Bitcoin Forum
March 19, 2024, 11:53:16 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Should maxblocksize increase? Which proposal do you prefer?  (Voting closed: September 04, 2015, 01:06:49 PM)
BIP101. Gavin Andresen. - 89 (36.2%)
BIP100. Jeff Garzik. - 44 (17.9%)
BIP103. Pieter Wuille. - 15 (6.1%)
Soft fork. Adam Back. - 19 (7.7%)
No increase. - 29 (11.8%)
Any, but with consensus. - 50 (20.3%)
Total Voters: 197

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: #Blocksize Survey  (Read 16114 times)
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 14, 2015, 08:13:03 PM
 #61

No increase until the block doesnt reach 70% fullness, its no reason to increase it until we have low block size.

I`d prefer the 8mb one if they would do it, but i think its not needed.

But anyway its not us who decide but the miners... Talking about decentralization... Bitcoin is a fucking oligarchy!

the Miners follow us, they dont want to mine a coin no one accepts. Miners can mine all the alt coins they want, I'm only accepting Bitcoin and mining it too.

its the network that gives Bitcoin its Value, the network is us, the best theory to prove his is Peter R's Metcalfe's Law correlation  miners mine for value the value is in the network.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
The grue lurks in the darkest places of the earth. Its favorite diet is adventurers, but its insatiable appetite is tempered by its fear of light. No grue has ever been seen by the light of day, and few have survived its fearsome jaws to tell the tale.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1710849196
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1710849196

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1710849196
Reply with quote  #2

1710849196
Report to moderator
1710849196
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1710849196

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1710849196
Reply with quote  #2

1710849196
Report to moderator
1710849196
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1710849196

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1710849196
Reply with quote  #2

1710849196
Report to moderator
RoadTrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1009


View Profile
August 14, 2015, 09:37:47 PM
 #62

Hearn and Gavin have both toyed with unpopular or potentially devastating ideas, but unlike Gmax and Back they have never tried to implement them.

Care to elaborate? What unpoplar and potentially devastating ideas did they try to implement?
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1070


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
August 14, 2015, 10:09:32 PM
 #63


the Miners follow us, they dont want to mine a coin no one accepts. Miners can mine all the alt coins they want, I'm only accepting Bitcoin and mining it too.


So you're going to be the first to stick your neck out and start accepting XTcoins, in order to begin establishing its alleged economic majority?

Such a brave choice.  XT needs more White Knights like you, since smoothie chickened out.

OK, I'll happily pay you in XTcoins for whatever you want to sell.  Got any silver, gold, or prepper gear/camping supplies?


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
Is Dash a scam?
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 02:11:35 AM
 #64

Hearn and Gavin have both toyed with unpopular or potentially devastating ideas, but unlike Gmax and Back they have never tried to implement them.

Care to elaborate? What unpoplar and potentially devastating ideas did they try to implement?

Sidechains, and Lightning Network, both those proposals are being worked on with full intent to move bitcoin transactions off the Main Chain. The net long term result is as block rewards diminish mining revenue that should come from transaction fees is moved out of the Bitcoin Block-chain and onto of-chain solutions, this changes the inherent incentive structure as designed by Satoshi and erodes the security dependent on incentives that secure Bitcoin from manipulation and attack.  

 

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 02:15:35 AM
 #65


the Miners follow us, they dont want to mine a coin no one accepts. Miners can mine all the alt coins they want, I'm only accepting Bitcoin and mining it too.


So you're going to be the first to stick your neck out and start accepting XTcoins, in order to begin establishing its alleged economic majority?

Such a brave choice.  XT needs more White Knights like you, since smoothie chickened out.

