It is now time to fork bitcoin. There is no reason to have only one.
With new efforts to integrate user identities - there is now a very big divide between two competing schools of thought. Each can go down their respective paths without interfering with the progress of the others. The one thing necessary for this to occur - exists wonderfully.
To create Bitcoin1 and Bitcoin2, we'd need to divide the processing power. Fortunately, we presently have more than twice the processing power that is necessary. The network is a perfect capacity for being split.
Bitcoin1 can go on with the anarchists/outlaws who hate all government involvement and despises law and order. Bitcoin2 can intergrate things which improve decent use in an orderly society.
Time to Fork Bitcoin.
we can also use Confidence Chains. They require practically no processing power. |
|
|
|
What this means is, there is no opt-out for any user in the Bitcoin ecosphere. You'll be processing their disastercoin-stuffed blocks, as a full node or as a miner, unless there is a specific way to exclude them - which may appear in the future if they burden the system too much.
Even if individuals blocked them, there's nothing stopping a mining pool for instance from including Disastercoin txs in their blocks, and thus if they have the mining power, you must accept them into the chain. It's a major fundamental flaw with Bitcoin that was temporarily fixed with COIN_DUST, but this did not provide a complete solution to the problem. Confidence Chains fully addresses these issues. I'd prefer that they stop acting out the "Tragedy of the Commons" right in front of us, and start their own chain. After all, if the idea has MERIT, it should succeed regardless, right? But no, they won't, because the money-blinders are fully in place, and they're congratulating themselves in exploiting every user of Bitcoin towards their own ends. (ie., their threads are full of future claims of getting rich, etc...)
that's exactly what is happening. This isn't about a "protcol", its about an ego-driven mob that is abusing every user in the Bitcoin network.
yep. |
|
|
|
Am I enraged at their stance towards the blockchain? You're damned right I am. Here we have some ostensibly "intelligent" people who are trying their best to turn each block into an overstuffed pressure chamber, primed to explode. (Metaphorically, as it were.)
So as they make their plans to soon create a system that has no opt-in when it comes to sharing the burden, I just want you guys to remember this point in time - the point where they couldn't - and wouldn't - face up to the real injustice happening here, the exploitation of everyone's resources.
yep this is the fundamental problem with the Color Coins architecture. note though I don't hold either Yoni Assia or Meni Rosenfeld liable for malice in this case, I just don't think they realized this at the time. The problems we're raised to Alex Mizrahi by myself on the BitcoinX list and he at first couldn't grasp the complexities of the points I was making, then finally did but pretended like they weren't a problem. the Mastercoin people showed up after all these discussions took place. More than likely you're going to get some people in the network who will deny their transactions, some might actually start charging Mastercoin for the transactions which will lead to other forms of capital involvement. IBM is already on that.The Color Coins architecture turns some basic assumptions in Bitcoin into a kind of resource which then is converted into a kind of functionality(that is bankable according to Mastercoin). So yes its a kind of reaping of the value that everyone put into the Bitcoin network. It's not sustainable without major reworking of Bitcoin, and I think some parties anticipate this. |
|
|
|
In contrast to paper bills, btc can be converted to any altcoin at exchanges anywhere on the planet, so how could a tainted version of btc survive? Fiat exchange can be regulated because there are bank accounts involved but btc-altcoin conversion are nearly impossible to regulate.
the other alt-coins dont significantly differ from Bitcoin thus they can easily and cheaply repeat the process with them. |
|
|
|
I don't understand that this has to do with anything? don't want to answer my question huh? |
|
|
|
This is why we need alternative blockchains. Bitcoin is going mainstream.
