Bitcoin Core or XT? POLL

[solex]

That's why I support the idea of getting rid of the Proof-of-Work mining altogether and replacing it with Proof-of-Stake. Right now miners are parasites to the network. The only owners of the network are actual bitcoin holders.

Satoshi's invention of mining (which probably should have been called "confirming") not only secures the blockchain but has one very important side-effect: the disbursement of the 21 million coins into as many hands as possible, i.e. distributing BTC wealth. This job is 2/3rds complete.

Would we prefer it if 73 people who happened to be around in the first months of 2009 got all the BTC to begin with?

[Adrian-x]

I'm an old school Bitcoiner, mining since 2011,
to preserve the fundamentals in the protocol
I'll be voting with an XT node. 

[not altcoin hitler]

Debate is settled. Proposal denied. Gavin just a waste of everyones' time.

But i think it was good Gavin came out the altcoin closet so now we know where he's at. We all hope he'll resign rather sooner than later to not cause everyone more trouble.

When will ICO for Gavincoin2 start?

[cryptworld]

Is really people going to change to bitcoin xt? how does that work? a new coin ? or I keep having my bitcoins in xt?

[MicroGuy]

You can see how many XT nodes are running here:

http://www.xtnodes.com

Quite a bit of growth in the past week

Finally, we're getting what we need ... an iron-willed individual ready to take the bull by the horns and steer Bitcoin into victory lane.

[not altcoin hitler]

Finally, we're getting what we need ... an iron-willed individual ready to take the bull by the horns and steer Bitcoin into victory lane.

lol, the drunken Goldcoin-guy 

[Alley]

Bitinfocharts says there's over 42k nodes.  That chart says there's 6k.   

[Adrian-x]

Is really people going to change to bitcoin xt? how does that work? a new coin ? or I keep having my bitcoins in xt?

nothing changes for every day users if the majority switches, (or doesn't switch for that matter) what does change is the centralized core development team becomes a little more decentralized with less centralized power to co-opt all force changes on all nodes.

ultimately you would want 3 or 4 or more versions of node software all running the same protocol, that way no core developers could propose radical changes without the majority consensus of the network of users choosing a path.  

XT is the first viable option to achieving this balance, the centralized Bitcoin Core Development team have discouraged competition and could be subconsciously or consciously limiting the growth of Bitcoin to leverage new technologies they have in development.  

[achow101]

Bitinfocharts says there's over 42k nodes.  That chart says there's 6k.   

That is saying it has found 42k nodes total that ever existed and were at one point peering. The 6k is the number of nodes currently online and active.

[Alley]

Bitinfocharts says there's over 42k nodes.  That chart says there's 6k.   

That is saying it has found 42k nodes total that ever existed and were at one point peering. The 6k is the number of nodes currently online and active.

Thanks.  Kind of alarming the number of nodes keeps dropping.

[rax]

Gavin Andresen is Bitcoin. How could anyone vote against him?

Nick: QuestionAuthority. ROTFL.

[Pecunia non olet]

Bitinfocharts says there's over 42k nodes.  That chart says there's 6k.   

That is saying it has found 42k nodes total that ever existed and were at one point peering. The 6k is the number of nodes currently online and active.

Thanks.  Kind of alarming the number of nodes keeps dropping.

And it would continue to drop with Gavincoin. In the end you'll ask yourself "why not use visa instead?".

[QuestionAuthority]

Gavin Andresen is Bitcoin. How could anyone vote against him?

Nick: QuestionAuthority. ROTFL.

So sarcasm is lost on you I see.

[fartbags]

What's wrong with a 4MB upgrade this year?

Classic move. Ask for 20 and accept 4.

[Adrian-x]

Bitinfocharts says there's over 42k nodes.  That chart says there's 6k.   

That is saying it has found 42k nodes total that ever existed and were at one point peering. The 6k is the number of nodes currently online and active.

Thanks.  Kind of alarming the number of nodes keeps dropping.