OK, I'll happily pay you in XTcoins for whatever you want to sell.  Got any silver, gold, or prepper gear/camping supplies?

nice try, Blockstream-coin if it survives will be an alt, I suspect Gmax and co will eat some humble Pie and move over to working on the Original Bitcoin.

the whole idea of a fork being a divorce is ludicrous and shame on you for speeding such crap, almost every significant upgrade to bitcoin has resulted in a hard fork, this upgrade will be no different, it's a problem developers dont want to fix bugs for feer of fracturing the network now is the time to do it as you know it only gets harder as we go forward.  

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1070


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
August 15, 2015, 03:43:02 AM
 #66


the Miners follow us, they dont want to mine a coin no one accepts. Miners can mine all the alt coins they want, I'm only accepting Bitcoin and mining it too.


So you're going to be the first to stick your neck out and start accepting XTcoins, in order to begin establishing its alleged economic majority?

Such a brave choice.  XT needs more White Knights like you, since smoothie chickened out.

OK, I'll happily pay you in XTcoins for whatever you want to sell.  Got any silver, gold, or prepper gear/camping supplies?

nice try, Blockstream-coin if it survives will be an alt, I suspect Gmax and co will eat some humble Pie and move over to working on the Original Bitcoin.

the whole idea of a fork being a divorce is ludicrous and shame on you for speeding such crap, almost every significant upgrade to bitcoin has resulted in a hard fork, this upgrade will be no different, it's a problem developers dont want to fix bugs for feer of fracturing the network now is the time to do it as you know it only gets harder as we go forward.  

There has never been a contentious hard fork of Bitcoin, so in any case, XT's would be necessarily be "different."

And that's why you Gavinista's authoritarian junta is not going to happen.

In a contentious hard fork, somebody (the most hardcore Gavinista ever) has to stick their neck out and be the first to accept XTcoins, at the risk of them becoming worthless if their contentious fork fails.

OTOH, those staying safely with the previously demonstrated multi-billion dollar economic majority may seek to exploit the ideological (over)commitments of XTcoin's White Knight first actors, in the form of MPEX's XTcoin Short.  No wonder you don't want to sell your silver for my XTcoins!

Given enough leverage, Team Core will move XT's world onto the ash heap of history.    Cool

Watch and learn, n00b...   Wink


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
Is Dash a scam?
LiteCoinGuy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148
Merit: 1010


In Satoshi I Trust


View Profile WWW
August 15, 2015, 05:27:26 AM
Last edit: August 15, 2015, 05:52:12 AM by LiteCoinGuy
 #67

Consensus is WAY more important than whatever particular solution it's gonna be.

Increasing blocksize now, increasing blocksize gradually over time in the near future, lowering the average block time, all fine with me. Bitcoin should remain functional like it has been the past 6.5 years.

Agree completely. Any change must have overwhelming consensus.

But consensus can be built over time, and the way to do so is to have an extended and very public discussion of the issue. We still have at least 6 months before the problems become urgent. We should make the most of that time to get each dev to explain their position very clearly, including its consequences and meaning for the future of Bitcoin.

some people said that we dont have to do anything until the shit hits the fan  Roll Eyes

thanks to Gavin we will have a choice and a plan when we need it in the future!


@Adrian-x

i agree. and even for the other solutions (sidechains etc) we need more time and bigger blocks.


@flix

thx for clearing things up.

timothythomas
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 06:38:55 AM
 #68

no matter how much people fight over the block size issue . sooner or later they will have to accept the fact that it needs to be increased to keep bitcoin stable
RoadTrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1009


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 07:01:35 PM
 #69

Hearn and Gavin have both toyed with unpopular or potentially devastating ideas, but unlike Gmax and Back they have never tried to implement them.

Care to elaborate? What unpoplar and potentially devastating ideas did they try to implement?

Sidechains, and Lightning Network, both those proposals are being worked on with full intent to move bitcoin transactions off the Main Chain. The net long term result is as block rewards diminish mining revenue that should come from transaction fees is moved out of the Bitcoin Block-chain and onto of-chain solutions, this changes the inherent incentive structure as designed by Satoshi and erodes the security dependent on incentives that secure Bitcoin from manipulation and attack.  

