Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea

[FiendCoin]

Don't you guys get tired of this constant battling back and forth? Its the same people bickering back and forth the same shit over and over and it gets us nowhere.

We need to come together and push for an agreement like Litecoin has for SegWit now and bigger blocks later when a certain threshold is reached with SegWit blocks.

Be it 50%, 75% full or whatever can be agreed upon.

The shilling needs to stop.

[Mbokani]

Bitcoin Unlimited is an attempt to centralize bitcoin.
Its not what Satoshi would have wanted & its not what is best for crypto or those who use it.
People think that if bitcoin has larger blocks, btc will be able to achieve thousands of transactions per second like credit cards.
That's not the way things work. Btc was never built for that function & it will never achieve a higher transaction rate no matter how big blocks are.

You really cannot pin point who is at fault in this case,yes it will be centralized when bitcoin unlimited rolls in because the major investors had a major say and who is to complain because they have spent millions in mining activities and they are simply safe guarding their cash cow business,it might not be best for bitcoin but it is best for their business.Almost everyone was behind their bandwagon for some time and now they started realizing after the bugs they had in their software which i think mainly damaged their reputation.

[jonald_fyookball]

Don't you guys get tired of this constant battling back and forth? Its the same people bickering back and forth the same shit over and over and it gets us nowhere.

We need to come together and push for an agreement like Litecoin has for SegWit now and bigger blocks later when a certain threshold is reached with SegWit blocks.

Be it 50%, 75% full or whatever can be agreed upon.

The shilling needs to stop.

It's the miners you need to convince.   I actually see progress because now 50% support for big blocks and looks like bip 100 making a comeback.

[Harry Callahan]

Don't you guys get tired of this constant battling back and forth? Its the same people bickering back and forth the same shit over and over and it gets us nowhere.
We need to come together and push for an agreement like Litecoin has for SegWit now and bigger blocks later when a certain threshold is reached with SegWit blocks.
Be it 50%, 75% full or whatever can be agreed upon.
The shilling needs to stop.

It's the miners you need to convince.   I actually see progress because now 50% support for big blocks and looks like bip 100 making a comeback.

It is really hard to convince the miners ,especially big mining farms as they have spent million and they wants the mining industry and the whole bitcoin coin platform to favor their chances rather than the other way round and with the incentives really high in the case of bitcoin ,it is really hard to come to an agreement like litecoin did. The drama will continue and i am not even sure when and how a solution will be reached.

[Lauda]

core ammended a few of them in 0.13 but didnt think to edit 0.12 with a patch.
core just release a new version but dont patch old versions. leaving older version vulnerable

That's not the thing that crashed the BTU nodes. It was their own code. We are still waiting for you to link the fix.

Don't you guys get tired of this constant battling back and forth? Its the same people bickering back and forth the same shit over and over and it gets us nowhere.

That's what the other side wants to do. They want to "wear out" the people that are spreading the truth in order to manipulate more newcomers into their bullshit. It's kind of like Jehovah witnesses.

It's the miners you need to convince.   I actually see progress because now 50% support for big blocks and looks like bip 100 making a comeback.

Miners do not decide what Bitcoin is or isn't. Your % of support is useless considering that the users do not want it.

[FiendCoin]

Don't you guys get tired of this constant battling back and forth? Its the same people bickering back and forth the same shit over and over and it gets us nowhere.

We need to come together and push for an agreement like Litecoin has for SegWit now and bigger blocks later when a certain threshold is reached with SegWit blocks.

Be it 50%, 75% full or whatever can be agreed upon.

The shilling needs to stop.

It's the miners you need to convince.   I actually see progress because now 50% support for big blocks and looks like bip 100 making a comeback.

This is why I can't take you off my shill list (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1879789.msg18699636#msg18699636) yet, this single-minded, obsessive big block support.

[AngryDwarf]

I don't see >90% of the Core nodes being taken down within the same day. Therefore, this is just another example of the dishonesty of the franky1 troll.

because core didnt advertise how to attack their own..

but did advertise how to attack others.

major difference

Where did Core patch it then? or is it still vulnerable?

core ammended a few of them in 0.13 but didnt think to edit 0.12 with a patch.
core just release a new version but dont patch old versions. leaving older version vulnerable

Can you add any substance behind this assertion? When I first looked at the issue, there was definitely issues in the xthin code, which affected other versions which had ported it as well. I did wonder if the code could have been tightened up further upstream. Latest BU still doesn't seem stable though.

[jonald_fyookball]

Don't you guys get tired of this constant battling back and forth? Its the same people bickering back and forth the same shit over and over and it gets us nowhere.

We need to come together and push for an agreement like Litecoin has for SegWit now and bigger blocks later when a certain threshold is reached with SegWit blocks.

Be it 50%, 75% full or whatever can be agreed upon.

The shilling needs to stop.

It's the miners you need to convince.   I actually see progress because now 50% support for big blocks and looks like bip 100 making a comeback.

This is why I can't take you off my shill list (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1879789.msg18699636#msg18699636) yet, this single-minded, obsessive big block support.

That's the way Bitcoin was originally intended to be according to Satoshi.  Big blocks, big nodes, and on chain scaling.

Sure with smaller blocks, node cost increases will be reduced, but you will be forced off the main chain and you'll instead be using KYC/AML LN nodes ran by AXA/Bilderberg funded Blockstream. 

[classicsucks]

change in the structure of power in Bitcoin

That happened years ago when Satoshi quit because Gavin went to the CIA.

It happened again when Gmaxwell got rid of Gavin, Hearn, and Garzik.

Maybe it's Maxwell's turn to take a fall? Or maybe development is done?

[megynacuna]

change in the structure of power in Bitcoin

That happened years ago when Satoshi quit because Gavin went to the CIA.

It happened again when Gmaxwell got rid of Gavin, Hearn, and Garzik.

Maybe it's Maxwell's turn to take a fall? Or maybe development is done?

Well I don't want to get into their politics but one thing that I know is that BU was a bad idea and shouldn't have been introduced let alone implement it.