Bitcoin Core or XT, you dont have to choose NOW. Dont bother with the poll....

[Bizmark13]

Moving to the new fork does this mean the 21 million coins are raised?

No the 21 million coins limit stays exactly the same whatever happens. Nothing's going to change that limit.

Actually, the 21 million coin limit can be raised at any time, and most probably will be in the future.

That would be a instant nail in the coffin for Gavincoin.
Look, I think we need to do something about the blocksize, and maybe unless someone comes up with something better, we'll need to modify the blocksize, but forking it to 20MB does shit nothing, we'll meet the same dead end in the future. What we need is doing something scalable. A fork for 20MB is not scalable. Staying 1MB is equally stupid.
But the total supply will always be 21, unless you want an instant dump of epic proportions.

I agree that a variable block size limit which scales according to the needs of the network would be preferable to one that is fixed since the latter is only really a temporary fix, as you said. Problem is, that's easier said than done and the proposals that we've seen so far have been shown to be far from perfect and tend to come with a host of problems of their own (e.g. miner collusion).

Gavin also touched briefly on this subject in one of his blog posts:

Dynamic limits

One very popular idea is to implement a dynamic limit, based on historical block sizes.

The details vary: how often should the maximum size be adjusted? Every block? Every difficulty adjustment? How much of an increase should be allowed? 50% bigger? Double?

If the block size limit is just a denial-of-service prevention measure (preventing a big, evil miner from producing an 11 gigabyte block that the rest of the network is forced to validate), then any of these proposals will work. Engineers could bike-shed the parameter choice to death, but I like the idea of a simple dynamic limit on the maximum allowed size.

There are more complicated proposals for a dynamic block size limit that (for example) involve proof-of-stake voting or linking the maximum block size to the mining reward and/or the amount of fees in a block. I like them less than a simple solution, because consensus-critical code must be absolutely correct, and every additional line of code is another opportunity for a chain-splitting bug to slip through code review and testing...

Link: http://gavinandresen.ninja/bigger-blocks-another-way

[1713567386]

1713567386

[1713567386]

1713567386

[1713567386]

1713567386

[1713567386]

1713567386

[oblivi]

God damn this forums must be all newbies or what? I had to log in to make this thread to stop all the nonsense from you newbies for the past few days. Let me break it down to you what is happening, and why a fork might not be a fork!


+ You currently dont have to choose Core or XT, both are just wallet clients using the same database (blockchain)

+ You can run both wallet clients if you dont know to support blocksize increase or not

+ Gavin and Dev core using 2 clients to sort out the consensus of the network, who will support blocksize increase and who wont.

+ As the XT becomes 90% of bitcoin nodes, Gavin will implement the blocksize increase. This is like soft fork, you will know by then because i'm sure all major bitcoin services will announce they will support the blocksize increase or not.

+ The Core will be obsoleted and the bitcoin network has reached the consensus.



Here is the BS being spread around here:

- You can sell your coins of weaker chain : NO you WONT, i can tell you no exchange will support a weaker chain and risking their business
- Price will be halved because you now have doubled your coins: No it wont, because you cant sell coins on the weaker change on any exchanges. Unless you can find some retard on the forums to sell to, and if you can, you should fork your own bitcoins now and be rich.


Gavin's proposal is to increase pressure on decision making of the Core team. As at the current pace, we will not have enough time left and bitcoin network will face bottleneck. The damages might be too great then and risk all investors involved.

I think this is a brilliant idea. Everyone (bitcoiners) will learn about this and start voting. Look at how many confused members on here, i think it works already.

Let me see if I get this. So the hard fork (actual split o the blockchain) will only happen once the nodes run in XT are 90%+? who did say 90%? Gavin? show me the quote.
In this case it would make sense, since running a XT client would be considered as 1 vote. 1 node = 1 vote. If you want to the fork, run the XT client, if you dont want the fork, run Core. It sounds cool, as soon as that majority is respected, in other words, 51% is not enough, and 90% would be obvious that a fork is preferred by people that actually care about BTC enough to run a node.

[anderson00673]

God damn this forums must be all newbies or what? I had to log in to make this thread to stop all the nonsense from you newbies for the past few days. Let me break it down to you what is happening, and why a fork might not be a fork!


+ You currently dont have to choose Core or XT, both are just wallet clients using the same database (blockchain)

+ You can run both wallet clients if you dont know to support blocksize increase or not

+ Gavin and Dev core using 2 clients to sort out the consensus of the network, who will support blocksize increase and who wont.