The reality is that Bitcoin blockchain can't handle all the world's transactions without getting completely centralized. These off-chain proposals are serving to satisfy both needs -- a need for scalability and a need for decentralization. If you read LN paper, you would have noticed that it actually argues in favor of bigger blocks -- otherwise it can't be reliable.

On the other hand, if we increase blocksize limit too much, we also erode its security and decentralization.

IMO, there must be a compromise. We can increase the limit without undermining decentralization, but the increases must be very conservative with regards to technological improvements, I'd suggest 15-20% a year. In the meantime, trustless off-cain solutions must be developed.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 01:05:49 AM
Last edit: August 16, 2015, 01:23:22 AM by Adrian-x
 #70

Hearn and Gavin have both toyed with unpopular or potentially devastating ideas, but unlike Gmax and Back they have never tried to implement them.

Care to elaborate? What unpoplar and potentially devastating ideas did they try to implement?

Sidechains, and Lightning Network, both those proposals are being worked on with full intent to move bitcoin transactions off the Main Chain. The net long term result is as block rewards diminish mining revenue that should come from transaction fees is moved out of the Bitcoin Block-chain and onto of-chain solutions, this changes the inherent incentive structure as designed by Satoshi and erodes the security dependent on incentives that secure Bitcoin from manipulation and attack.  

The reality is that Bitcoin blockchain can't handle all the world's transactions without getting completely centralized. These off-chain proposals are serving to satisfy both needs -- a need for scalability and a need for decentralization. If you read LN paper, you would have noticed that it actually argues in favor of bigger blocks -- otherwise it can't be reliable.

On the other hand, if we increase blocksize limit too much, we also erode its security and decentralization.

IMO, there must be a compromise. We can increase the limit without undermining decentralization, but the increases must be very conservative with regards to technological improvements, I'd suggest 15-20% a year. In the meantime, trustless off-cain solutions must be developed.

Centralization and decentralization need to be defined and agreed on for this debate.
Bitcoin needs to be protected from any one minority group influencing it's function that's the promise decentralization provides.

What many here are overlooking is it's already centralized, and the centralized controllers are telling us that all nodes should run their version of the code, and they use terms like it's a hostile hard fork if you try to improve Bitcoin without our approval.  Those centralized controllers either don't trust the Bitcoin protocol or don't want to concede control. XT is no threat to Bitcoin, it's a threat to how it's controlled. 

More nodes running centrally controlled code is not decentralization, we want many implementations of code running the same protocol.  If we end up with 200 nodes run by competing interests we will have more decentralization that we have today.


Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 01:18:07 AM
 #71


the Miners follow us, they dont want to mine a coin no one accepts. Miners can mine all the alt coins they want, I'm only accepting Bitcoin and mining it too.


So you're going to be the first to stick your neck out and start accepting XTcoins, in order to begin establishing its alleged economic majority?

Such a brave choice.  XT needs more White Knights like you, since smoothie chickened out.

OK, I'll happily pay you in XTcoins for whatever you want to sell.  Got any silver, gold, or prepper gear/camping supplies?

nice try, Blockstream-coin if it survives will be an alt, I suspect Gmax and co will eat some humble Pie and move over to working on the Original Bitcoin.

the whole idea of a fork being a divorce is ludicrous and shame on you for speeding such crap, almost every significant upgrade to bitcoin has resulted in a hard fork, this upgrade will be no different, it's a problem developers dont want to fix bugs for feer of fracturing the network now is the time to do it as you know it only gets harder as we go forward.  

There has never been a contentious hard fork of Bitcoin, so in any case, XT's would be necessarily be "different."

And that's why you Gavinista's authoritarian junta is not going to happen.

In a contentious hard fork, somebody (the most hardcore Gavinista ever) has to stick their neck out and be the first to accept XTcoins, at the risk of them becoming worthless if their contentious fork fails.

