If you want to know why I hate the dev team and how they treat Bitcoin...

[Mike Hearn]

I read the reddit thread and did not see any Bitcoin developers post on it. How to balance the need for fully verifying nodes and the need for users to be on fast implementations is a topic we've discussed many times.

I wish Atlas would put his copious free time into something more useful than posting to some web forum.

[jgarzik]

I can't blame the devs for being a bit overly cautious.  They started off suggesting that users use online wallet services, and that was a spectacular failure.

Sorry, this is just not true.  Nobody started off "suggesting that users use online wallet services."

The advice has always been "run a node, if you can.  Please please please run a node.  If you absolutely cannot run a node...  use a mobile or online wallet."

Online wallet has always been a last resort, because that is a centralized solution.

The more people that run nodes, the stronger the network.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Atlas hates the dev team because they're not getting enough done and they're not responsive enough to the community's priorities. That's why he opposes their effort to get more development resources and initiate a better process to assess the community's priorities.

+1kk
Exactly right.

@Atlas

Stop creating pointless threads & attacking everyone. You are behaving like some crazy Atlas nutjob.

PS.
I hope that you didn't think that changing the avatar again would change people's perception of your person.

----
This forum should get a Slashdot-like meta-moderation system, so trolls like Atlas get sorted out.

[mjsbuddha]

I think the dev team is to paralyzed with fear to iterate at a normal pace for modern software because of how litigious the bitcoin community is. They fuck up somewhere and they all get sued into the poor house so they take an extreme amount of time to test anything that needs to be addressed.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

I think the dev team is to paralyzed with fear to iterate at a normal pace for modern software because of how litigious the bitcoin community is. They fuck up somewhere and they all get sued into the poor

The X11/MIT license of the official client does not give the user ANY KIND of warranty, so you cannot sue anybody.
However if the devs fuck up, a lot of people are going to be VERY pissed off, including some mafia and CIA, who will both probably use Bitcoin to pay for smuggled drugs, arms & prostitutes (if they aren't doing that already).

house so they take an extreme amount of time to test anything that needs to be addressed.

Extreme amount of time needs to be taken, because a bad coding decision could destroy wealth of many people and have devastating consequences.
Changing software isn't always a serious thing. But modifying a CURRENCY is always serious... there is no room for mistake.

I think we should be thankful that the changes are so slow. I do not want them any faster - neither should anybody. It's all our money that are at stake after all.

[jgarzik]

I think the dev team is to paralyzed with fear to iterate at a normal pace for modern software because of how litigious the bitcoin community is. They fuck up somewhere and they all get sued into the poor house so they take an extreme amount of time to test anything that needs to be addressed.

We are overly cautious because any screwup costs real money.  Literally.

[franky1]

gotta disagree with OP opinion.

not helping his own transactions get verified along with others is just going to cause confirmations to take even longer if everyone avoided them.

then they would complain of confirm speeds being too slow they wont want to trade.

i wouldn't say if u don't like it go away like the dev's did, but i would say if you want to use a less clogged up client that still validates bocks, invent one.. or pay the dev's to fix the bugs.

the dev's are not slaves, if you want something bad enough invent it urself or pay a bounty to get it.

or just continue as u are and accept the situation u are in.. just dont go shouting for everyone to join you on non verifying clients as you are just going to make ur own confirmation times slower as an end result of everyone not using verifying clients.

[Richy_T]

Learn programming Atlas.

Atlas Debugged?

[Richy_T]

What is needed is a mechanism for miners to announce their demands in their mined blocks, which has to work across pools. It's fairly straight forward to implement but it won't be done because of above issues.

Lets wait for the collapse of the GLBSE mining bond bubble (watch the difficulty!) then we will see what happens.

Transaction volume is low right now, particularly for zero-fee transactions and people are happy to donate time (especially since it's in the default client) to help get bitcoin established. If volumes start having a significant effect expect to see transaction fees rise if you want to see the transaction proceed in a timely manner.

[ElectricMucus]

Learn programming Atlas.

Atlas Debugged?

HAHA, good one  

[ElectricMucus]

What is needed is a mechanism for miners to announce their demands in their mined blocks, which has to work across pools. It's fairly straight forward to implement but it won't be done because of above issues.

Lets wait for the collapse of the GLBSE mining bond bubble (watch the difficulty!) then we will see what happens.

Transaction volume is low right now, particularly for zero-fee transactions and people are happy to donate time (especially since it's in the default client) to help get bitcoin established. If volumes start having a significant effect expect to see transaction fees rise if you want to see the transaction proceed in a timely manner.

Did you pay attention to the bold part? FYI we are in the midst of it..

[Richy_T]

What is needed is a mechanism for miners to announce their demands in their mined blocks, which has to work across pools. It's fairly straight forward to implement but it won't be done because of above issues.

Lets wait for the collapse of the GLBSE mining bond bubble (watch the difficulty!) then we will see what happens.

Transaction volume is low right now, particularly for zero-fee transactions and people are happy to donate time (especially since it's in the default client) to help get bitcoin established. If volumes start having a significant effect expect to see transaction fees rise if you want to see the transaction proceed in a timely manner.

Did you pay attention to the bold part? FYI we are in the midst of it..