+ As the XT becomes 90% of bitcoin nodes, Gavin will implement the blocksize increase. This is like soft fork, you will know by then because i'm sure all major bitcoin services will announce they will support the blocksize increase or not.

+ The Core will be obsoleted and the bitcoin network has reached the consensus.



Here is the BS being spread around here:

- You can sell your coins of weaker chain : NO you WONT, i can tell you no exchange will support a weaker chain and risking their business
- Price will be halved because you now have doubled your coins: No it wont, because you cant sell coins on the weaker change on any exchanges. Unless you can find some retard on the forums to sell to, and if you can, you should fork your own bitcoins now and be rich.


Gavin's proposal is to increase pressure on decision making of the Core team. As at the current pace, we will not have enough time left and bitcoin network will face bottleneck. The damages might be too great then and risk all investors involved.

I think this is a brilliant idea. Everyone (bitcoiners) will learn about this and start voting. Look at how many confused members on here, i think it works already.

Let me see if I get this. So the hard fork (actual split o the blockchain) will only happen once the nodes run in XT are 90%+? who did say 90%? Gavin? show me the quote.
In this case it would make sense, since running a XT client would be considered as 1 vote. 1 node = 1 vote. If you want to the fork, run the XT client, if you dont want the fork, run Core. It sounds cool, as soon as that majority is respected, in other words, 51% is not enough, and 90% would be obvious that a fork is preferred by people that actually care about BTC enough to run a node.

Hi, check this thread for a really good interview with Gavin.  It helps explain some things and should make people feel a little more comfortable.  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1075510.0

Some good posts as well in that thread.  I think you will see that everything is ok and this is just a bump in the road.

[SebastianJu]

God damn this forums must be all newbies or what? I had to log in to make this thread to stop all the nonsense from you newbies for the past few days. Let me break it down to you what is happening, and why a fork might not be a fork!


+ You currently dont have to choose Core or XT, both are just wallet clients using the same database (blockchain)

+ You can run both wallet clients if you dont know to support blocksize increase or not

+ Gavin and Dev core using 2 clients to sort out the consensus of the network, who will support blocksize increase and who wont.

+ As the XT becomes 90% of bitcoin nodes, Gavin will implement the blocksize increase. This is like soft fork, you will know by then because i'm sure all major bitcoin services will announce they will support the blocksize increase or not.

+ The Core will be obsoleted and the bitcoin network has reached the consensus.



Here is the BS being spread around here:

- You can sell your coins of weaker chain : NO you WONT, i can tell you no exchange will support a weaker chain and risking their business
- Price will be halved because you now have doubled your coins: No it wont, because you cant sell coins on the weaker change on any exchanges. Unless you can find some retard on the forums to sell to, and if you can, you should fork your own bitcoins now and be rich.


Gavin's proposal is to increase pressure on decision making of the Core team. As at the current pace, we will not have enough time left and bitcoin network will face bottleneck. The damages might be too great then and risk all investors involved.

I think this is a brilliant idea. Everyone (bitcoiners) will learn about this and start voting. Look at how many confused members on here, i think it works already.

Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT would not use the same database once the fork happened. Only the same base database. But once the fork happened all blocks will be different.

How do you know the Core will be obsoleted? Are there really so many in advantage of raising now? Gavin is so loud as if we need to do it next week, otherwise bitcoin will crash. Though we have way than enough time to act. The prediction says past 2016.

It seems you very clear believe that one chain will die. For sure, at some point. But this is not some alternative Cryptocurrency then. What if there are around 50% fans on both sides? Each side will believe that their coins will survive and that their coins will be worth the 222$ actually. They WILL sell the other coins to those fans of the other chain. And what does that mean? Right, halving of the price. Of course, if youre right and there are only a couple fans on one chain, then this wont happen.

[dserrano5]

What if there are around 50% fans on both sides? Each side will believe that their coins will survive and that their coins will be worth the 222$ actually. They WILL sell the other coins to those fans of the other chain. And what does that mean? Right, halving of the price. Of course, if youre right and there are only a couple fans on one chain, then this wont happen.

If there's a 50/50 split, the increase in block size won't reach the required support so it won't be enacted. We will remain with the same bitcoin we always had, only with two clients. Oh wait, just like now…

[pereira4]

God damn this forums must be all newbies or what? I had to log in to make this thread to stop all the nonsense from you newbies for the past few days. Let me break it down to you what is happening, and why a fork might not be a fork!


+ You currently dont have to choose Core or XT, both are just wallet clients using the same database (blockchain)

+ You can run both wallet clients if you dont know to support blocksize increase or not

+ Gavin and Dev core using 2 clients to sort out the consensus of the network, who will support blocksize increase and who wont.