OTOH, those staying safely with the previously demonstrated multi-billion dollar economic majority may seek to exploit the ideological (over)commitments of XTcoin's White Knight first actors, in the form of MPEX's XTcoin Short.  No wonder you don't want to sell your silver for my XTcoins!

Given enough leverage, Team Core will move XT's world onto the ash heap of history.    Cool

Watch and learn, n00b...   Wink

Every day blocks are orphaned by competition for the longest chain, each orphan represent a failed fork, the reason miners stop mining the shortest chain is they mine coins that will be accepted by the users of the network. This is not political or risky, the chain that accommodates the most transactions and uses create a market for miners to sell the coins they mine and so will be the longest.

This is how Bitcoin works, and has always worked.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1070


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
August 16, 2015, 01:37:33 AM
 #72


the Miners follow us, they dont want to mine a coin no one accepts. Miners can mine all the alt coins they want, I'm only accepting Bitcoin and mining it too.


So you're going to be the first to stick your neck out and start accepting XTcoins, in order to begin establishing its alleged economic majority?

Such a brave choice.  XT needs more White Knights like you, since smoothie chickened out.

OK, I'll happily pay you in XTcoins for whatever you want to sell.  Got any silver, gold, or prepper gear/camping supplies?

nice try, Blockstream-coin if it survives will be an alt, I suspect Gmax and co will eat some humble Pie and move over to working on the Original Bitcoin.

the whole idea of a fork being a divorce is ludicrous and shame on you for speeding such crap, almost every significant upgrade to bitcoin has resulted in a hard fork, this upgrade will be no different, it's a problem developers dont want to fix bugs for feer of fracturing the network now is the time to do it as you know it only gets harder as we go forward.  

There has never been a contentious hard fork of Bitcoin, so in any case, XT's would be necessarily be "different."

And that's why you Gavinista's authoritarian junta is not going to happen.

In a contentious hard fork, somebody (the most hardcore Gavinista ever) has to stick their neck out and be the first to accept XTcoins, at the risk of them becoming worthless if their contentious fork fails.

OTOH, those staying safely with the previously demonstrated multi-billion dollar economic majority may seek to exploit the ideological (over)commitments of XTcoin's White Knight first actors, in the form of MPEX's XTcoin Short.  No wonder you don't want to sell your silver for my XTcoins!

Given enough leverage, Team Core will move XT's world onto the ash heap of history.    Cool

Watch and learn, n00b...   Wink

Every day blocks are orphaned by competition for the longest chain, each orphan represent a failed fork, the reason miners stop mining the shortest chain is they mine coins that will be accepted by the users of the network. This is not political or risky, the chain that accommodates the most transactions and uses create a market for miners to sell the coins they mine and so will be the longest.

This is how Bitcoin works, and has always worked.


I've known "how Bitcoin works" since before you made your account here.  But thanks for the (partial) refresher.

What you left out is the key role of the economic majority, and more specifically, the risk incurred by those (brave) actors who are first to attempt defection from it.


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
Is Dash a scam?
RoadTrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1009


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 07:40:28 AM
 #73

Every day blocks are orphaned by competition for the longest chain, each orphan represent a failed fork, the reason miners stop mining the shortest chain is they mine coins that will be accepted by the users of the network. This is not political or risky, the chain that accommodates the most transactions and uses create a market for miners to sell the coins they mine and so will be the longest.

This is how Bitcoin works, and has always worked.

Do you even know what you're talking about? How is your description of orphaning relevant to the discussion of hards forks?
Quote
Bitcoin needs to be protected from any one minority group influencing it's function that's the promise decentralization provides.
Yes, it needs to be protected from Gavin&Mike, a clear minority group trying influencing it. Yup?

