The bigger block support does not mean that bigger blocks will be adopted, though. Once the developers say they are going to move towards that, it will be much safer.

It would be really strange that the commited developers didn't have a clue of who satoshi is, or had at least some mails from him.

It seems like a matter of (short) time that a bigger blocksize is widely adopted. Hopefully then consensus may be reached again.

I am relatively new to this discussion, but seems that everybody (or almost) supports a raise in the block size, either by BIP 100, 101 or XT.

Some people say it is not needed to raise block limit yet, but still support a raise. I have seen considerably less people supporting that maintaining the block size to 1MB is the way to go so ...

Wouldn´t be better to make some preasure on the developers to do the raise instead of fighting about the XT vs. Core thing?

I am glad you posted about the duplicity (1 Bitcoin becoming 2 in different chains) as I have not thought about it that way. If, as you say (and probably will happen) inflation kicks in degrading the value of both coins, people will be obligued to hold onto the 2 chains to maintain their Bitcoins savings 

Or they might also sell their coins on a chain in favor of the other but... Which one? people will be forced to gamble if the two chains keep working.

I think 75% or even a little less, is a good number. People tend to stay the same and see what happens, so a 75% moving to a new initiative indicates an awesome majority (as a great part of the resting 25% would simply follow what majority says).

without googling... and for what I have learnt, is a protocol or project for increasing the blocksize, I think

Thanks for all the replies and different points of view 

So, to sum up, he thinks Bitcoin will be more stable than the yuan. Which in my opinion is very doubtful.

Thanks for clarifying. So XT will be compatible either way?

I am not sure if the size increase is much needed or not (just learning about it through you guys ) but I will definitely move with what works. If XT shows to be the solution, I will move. Not dogmatic about that.

But Core will not move if it is not forced, and this letter makes pressure. No doubt about it.

I can´t see the connection between the China economy falling and buying Bitcoin. Does he means that many chinese will run to Bitcoin thus raising its price?

Well, pressure is being done to the increment of block size. I sense it is just a mater of time before core implements it.

I think the idea of several Bitcoin companies (specially the more interested ones, as are trading sites and online wallet companies) joining forces for a Bitcoin campaign makes sense. More adopters means more fiat money put into Bitcoin, and likely a raise in price. If you are holding online wallets or a trading site and Bitcoin value goes up, your value goes up.

It should be taken into consideration. Good point.

I agree. The mechanism is not as complex as facebook, which has to handle uploads, sharing, showing on other walls the info following user defined rules, handle an advertising system, playing videos and audios in site, online chats and video conferences.... much more complex.

The continual lowering of rewards are putting the ROI in the line with regular mining companies.

I do not think they are counting on new money to follow on. They have lost too much credibility. If they are still maintaining the site, it should mean that they would try to regain some credibility first.

The bad thing is that it would not be Bitcoin. People moving towards it would risk too much (as with other kind of altcoin). It is better to launch it just as they have done it. Many people will think "ok, if I switch to XT I have nothing to lose" as they are regular Bitcoins, with the same value.

Also, doing it has they have done, they do not need to compete with thousands of other altcoins, not even with Bitcoin really. They will only move away safely if they have some popularity already.

Opening a high-yield investing site and then trading very well with the money deposited from users. Then pay the users the revenue and keep on trading very well.

But you will have to make people trust you (not easy), and be a great trader.

But there is something I do not understand very well  

Why choose between mining XT and core? It is not that XT will preserve the coins in core after forking? I mean, to mine XT or core is exactly the same right now isn't it?

Right now I am focused on earning them, expecting them to raise when I need them for something.

True, but one has to balance the promised interest rate with research, and research might include small testings of the system.

I mean, for me it is clear that a site that offers 1% return or more daily, would not have much (ïf any) proof of meaning, adresses and contact methods. I somewhat expect that. If a site were to have all that proof, it would be perceived much more secure, and as a result would pay less (he is paying you in trustworthiness, so to speak, so would pay you less in money).

Anonymity is a big sign of a scam, but if you think of it, it is also normal than someone that knows a method to get 1% benefit daily or more wants to remain anonymous. Too much questions, investigation, greedy relatives etc. would fall on that person, even if s/he has the best of intentions.

So I try to research risky sites investing the minimum, making some withdrawals, and investing more progressively. Reviews and payment testimonials from other users also count. I know I have many chances of losing, but also the chances or winning are more.

To sum up:

More revenue=more risks. We are to minimize the risks as much as possible given the situation, but simply some revenues are impossible without risks, and no revenue promise will compensate a very high level of risk.

So it only takes money to convert to Bitcoin?  it does not seem very useful. Converting Bitcoins to more usable money would be better. Some people will be interested when they see it, but what is really needed is things to make spending Bitcoins easier.