Or an alternative, true, foundation? No, no centralization please. Existing members of the BF should consider withdrawing their membership. BF + ECB/FR = BFF |
|
|
|
It looks like the foundation is attracting a lot of wanna-be central bankers
How many times - read read read. Stop just reading a headline and throwing out a random statement based on fiction. No wonder Fox News has such a huge effect - people don't want to think for themselves, they just want to be outraged. Virtually no one wants tainting. Based on the forum posts the op put up, the foundation members don't either. did you read this? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/libor-scandal/10394831/City-workers-face-investigation-over-Libor-fixing.htmlwho do you think is culpable? |
|
|
|
watching
does anyone think it's a coincidence that we have a huge run up in BTC price EXACTLY at the time this stuff is going on behind closed doors? certainly suggests and implicates various parties in some dastardly doings. Obviously. Some "groups" have concluded that Bitcoin will go mainstream and it has to be controlled before it can harm their business and powers. well if the insiders(who are supposed to be representing the community) covertly agree to work in controls that are beneficial for capital interests, then they know its safe to start buying BTC, and they know this before the general public does and can profit from it. |
|
|
|
The only people with their knickers in a twist over a simple discussion are people here.
Why does it seem we have so many British on this side of the discussion lately? Also the IBM rep who was poking around was also London based. I think maybe theyre concerned this might happen again: http://www.no-debts.com/anti-federalist/files/ownmoney.txt |
|
|
|
have you actually tried this? apparently a web link is some sort of new form of argument proof in our modern times. argumentum ad hrefium? |
|
|
|
watching
does anyone think it's a coincidence that we have a huge run up in BTC price EXACTLY at the time this stuff is going on behind closed doors? certainly suggests and implicates various parties in some dastardly doings. |
|
|
|
We need an altcoin that improves the weaknesses bitcoin has
So none of the altcoins out there already, to be clear. They all use addresses like Bitcoin and are data-minable just as Bitcoin is. Perhaps more so given their smaller blockchains and lack of alternative clients. at best you will duplicate the pattern and buy some time perhaps? If the underlying technology is identical, then it's not immune to the same effects. Some of the altcoins have departed considerably from the basic Bitcoin structure thus it takes more work to couple the various commercial systems to them, but it's not a major barrier. All the alt-coins are structurally similar if not identical to Bitcoin. Confidence Chains IS immune to these effects. I re-factored some very low level elements. |
|
|
|
I am to the point where I would take a serious look at a codebase released from a group of people I trust to evolve the protocol in a healthy direction which rectifies some of the deficiencies. gmaxwell, retep, and adam3us come to mind.
Ideally releases from the more desirable codebase would track and inter-operate with releases blessed by the Bitcoin Foundation. Until they didn't.
You already have a codebase released from that group, the one at http://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoinIf it is changed in a way that is seriously objectionable, as opposed to minor disagreements about engineering tradeoffs, believe me, you will see alternative releases from myself and many others pop up. you do realize that code base is a labyrinthine maze of C code, GOTOs, global variables, and other off-putting things? there are only a few people who are effectively capable of modifying the bitcoin code in any serious way. The only alternative client is BitcoinJ, written by Mike Hearn, who appears to be at the center of this whole controversy. Given that not many people here seem to even know the basics of software engineering, that leaves precious few people who can have an impact and haven't been bought out. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not directly competing with Apple, so I really don't understand the comparison to the IBM vs. Apple feud.
Apple has iMoney patents. do you have links to those? thanks, bm |
|
|
|
I cannot formulate the words to adequately express my anger about this. I consider Bitcoin to be revolutionary. It could completely free people from the failing fiat system. It could completely free the people from the restrictions of credit card payments. It combines the best qualities of cash and plastic, AND it's impossible to steal (assuming the proper precautions are taken). And now, as with everything great that's happened since 1920, the US government and some multinational corporations have to find some way to stomp it to the ground for a few kickbacks and maybe a few years in office.
If I could find a person who knowingly allowed this to happen, and I were in the same room as him with a gun in my hand, I would have a very difficult time not pulling the trigger.
Some people might argue that "compromise is the only way to keep Bitcoin legal". If Bitcoin becomes popular enough, this may be true. I say, why gives a fuck? I believe morality overrides legality 100% of the time. I believe that in the modern world, which revolves around the Internet, free software (especially free software infrastructures such as Bitcoin) is the greatest tool we have against authoritarianism. I believe that freedom from governmental and corporate control is a human right. Therefore, I believe that as long as Bitcoin has even a small number of users, it is my moral duty to do my best to keep the Bitcoin ecosystem alive, regardless of the consequences. If everyone shared this same philosophy, Bitcoin would be literally unstoppable.