I guess I didn't/don't understand the link (which is not to say that it isn't a real thing)

[greyhawk]

GLBSE is dead, finished, fini, it has issued it's last stock. It was released of it's earthenly bonds. In fact, it is an ex-change.

[ElectricMucus]

What is needed is a mechanism for miners to announce their demands in their mined blocks, which has to work across pools. It's fairly straight forward to implement but it won't be done because of above issues.

Lets wait for the collapse of the GLBSE mining bond bubble (watch the difficulty!) then we will see what happens.

Transaction volume is low right now, particularly for zero-fee transactions and people are happy to donate time (especially since it's in the default client) to help get bitcoin established. If volumes start having a significant effect expect to see transaction fees rise if you want to see the transaction proceed in a timely manner.

Did you pay attention to the bold part? FYI we are in the midst of it..

I guess I didn't/don't understand the link (which is not to say that it isn't a real thing)

In short terms: Ponzi scheme subsidized miners do not care about their profitability, they will include every transaction and do not even care about rising difficulty... It's all about rising Megahash.
Next difficulty adjustment might be down, however there are still pyramining and several independent schemes related to mining, once they push the regular miners out of business the real fun begins...

[justusranvier]

GLBSE is dead, finished, fini, it has issued it's last stock. It was released of it's earthenly bonds. In fact, it is an ex-change.

It's pining for the fjords.

[casascius]

I do believe that paper wallets are a viable solution that is totally underrepresented in the materials one's likely to find in a cursory web search for bitcoin.

The generator at BitAddress.org should be available on Bitcoin.org.

The community of people able to use Bitcoin would be much bigger if they could easily print their own wallet, buy bitcoins somewhere to fund it, and type their private key directly into the merchant of their choice, no differently than if they were buying and redeeming an iTunes gift card.  That "type it into a merchant" step would come much more easily if bitcoind offered support for "sweeping" private keys, which is why I proposed it over a year ago.  A merchant would simply put a web front-end on the function, sweep funds to an address he controls, and then treat swept payments the same as an incoming payment from elsewhere on the internet.

I run into people all the time who just wanted to own some coins, downloaded the client, and gave up because they bit off more than they could chew and because to them, a day long block chain download sounded nothing like "the future of money".  If they could have printed themselves a wallet in 30 seconds, then handing someone 100 bucks for some play coins would have been far more pleasant.

[Richy_T]

I do believe that paper wallets are a viable solution that is totally underrepresented in the materials one's likely to find in a cursory web search for bitcoin.

The generator at BitAddress.org should be available on Bitcoin.org.

The community of people able to use Bitcoin would be much bigger if they could easily print their own wallet, buy bitcoins somewhere to fund it, and type their private key directly into the merchant of their choice, no differently than if they were buying and redeeming an iTunes gift card.  That "type it into a merchant" step would come much more easily if bitcoind offered support for "sweeping" private keys, which is why I proposed it over a year ago.  A merchant would simply put a web front-end on the function, sweep funds to an address he controls, and then treat swept payments the same as an incoming payment from elsewhere on the internet.

I run into people all the time who just wanted to own some coins, downloaded the client, and gave up because they bit off more than they could chew and because to them, a day long block chain download sounded nothing like "the future of money".  If they could have printed themselves a wallet in 30 seconds, then handing someone 100 bucks for some play coins would have been far more pleasant.

Interesting. I'd say start an initiative to get something like this going. It does nothing that would interfere with what's happening on the mainline stuff.

[FLHippy]

I do believe that paper wallets are a viable solution that is totally underrepresented in the materials one's likely to find in a cursory web search for bitcoin.

Interesting. I'd say start an initiative to get something like this going.

Did he really just say this to Casascius?

[MatthewLM]

I do believe that paper wallets are a viable solution that is totally underrepresented in the materials one's likely to find in a cursory web search for bitcoin.

The generator at BitAddress.org should be available on Bitcoin.org.

The community of people able to use Bitcoin would be much bigger if they could easily print their own wallet, buy bitcoins somewhere to fund it, and type their private key directly into the merchant of their choice, no differently than if they were buying and redeeming an iTunes gift card.  That "type it into a merchant" step would come much more easily if bitcoind offered support for "sweeping" private keys, which is why I proposed it over a year ago.  A merchant would simply put a web front-end on the function, sweep funds to an address he controls, and then treat swept payments the same as an incoming payment from elsewhere on the internet.

I run into people all the time who just wanted to own some coins, downloaded the client, and gave up because they bit off more than they could chew and because to them, a day long block chain download sounded nothing like "the future of money".  If they could have printed themselves a wallet in 30 seconds, then handing someone 100 bucks for some play coins would have been far more pleasant.

This seems to make things more complicated, not less. Maybe I haven't got a clue.

[casascius]

This seems to make things more complicated, not less. Maybe I haven't got a clue.

If everywhere you wanted to shop had a place to enter a private key, or to scan one with your webcam like BlockChain.info has, that worked exactly the same as the "Redeem iTunes Gift Card" button in iTunes, then it would be much less complicated.  Especially if the pawn shop or check cashing place down the street sold bitcoins and delivered them to you by telling you to bring in a paper wallet you printed yourself.