Should Gavin resign from developement of Bitcoin? [POLL]

[hasmukhh]

well if he does so many thing that effects humanity then I guess he should leave the bitcoin development. 
if there is so much of ego in him and if he wants us to follow his rules then he should not be in the community.  bitcoin is a thing by the people and for the people . its freedom to anything.
it should be immune and people should be using bitcoin comfortably.

[Muhammed Zakir]

Hey Morons! 20 MB Gavinshittles does not scale! Offchain transactions do scale all you want! Fire the Gavin already! He's ruining it!

Saying this is more than being idiot. It's like having a mental problem.
"Gavin doesn't like descentralization" they say and their answer is offchain transactions?

Satoshi made Bitcoin with block support way bigger than 20MB, we are just getting ready if the number of transactions increases.
I support 100% the new block max size.

What has changed since he determined that the 1 MB limit was necessary? The Bitcoin network is still pretty vulnerable to spam attacks, and many people running full nodes still couldn't handle consistent 20 MB blocks very well. The situation is basically the same.

Also:
- Satoshi is not God. He would be disappointed at how many people are using his words to end discussion rather than start it. Satoshi didn't create the world's first decentralized money so that we would all be forever bound by his own indomitable will.
- He said that in a short comment 5 years ago. At that time, I believed the same thing he did. But things change and new info becomes available. I wouldn't be surprised if he changed his mind as I did. And he's not around to debate it anyway, so you should more-or-less ignore the few sentences he wrote about this so far in the past.
- His first priority was obviously decentralization, not scaling. "... secured in a way that is physically impossible for others to access, no matter for what reason, no matter how good the excuse, no matter what. It's time we had the same thing for money."

Increasing the block max size doesn't necessary will make all blocks with 20MB. It's just a small step.
On the physical storage side, it's pretty much no difference. It's almost impossible to find a HDD with less than 1TB. It can support the actual network for a few years easily, no doubt.
Well, the only problem would be on the network side, transmiting and relaying a 20MB block would take a few moments. I just hope that even before we ever reach 5MB each block the devs and supporters find a better solution or the "block bloat".

Blocks aren't even full, goofy.

Do you prefer to fix a problem or to avoid it?

I do understand but can't we just wait and see what are the problems when block size reaches 1MB.

[iCEBREAKER]

Has Gavin considered creating a alt coin named Gavin coin? If the polls are to be believed then it could be exceedingly popular and make him a lot of money.

He's already created an alt called BitcoinXT, popularly known as GavinCoin.

The problem is that he's trying to launch it at the expense of BTC, with a sneaky secret ninja plan to cannibalize the existing network and ultimately assassinate good old CoreCoin.

Current domination post on the subject:

There's about 3.2 billion reasons why a larger block altenative isn't already launched.  The assumption is that this change to the protocol should be accepted by existing Bitcoin users, miners, exchanges, wallets, etc. and thus the $3.2 market cap would transfer in its entirety to the hardfork side.     But this Bitcoin-XT (specifically, the change to support larger blocks) should simply be considered as being a new coin -- one with initial distribution (premine) such that 1 UTXO exists in the new coin for each UTXO that existed in Bitcoin at the time of the hard fork.

The only way for the new coin to have any chance of having an impact is if it captures all the existing traction and momentum that Bitcoin has received to-date.

Sure, that's a lofty goal.   Essentially, those pushing this new coin (BTX) want to gamble with our bitcoins (BTCs).

Maybe the solution is to simply treat this new coin  .... as a new coin, difficulty 1, and no premine.

gavin@TLA.MIT.EDU is done with the false-flag "embrace" phase.  He's now deep in the "extend" offensive.  Next (and last) he goes for "extinguish."

[shawshankinmate37927]

Blocks aren't even full, goofy.

Do you prefer to fix a problem or to avoid it?

I prefer to fix a problem once it occures. It's good to have a solution at hand but it's called "obsessive compulsive bahviour" if you fix problems that don't exist.

You mean like waiting until your engine dies before worrying about putting more gas in the tank?

Maybe Gavin has OCD. Ever thought about that?

Or maybe he's just proactive instead of reactive.  Ever thought about that?

[ObscureBean]

Blocks aren't even full, goofy.

Do you prefer to fix a problem or to avoid it?

I prefer to fix a problem once it occures. It's good to have a solution at hand but it's called "obsessive compulsive bahviour" if you fix problems that don't exist.

Maybe Gavin has OCD. Ever thought about that?

Well if Gavin's predictions are correct, it might be too late or very difficult to apply a fix beyond a certain threshold. Adding to the problem is the fact that things can go downhill extremely fast in crypto, a single wave of panic-selling could be enough to bring Bitcoin to it's knees. I suggest that people interested in the topic read Gavin's own words/notes and make up their minds rather than trusting other people's version of the story.

http://gavintech.blogspot.com/2015/01/twenty-megabytes-testing-results.html

[Lauda]

I prefer to fix a problem once it occures. It's good to have a solution at hand but it's called "obsessive compulsive bahviour" if you fix problems that don't exist.

You mean like waiting until your engine dies before worrying about putting more gas in the tank?

Maybe Gavin has OCD. Ever thought about that?

Or maybe he's just proactive instead of reactive.  Ever thought about that?

Please ignore Mircea and his band. You're in for a better experience doing so. They have authority issues with Gavin and are going to spew up just about anything to support their goals (removing Gavin).
Fixing a problem once it occurs is the worst method. Mircea would rather get an STD than wear protection.  
It seems rather irrational to wait and see how it plays out and if things go downhill then try fixing what we could have prevented in the first place.

