation and technology will make any monetary based system deprecated in the following 1000 years.
If we are still half retarded uneducated monkeys bashing each other in 1000 years, we'll be fucked.
You're definitely right and I agree. I do not understand how some of us see some weird magical world in 50 years. Anyone will rather spend a certain sum of money for a robot that is equal to a yearly payment of a worker. Probably event more, because after that point (you've reached ROI), you just pay for the electricity. At first there will be new jobs, indeed. There will be a larger demand for people putting those robots together, designing them and maintaining them, however only for a certain period of time. Once we actually pass the Turing, there won't be a coming back. What happens when robots start maintaining and fixing other robots? What happens when robots start building robots? The majority of jobs will be lost. I'm pretty sure that IT personnel, doctors and a few other titles will remain intact for a longer period of time. However in the future, society needs to adapt. Working to survive will no longer be feasible. Please don't go deeply into futuristic economies, that's rather for the speculation sub forum. It doesn't take passing Turing. Good old automation improved x100 times, more precise, less prone to failure, and improved solar panels, geothermal energy.. it will be near sustainable (minus the obvious tear and wear which is as far as I know impossible to remove due termodynamics) but efficiency and constant improvement in technique and materials used could make an automatic factory that can be producing excellent products for 100 years without failure. So there you go, with time, we will need less and less repairmen not because some super intelligent robots can repair each other, but just because the automation robots (no IA involved) are so good and efficient that it takes ages for a failure to appear. It's all a big ticking clock with constant perpetual unemployment racking up. |
|
|
|
Actually 8% tax isn't much, when most European countries have 20%+ VAT.
Yeah, actually its low as hell, I can't think a single European country that has single figure VAT without having to google/wikipedia it. On top of my head all are like 12+% maybe 14 on average. |
|
|
|
|
Im not a technical person, but if the 20MB blocksize proposal by Gavin is not a solution and would indeed bring more problems... then what is the solution? What we know for a fact is things cant go on the way they are now indefinitely.
|
|
|
|
I only just knew about this alert key. I think this alert key is a message broadcast "password". It alerts users and doesn't halt the network or anything. It isn't that important who else has the key (apart from the named 3).
I've just read about it myself, I had no idea what an alert key was. If I understood it correctly, it's the ability to send messages to every Bitcoin Core wallet to announce of an update or something along the lines? If that is the case, the alert key should only work if the majority of developers agree, otherwise it could be used for personal goals. |
|
|
|
You know what's even cooler? Lucy Liu is officially the first Satoshi's Angels. Meet the other two:    If I had Satoshi's wallet, I would buy more than 3 angels, if you know what I mean  Btw, great to see mega celebrities like Lucy Liu big upping BTC. |
|
|
|
|
I heard about it when it was about 600, in the middle of the 2013 rally, in some mainstream news where they were talking about Silk Road.
|
|
|
|
|
Bitin.io pays for Member status 0.0001 per month. Not much, but definitely more than any faucet out there that I know. But like other posters said, you need competent english if you want to get paid. If you don't talk english, you should search a signature campaign in your local language (if any).
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