+ As the XT becomes 90% of bitcoin nodes, Gavin will implement the blocksize increase. This is like soft fork, you will know by then because i'm sure all major bitcoin services will announce they will support the blocksize increase or not.

+ The Core will be obsoleted and the bitcoin network has reached the consensus.



Here is the BS being spread around here:

- You can sell your coins of weaker chain : NO you WONT, i can tell you no exchange will support a weaker chain and risking their business
- Price will be halved because you now have doubled your coins: No it wont, because you cant sell coins on the weaker change on any exchanges. Unless you can find some retard on the forums to sell to, and if you can, you should fork your own bitcoins now and be rich.


Gavin's proposal is to increase pressure on decision making of the Core team. As at the current pace, we will not have enough time left and bitcoin network will face bottleneck. The damages might be too great then and risk all investors involved.

I think this is a brilliant idea. Everyone (bitcoiners) will learn about this and start voting. Look at how many confused members on here, i think it works already.

Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT would not use the same database once the fork happened. Only the same base database. But once the fork happened all blocks will be different.

How do you know the Core will be obsoleted? Are there really so many in advantage of raising now? Gavin is so loud as if we need to do it next week, otherwise bitcoin will crash. Though we have way than enough time to act. The prediction says past 2016.

It seems you very clear believe that one chain will die. For sure, at some point. But this is not some alternative Cryptocurrency then. What if there are around 50% fans on both sides? Each side will believe that their coins will survive and that their coins will be worth the 222$ actually. They WILL sell the other coins to those fans of the other chain. And what does that mean? Right, halving of the price. Of course, if youre right and there are only a couple fans on one chain, then this wont happen.

If the hard fork happens only past 90% of nodes in one side as it should, then what you say it's not a problem. The real fork only happens past 90%, yes or no? thats what I read once here.

[achow101]

If the hard fork happens only past 90% of nodes in one side as it should, then what you say it's not a problem. The real fork only happens past 90%, yes or no? thats what I read once here.

That is true. Once >90% of the last 1000 blocks mined that have been accepted by the network and are of the new version yet still conform to the old rules will the hard fork happen. Anything before that will just be two clients on the same network, mining valid blocks for everyone.

[SebastianJu]

Do you have trouble comprehending simple English?

Why quote me when you didnt even read?

Oh, now i remember you name. And your posts often have an attacking and wording tendency.

Whatever. You dont need to explain where im wrong. Its surely better to insult others. 

[thejaytiesto]

God damn this forums must be all newbies or what? I had to log in to make this thread to stop all the nonsense from you newbies for the past few days. Let me break it down to you what is happening, and why a fork might not be a fork!


+ You currently dont have to choose Core or XT, both are just wallet clients using the same database (blockchain)

+ You can run both wallet clients if you dont know to support blocksize increase or not

+ Gavin and Dev core using 2 clients to sort out the consensus of the network, who will support blocksize increase and who wont.

+ As the XT becomes 90% of bitcoin nodes, Gavin will implement the blocksize increase. This is like soft fork, you will know by then because i'm sure all major bitcoin services will announce they will support the blocksize increase or not.

+ The Core will be obsoleted and the bitcoin network has reached the consensus.



Here is the BS being spread around here:

- You can sell your coins of weaker chain : NO you WONT, i can tell you no exchange will support a weaker chain and risking their business
- Price will be halved because you now have doubled your coins: No it wont, because you cant sell coins on the weaker change on any exchanges. Unless you can find some retard on the forums to sell to, and if you can, you should fork your own bitcoins now and be rich.


Gavin's proposal is to increase pressure on decision making of the Core team. As at the current pace, we will not have enough time left and bitcoin network will face bottleneck. The damages might be too great then and risk all investors involved.

I think this is a brilliant idea. Everyone (bitcoiners) will learn about this and start voting. Look at how many confused members on here, i think it works already.

Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT would not use the same database once the fork happened. Only the same base database. But once the fork happened all blocks will be different.

How do you know the Core will be obsoleted? Are there really so many in advantage of raising now? Gavin is so loud as if we need to do it next week, otherwise bitcoin will crash. Though we have way than enough time to act. The prediction says past 2016.

It seems you very clear believe that one chain will die. For sure, at some point. But this is not some alternative Cryptocurrency then. What if there are around 50% fans on both sides? Each side will believe that their coins will survive and that their coins will be worth the 222$ actually. They WILL sell the other coins to those fans of the other chain. And what does that mean? Right, halving of the price. Of course, if youre right and there are only a couple fans on one chain, then this wont happen.