Quote
What many here are overlooking is it's already centralized, and the centralized controllers are telling us that all nodes should run their version of the code, and they use terms like it's a hostile hard fork if you try to improve Bitcoin without our approval.  Those centralized controllers either don't trust the Bitcoin protocol or don't want to concede control.
That's plain wrong. All nodes shouldn't neccessarily run one version of code, they should implement one version of protocol. That's how Bitcoin works, didn't you know that?

Quote
XT is no threat to Bitcoin
And you have proof of that, don't you? Because the burden of proof lies on the claimant.

Quote
More nodes running centrally controlled code is not decentralization, we want many implementations of code running the same protocol.
Don't you know we already have many implementations of the current protocol?
Quote
If we end up with 200 nodes run by competing interests we will have more decentralization that we have today.
What are competing interests?
danielW
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 277
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 09:18:44 AM
Last edit: August 16, 2015, 09:59:25 AM by danielW
 #74

There should be a new option in the survey:

'Smaller increases in the future'.
flix (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1227
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 02:24:56 PM
 #75

Mike Hearn. Why Bitcoin is forking:

https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1?1
flix (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1227
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 16, 2015, 02:32:34 PM
 #76

Mike Hearn says:

Quote
Raising the block size is supported by, amongst others:

-The developers of the most popular wallets on iOS, Android and one of the most popular web wallets. Between them they have served millions of users.
-Several of the biggest Bitcoin exchanges.
-The two biggest payment processors, which between them have most of the market.
-Several major mining pools, including all the Chinese pools.
-Two of the five Bitcoin Core committers (Gavin and Jeff)
-User polling shows about 75–80% support from people in online forums.
RoadTrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1009


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 02:55:50 PM
 #77

Mike Hearn says:

Quote
Raising the block size is supported by, amongst others:

-The developers of the most popular wallets on iOS, Android and one of the most popular web wallets. Between them they have served millions of users.
-Several of the biggest Bitcoin exchanges.
-The two biggest payment processors, which between them have most of the market.
-Several major mining pools, including all the Chinese pools.
-Two of the five Bitcoin Core committers (Gavin and Jeff)
-User polling shows about 75–80% support from people in online forums.
I wonder how many of the mentioned have stated their position publicly. Why not name them?
Also, the last one doesn't really count, because it's a non-representative sample.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1070


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
August 16, 2015, 09:09:39 PM
 #78

Mike Hearn says:

Quote
Raising the block size is supported by, amongst others:

-The developers of the most popular wallets on iOS, Android and one of the most popular web wallets. Between them they have served millions of users.
-Several of the biggest Bitcoin exchanges.
-The two biggest payment processors, which between them have most of the market.
-Several major mining pools, including all the Chinese pools.
-Two of the five Bitcoin Core committers (Gavin and Jeff)
-User polling shows about 75–80% support from people in online forums.

These days, Gavin is a "Core committer" in name only.  He's too busy meeting with spooks and oligarchs in smoke filled rooms to code much.

Most of the people who support larger blocks eschew XT.

Hearn is misleading the public like it's his job.  Case in point:






██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
Is Dash a scam?
ArticMine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 1050


Monero Core Team


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 10:48:03 PM
Last edit: August 17, 2015, 12:15:09 AM by ArticMine
 #79

...

Then the answer is to run Bitcoin XT with just the large blocks fork and without the additional items such as the double transactions propagation, lighting network Lighthouse compatibility etc. In short let us focus this debate on the blocksize issue and not allow it to be distracted by this additional baggage.

Edit: Replaced "lighting network" with Lighthouse since I confused them. This furthers my point  that adding extraneous baggage in Bitcoin XT to the blocksize debate does not help at all.

Concerned that blockchain bloat will lead to centralization? Storing less than 4 GB of data once required the budget of a superpower and a warehouse full of punched cards. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/IBM_card_storage.NARA.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1070


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
August 17, 2015, 01:23:03 AM
 #80

the answer is to run Bitcoin XT with just the large blocks fork and without the additional items

No, the answer is to avoid contentious hard forks and stick with the BIP process.



██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
Is Dash a scam?
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!