In short, even without Bitmain there is currently zero chance of activating Classic. In other words, Classic is DOA.

https://medium.com/@21/true-micropayments-with-bitcoin-e64fec23ffd8#.3khobnccg


What do you think about that?

segwit 'no witness mode' takes a full node away from being a fullnode and into being just a compatible node.

centralization is where there is only one source of code. so blockstream wanting to be the only source of a fullnode. is them centralizing and then lowering the distribution of fullnodes by allowing a non-witness mode and wrongfully telling them its ok to not accept witness data

as for saying that everyone that wants 2mb is a "classic backer" shows your narrowmindedness..

oh and if you think that blockstream is winning the debate.. ill use lauda's data from an earlier post (grey and yellow show recent decisions on direction)

Only. The. Code. Matters.

How come bitcoin.org, bitcointalk, bitcoincore.org, r/bitcoin is censored from the site?

Where is 51% defined as consensus?  The whitepaper?  Cite please!

And you know full well much less than 51% will given time inevitably appear, due to variance, as 51%.

The consensus mechanism is designed to discourage/prevent a situation where there is contention, via the extreme penalties (ie losing all your BTC) for defecting from the socioeconomic majority.

You don't get to be privy to, much less control, the Core Defense Network and small block militia's strategy, timing, and tactics.

You only get to find out what they are in the heat of battle, as the wildfire turns your attacking fleet into ash, shipwrecks, and corpses.

Now, isn't it well past time for you to concede that XT was defeated?

We're waiting....

Where is 51% defined as consensus?  The whitepaper?  Cite please!

And you know full well much less than 51% will given time inevitably appear, due to variance, as 51%.

The consensus mechanism is designed to discourage/prevent a situation where there is contention, via the extreme penalties (ie losing all your BTC) for defecting from the socioeconomic majority.

You don't get to be privy to, much less control, the Core Defense Network and small block militia's strategy, timing, and tactics.

You only get to find out what they are in the heat of battle, as the wildfire turns your attacking fleet into ash, shipwrecks, and corpses.

Now, isn't it well past time for you to concede that XT was defeated?

We're waiting....

They have leveraged the work of countless people over 7 years to build out a ledgering system that has proved itself to be largely unbreakable.( all the scams/thefts from bitcoin have been a result of human failings rather than anything in the protocol, but i'm open to correction). The last few holes in such things as 0-conf and tx malleability are being patched up as we speak.

But what some of the flag wavers fail to realise is that it is just about the code - not the bitcoins themselves. Banks obviously want to make money, but their main business is simply the accurate accounting of transactions. And that is what the blockchain provides. The idea that a 2-way peg with bitcoins implies that a $1m transaction on a sidechain will require $1m worth of bitcoin is naive.  The peg will simply act in the same manner that a government stamp has when conveying title on a land deed. It gives the underlying transaction legitimacy by virtue of its existence. The stamp itself is of nominal value. This is why a strict limit is important - its the fee paid that signifies the value, not the transaction amount.

I think this announcement signifies a clear line in the sand as we move from seeing bitcoin as a peer to peer electronic cash system to it simply being an accounting backbone for multi-billion dollar financial institutions. Make of that what you will, and what impact it will have for the value of bitcoin.

When is the last time you heard much discussion of rolling out payment solutions for the public or multi million dollar investments in the firms working on them?

Garzik is reportedly now using the same shovel as Gavin and Mike, as he attacks segwit for no good reason.

I wonder what make him lose enough self-respect to put up with being bossed around by a bigoted, copyright-trolling shitlord like Olivier Janssens?

You'd think Classic's (heavy-handed, top-down) steadfast commitment to 75% instead of the far more reasonable (and miner endorsed) 95% would clue Jeff in to the fact it's not a serious effort.  But no....

Crikey, isn't that a sign of the Bitpocalypse?   

But ya, only the code matters.

All of this anti-Blockstream FUD fixating on who wrote the code, why they wrote it, where they wrote it, what they were wearing when they wrote it, what they ate for breakfast, what club they went to last night, and where their pets' vet went to elementary school is an irrelevant distraction.

The Classic devs are a bunch of morons that wouldn't be able to run the full node unless they keep relying on Core devs keeping it up to date, what happens when Core devs get fed up?, that's why no one with a functional brain is supporting Classic.
Who has come up with SegWit? Core devs. Who has come up with Confidential Transactions? Core devs. Who has come up with the whole sidechains thing? Core devs. Who has come up with Libsecp256k1? Core devs. Who has come up with OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY? Core devs. I can continue all day.
What the fuck have Classic devs done? Exactly. When they can prove to do something of substance, they will be worth a contender to run the full node. Until then, anyone willing to put those guys in charge deserves bankruptcy.
You can keep FUDing with your low IQ replies while Core devs keep making great things.

Only in your mind.

In reality, the community has rejected XT, Unlimited, and now "Classic". Your move.

its not created against a deposit.. seriously you are missing out lesson one of fiat money creation..
here.. straight from the bank of england website
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/quarterlybulletin/2014/qb14q1prereleasemoneycreation.pdf

a bank deposits NEW money into a persons account.. it doesnt shift money from someone elses account .. it creates a new balance.. out of no where, based on credit agreements.

you can..

you do know that credit is a credit agreement.. the primary way banks "create money"..

you do realise that its not money movement from one account to another to give you credit.. the banks magic the money out of nowhere and you sign a credit card contract to hand them funds + a fee..

same goes for mortgages. the funds dont come from other peoples accounts.

when you realise that its created by nothing more then laws allowing them to create it under the use of credit agreements .. you will see that fiat is only backed by laws..

its not backed by anything solid.. but it is backed by legislation..

EG the minimum wage laws make it so that a bank note is the equivelent to atmost X.X hours
for instance in california a $10 bank note has the belief that its back atmost 1 hour of sweat labour ($10 minimum wage)

yes i know people get paid more than $10 an hour.. hense why i said atmost..

also
tax that requires to be paid only in fiat is another reason that fiat holds value as it forces people to handle dollar. rather than choose a better currency to use.

inshort:
fiat is backed by legislation and the weak belief that it has value of sweat labour. but is not backed by anything of real value/substance.. which some say that paper bank notes are backed only by other pieces of paper (laws)

Is it capitalism and a "free market" when banks fail and we pay the bill? It's bullshit, that's what it is.
Is it socialism when the governing oligarchy and their circle have extensive privileges over others?

The elite don't have economic ideologies. Economy is just one very important tool, out of many tools, to exercise global control. People fight over socialism, capitalism, and other 'ism's, when there are no such systems in existence. They are all bastard systems, customized to serve other agendas.