The fork only happens past 90%. Therefore all coins on the non-majority blockchain become automatically obsolete, and you keep your coins safe automatically in the blockchain. It's pretty smooth.

[Tobo]

what is the progress? how many nodes are using XT?

[Amph]

what is the progress? how many nodes are using XT?

still a few, but bears in mind that the changes are not done yet in the client, it is just pure testing, so there isn't any reason to change for now, better to wait at least the end of this year

but you can check it here https://blockchain.info/it/connected-nodes

[Tobo]

what will happen next week? I heard that something regarding the xt fork will be done during next week.

[Muhammed Zakir]

what will happen next week? I heard that something regarding the xt fork will be done during next week.

https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoinxt/commit/821e223ccc4c8ab967399371761718f1015c766b

https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoinxt/commit/c81898ec46e4962daf975e352931b848026fdc34

[ammy009]

awesome post!!!
everyone should read it

[Tobo]

what will happen next week? I heard that something regarding the xt fork will be done during next week.

https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoinxt/commit/821e223ccc4c8ab967399371761718f1015c766b
https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoinxt/commit/c81898ec46e4962daf975e352931b848026fdc34

Thanks. If I read correctly, it seems the XT will raise the block size to 8mb and double it up every 2 years. This seems a compromise with the Chinese miners. Is it next week the XT will be released for real? 

[rocoro]

Look at how many confused members on here, i think it works already.

Not sure if joking, or serious.
At some point people WILL have to choose, so might as well be now.

[extrabyte]

Moving to the new fork does this mean the 21 million coins are raised?

No the 21 million coins limit stays exactly the same whatever happens. Nothing's going to change that limit.

Actually, the 21 million coin limit can be raised at any time, and most probably will be in the future.

That would be a instant nail in the coffin for Gavincoin.
Look, I think we need to do something about the blocksize, and maybe unless someone comes up with something better, we'll need to modify the blocksize, but forking it to 20MB does shit nothing, we'll meet the same dead end in the future. What we need is doing something scalable. A fork for 20MB is not scalable. Staying 1MB is equally stupid.
But the total supply will always be 21, unless you want an instant dump of epic proportions.

Agreed; people are overreacting every bit of news bitcoin is associated with, especially over this fork

[tvbcof]

Moving to the new fork does this mean the 21 million coins are raised?

No the 21 million coins limit stays exactly the same whatever happens. Nothing's going to change that limit.

Actually, the 21 million coin limit can be raised at any time, and most probably will be in the future.

The whole point of Gavincoin is to subsidize the indigent users in order to build a 'critical mass.'  A very good follow-up to free transactions for the welfare spenders would be to produce more coins and spread the wealth around more fairly.  The idea of getting 'free money' for mining was key to popularizing Bitcoin in the first place.  If every user (who properly registered) were given some of the current inflation it would be quite effective in further popularizing the solution.

Just like it the real world, it is more politically palatable to do this re-distribution through inflation than through theft.  Theft is, however, possible as well and both will be much more practical when there is a single 'benevolent dictator' at the helm.  It is possible that 'tainted' coins (which has been something of a fixation on the part of the XT developer) could be re-distributed.  In that case there need not be inflation or theft (depending on how theft is defined.)

[BitUsher]

"We do not necessarily consider an 8 MB block size limit a temporary solution, as we cannot predict what will happen years into the future. But we do think 8 MB is enough for the foreseeable future, presumable at least for the next three years. An increase to 20 MB however, is too risky, and we do not like the proposed Bitcoin-Xt alternative either. We do, on the other hand, support BIP 100 as proposed by Jeff Garzik."

[SebastianJu]

How about not forking Bitcoin at all since this is not an imminent issue. IF transaction numbers per block keep increasing at the rapid speed they have been recently it will take 2 years to start hitting 1 mb per block. No reason to implement a fork that will cause people to lose Bitcoins until it is absolutely necessary, keep the code on the side until then. Why is there so much haste to make a change that isn't needed for 2 years  

The majority of Bitcoin developers agree with this statement, the developer of XT decided to make his own version of Bitcoin so he could control Bitcoin's code without needing consent from anyone else.

http://cointelegraph.com/news/114426/andresen-will-shift-efforts-to-bitcoin-fork-if-no-consensus-reached-on-block-size

Exactly... your last paragraph is what i dont get in this whole discussion. Why are bitcoiners so fast in giving away "their" cryptocurrency to a private company? Its interesting to see but somehow strange when you know the libertarian ideas of bitcoin in the beginning.