And it would continue to drop with Gavincoin. In the end you'll ask yourself "why not use visa instead?".

Here's a quote from luke-Jr conceding that limiting block size will result in transaction costs higher than credit cards today and Bitcoin being good for just paying your credit card bill.

You make a good point. I suppose credit cards could simply bill you and get paid every month with bitcoins on the blockchain. Will need to ponder this more...

[/quote ]
Ref: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/38giar/analysis_graphs_of_block_sizes/cruz3n3

[Alley]

What's wrong with a 4MB upgrade this year?

Classic move. Ask for 20 and accept 4.

It would be fine but I don't think they want to have to go through this mess again in a couple years.

[Adrian-x]

Bitinfocharts says there's over 42k nodes.  That chart says there's 6k.   

That is saying it has found 42k nodes total that ever existed and were at one point peering. The 6k is the number of nodes currently online and active.

Thanks.  Kind of alarming the number of nodes keeps dropping.

Not really, you only need to run a node if you are invested in keeping the protocol from changing otherwise you can just use an SPV wallet.

What is problematic is just a fiew Core developers like Luke-jr can force their will on us knowing full well transaction costs will go to their lighting network and sidechains.

[Alley]

Bitinfocharts says there's over 42k nodes.  That chart says there's 6k.   

That is saying it has found 42k nodes total that ever existed and were at one point peering. The 6k is the number of nodes currently online and active.

Thanks.  Kind of alarming the number of nodes keeps dropping.

Not really, you only need to run a node if you are invested in keeping the protocol from changing otherwise you can just use an SPV wallet.

What is problematic is just a fiew Core developers like Luke-jr can force their will on us knowing full well transaction costs will go to their lighting network and sidechains.

I would say you're incorrect.  A network with only a few nodes would be susceptible to a cyber attack.

[fartbags]

Bitinfocharts says there's over 42k nodes.  That chart says there's 6k.   

That is saying it has found 42k nodes total that ever existed and were at one point peering. The 6k is the number of nodes currently online and active.

Thanks.  Kind of alarming the number of nodes keeps dropping.

Not really, you only need to run a node if you are invested in keeping the protocol from changing otherwise you can just use an SPV wallet.

What is problematic is just a fiew Core developers like Luke-jr can force their will on us knowing full well transaction costs will go to their lighting network and sidechains.

I would say you're incorrect.  A network with only a few nodes would be susceptible to a cyber attack.

All the nodes are the same in that they do the same base stuff. They are different as they have added features that become real once enough miners uses that node type.

[Adrian-x]

Bitinfocharts says there's over 42k nodes.  That chart says there's 6k.  

That is saying it has found 42k nodes total that ever existed and were at one point peering. The 6k is the number of nodes currently online and active.

Thanks.  Kind of alarming the number of nodes keeps dropping.

Not really, you only need to run a node if you are invested in keeping the protocol from changing otherwise you can just use an SPV wallet.

What is problematic is just a fiew Core developers like Luke-jr can force their will on us knowing full well transaction costs will go to their lighting network and sidechains.

I would say you're incorrect.  A network with only a few nodes would be susceptible to a cyber attack.

Sure but how many do you need? Nodes maintain the protocol and store the blockchain, the incentive to run a node is to protect the value one has stored on the blockchain and ensure miners abide by the rules.

Not everyone needs to run a node, I suspect businesses high net worth individuals, and a myriad of services will have a need to run a node, (preserve the protocol and have at hand, proof the blockchain is correct.) So long as there is competition nodes will not collude, and the network will be resilient as miners are the ones that validate transactions and miners do what nodes allow them to do.

This number isn't an arbitrary but a function of the distribution of of value stored on the blockchain and the services that are dependent on it. Referencing  a number from the past isn't a reliable comparison, back then there were other methods used to count and everyone has to download the full blockchain if they were to use Bitcoin.

The most effective way to attack the network is to have a private corporation employ developers to wright the code for Bitcoin and have it be the single source for all nodes.

That is the situation today that's why I am running a Bitcoin XT node.