1. Reject all closed source Bitcoin software, including web wallets, and, God forbid it comes to this, the official client.
2. Reject all Bitcoin software that contradicts Satoshi's paper. This paper is the Constitution of Bitcoin. This includes any software which blacklists addresses, reverses transactions, or has ANY central point of failure, especially a central authority. The difference between Bitcoin and Paypal is that Bitcion is decentralized.
3. Governments exist to catch proverbial murderers. They do not exist to prevent the purchase of proverbial weapons. No matter what governments say, control of currency (Bitcoin or otherwise) does nothing but control innocent people.
4. Corporations exist to serve customers. They do not exist to control customers. Boycott companies that place any restrictions other than the price of their goods or services.
Interesting points but it's not really quite so simple to combat these problems. Things like web wallets do contributee to the centalization aspect, making it far easier for large banks to come in and start capitalizing- just build a feature that has some price advantage, but uses centralized technologies, and suddenly everyone is back on the old program again. One problem we face is tolerating technologies that abuse the underlying network. In my view Color Coins and Mastercoin are an example of this. The notion of having some kind of for-profit Color Coin system that exploits the assumptions of the network participants is just flat out intolerable if you ask me. This issue of government charter in the realm of finance has been going on for quite some time. J. Orlin Grabbe identitied these conflicts some time ago. http://orlingrabbe.com/money2.htm There's a specter haunting the international financial markets: the specter of crime by nomenclature, by theological semantics. To be sure, the faceless piece of transaction information that makes money "money"--a useful medium of exchange, whereby we exchange everything for it, and avoid the direct bartering of wheelbarrows for oranges--has been under attack before. The 60s brought us "euro"-dollars, and the 70s "petro"-dollars. Now we have "narco"-dollars, "terror"-dollars, and (who knows?) maybe "kiddie-porn"-dollars. For some of the data bits stored in banks' computers comprise "clean" money and others "dirty" money, the latter legalistically smitten with original sin.
As Yoga Berra might say, it's digital voodoo, all over again. As we know in post-Bailout America, there is an 'insider group' and these people are working for money interests while telling us that they want to keep up safe from terror, kiddie porn, and irreversible transactions. Do we still believe these people? The solution though is to stay vigilant with our values and continue to forge ahead despite the 'knowns' being now salaried employees of various banking interests. Have a look at my Confidence Chains project, it came out of some of the conclusions I came to regarding these issues and the drawbacks of other similar platforms. |
|
|
|
They are destroying the work of satoshi which aimed decentralized currency. Maybe its time to find a new bitcoin developers.
please have a look at what I'm working on(links below). it addresses many of these issues as it does away with mining altogether. thanks and I 100% agree with OP, it's a huge problem. This isn't really what Bitcoin was meant to be. |
|
|
|
apple went from being the underdog (in 1984) in this commercial http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UZV7PDt8Lwonly to become "the oppressive establishment" that they despised in the video. yes to monotony, yes to being brainwashed into believing what they want you to. I run Ubuntu Linux desktop and use Android Tablet and phones. |
|
|
|
Switch my iPhone for a crappy android phone, just to use a Coinbase app? Uh...no. Just no.  actually this is a perfect example of why Apple's model is not worth it. they cripple the features you have access to, give you shiny pointless bells and whistles instead, and then charge you up the wazoo. The group of people understand what theyre missing out on are sufficiently small, while the group of people willing to pay for shiny graphics with gradients, etc. are very large. Apple exploits the ignorance of the general public. it was everything that Apple was against in the early days. Oh my how times have changed. Still remember my beloved apple II+. It had a whopping 4 colors in the graphics card. Apple, why have you forsaken me?  |
|
|
|
Android users not affected  Next time get a free device  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