Well if Gavin's predictions are correct, it might be too late or very difficult to apply a fix beyond a certain threshold. Adding to the problem is the fact that things can go downhill extremely fast in crypto, a single wave of panic-selling could be enough to bring Bitcoin to it's knees. I suggest that people interested in the topic read Gavin's own words/notes and make up their minds rather than trusting other people's version of the story.

http://gavintech.blogspot.com/2015/01/twenty-megabytes-testing-results.html

People really have weird reasons to why they are objecting Gavin's proposal.

I do understand but can't we just wait and see what are the problems when block size reaches 1MB.

There seems to be a group of individuals that can wait. I'm pretty sure that they use reason often.  


Update:

I didn't understand what you "really" meant. Maybe you can clarify?

I'm trying to say that there is a group of people who think otherwise.

[Fabrizio89]

I don't really care what he does, I want to see more people getting involved with the development, if someone has better ideas, a view, the network will recognize him, that's how Bitcoin will thrive, not by simply pushing people out

[S4VV4S]

It goes like this: Satoshi > Gavin > Community

Not like this: Satoshi > Community > Gavin

If you put the community in the middle there will be total chaos with no direction or cure. The community must go with flow chart A.

You got things mixed up.
It is the other way around.

It is community first, because if there wasn't community there wouldn't be a Satoshi to begin with.
If noone supported his coin, then you wouldn't have heard of him.

So you should put the community first, then the rest.

[Amph]

It goes like this: Satoshi > Gavin > Community

Not like this: Satoshi > Community > Gavin

If you put the community in the middle there will be total chaos with no direction or cure. The community must go with flow chart A.

You got things mixed up.
It is the other way around.

It is community first, because if there wasn't community there wouldn't be a Satoshi to begin with.
If noone supported his coin, then you wouldn't have heard of him.

So you should put the community first, then the rest.

without satoshi , there would not be any bitcoin nowadays, nor blockchain, it's satoshi that started this whole story that then has built a comunity, the comunity wasn't even aware of bitcoin, before satoshi made it public, so you point has no sense

[Muhammed Zakir]

-snip-

I do understand but can't we just wait and see what are the problems when block size reaches 1MB.

There seems to be a group of individuals that can wait. I'm pretty sure that they use reason often. 

I didn't understand what you "really" meant. Maybe you can clarify?

[JeromeL]

[...] after Szabo began via twitter to gently reign in Gavin's megalomania.)

link ?

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/356twp/nick_szabo_zooko_pwuille_gavinandresen_infinity/

https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4
Jun 1
Bitcoin is a global currency. Good thread on int'l bandwidth & other threats to interconnectivity of Bitcoin miners: https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg08010.html …

Nick Szabo retweeted
Peter Todd ‏@petertoddbtc May 30
FYI: @gavinandresen's (optimistic) 20MB block analysis had an arithmetic error, and actually supports 8MB blocks https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/37vg8y/is_the_blockstream_company_the_reason_why_4_core/crqgtgs

FYI, Nick Szabo retweeted (and added to his favorites):
https://twitter.com/oleganza/status/605117508971053057
"@oleganza: If Bitcoin was ever competing with Paypal or Visa, it would not even start. It competes with gold and central banks."

[crazyearner]

Even if Gavin resigned it would give room for more people to step in and take his place. Satoshi left at the beginning and still it continues to grow get maintained and updated. It is up to Gavin to stay or not but if he does leave will be a massive loss but at the same time still room for more people to take over and take his place if he does decide to leave.

[NorrisK]

Even if Gavin resigned it would give room for more people to step in and take his place. Satoshi left at the beginning and still it continues to grow get maintained and updated. It is up to Gavin to stay or not but if he does leave will be a massive loss but at the same time still room for more people to take over and take his place if he does decide to leave.

He should leave at a high though, not at a low. With all this shit about the fork, it would leave a stain on all his work before. I rather see him leave later than now.

[iCEBREAKER]

[...] after Szabo began via twitter to gently reign in Gavin's megalomania.)

link ?

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/356twp/nick_szabo_zooko_pwuille_gavinandresen_infinity/

https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4
Jun 1
Bitcoin is a global currency. Good thread on int'l bandwidth & other threats to interconnectivity of Bitcoin miners: https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg08010.html …

Nick Szabo retweeted
Peter Todd ‏@petertoddbtc May 30
FYI: @gavinandresen's (optimistic) 20MB block analysis had an arithmetic error, and actually supports 8MB blocks https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/37vg8y/is_the_blockstream_company_the_reason_why_4_core/crqgtgs

FYI, Nick Szabo retweeted (and added to his favorites):
https://twitter.com/oleganza/status/605117508971053057
"@oleganza: If Bitcoin was ever competing with Paypal or Visa, it would not even start. It competes with gold and central banks."

Well then, it's settled.  Satoshi has spoken.

[alani123]

Haven't heard much about block size lately. Bitcoin's development public email list is also back to normal. Are we done with the drama?

[crazyearner]

Even if Gavin resigned it would give room for more people to step in and take his place. Satoshi left at the beginning and still it continues to grow get maintained and updated. It is up to Gavin to stay or not but if he does leave will be a massive loss but at the same time still room for more people to take over and take his place if he does decide to leave.

He should leave at a high though, not at a low. With all this shit about the fork, it would leave a stain on all his work before. I rather see him leave later than now.

True but maybe he has his own reasons to leave or is being pressured into it no one quite knows thew reasons  maybe he should step forward make an announcement casting his thoughts and views and get feedback from bitcoin users.