Not Bitcoin XT

[Legov]

I think the best way to protect the status quo until real technical consensus is formed about the blocksize is to run more Bitcoin Core "/Satoshi:0.11.0/ (70002)" Full Nodes. So if you can afford the cost install and run Bitcoin Core 0.11.0. ASAP.

The 75% vote does not depend on the number of full nodes with the right version but on the number of new blocks with the right version.
Running more Bitcoin Core "/Satoshi:0.11.0/ (70002)" is not relevant.
Hashing on this nodes is important!

[unamis76]

This kind of spoofing will just drive away further Bitcoiners. If a fork is prematurely deployed, it will be even bigger chaos than it already is. More harm done with these fake nodes.

Core and XT exist. Why run something else anyways? More code to audit unnecessarily. Time wasted.

[Carlton Banks]

This kind of spoofing will just drive away further Bitcoiners. If a fork is prematurely deployed, it will be even bigger chaos than it already is. More harm done with these fake nodes.

I think that's the point though. Why risk switching to XT and the potential chaos, even if you support it or it's features?

This is kind of a crucial point that's not been made enough: if Mike and Gavin tried to start a real alt coin, not one that relies on Bitcoin's infrastructure, they would fall flat on their faces (and they've not done much better than that otherwise). There is little to no demand for alts, people want bitcoin.

[tmltd]

I think the best way to protect the status quo until real technical consensus is formed about the blocksize is to run more Bitcoin Core "/Satoshi:0.11.0/ (70002)" Full Nodes. So if you can afford the cost install and run Bitcoin Core 0.11.0. ASAP.

The 75% vote does not depend on the number of full nodes with the right version but on the number of new blocks with the right version.
Running more Bitcoin Core "/Satoshi:0.11.0/ (70002)" is not relevant.
Hashing on this nodes is important!

You are right. I misunderstood the 75% vote.
From BitcoinXT

By mining with Bitcoin XT you will produce blocks with a new version number. This indicates to the rest of the network that you support larger blocks. When 75% of the blocks are new-version blocks, a decision has been reached to start building larger blocks that will be rejected by Bitcoin Core nodes.

So only the miners and their hash power will decide and NOT the mass bitcoin users that support the ecosystem.

[Carlton Banks]

So only the miners and their hash power will decide and NOT the mass bitcoin users that support the ecosystem.

Sort of. If all miners switch to XT, but all users stay with Core, then there are no Core miners to process transactions, and no XT transactions for miners to process. Sure they can carry on mining for the block reward, but something tells me the price will tank.

So, the miners determine the triggering of the fork, but they're relying on some critical number of users to follow them, otherwise any further mining is unprofitable to them.

[unamis76]

This kind of spoofing will just drive away further Bitcoiners. If a fork is prematurely deployed, it will be even bigger chaos than it already is. More harm done with these fake nodes.

I think that's the point though. Why risk switching to XT and the potential chaos, even if you support it or it's features?

This is kind of a crucial point that's not been made enough: if Mike and Gavin tried to start a real alt coin, not one that relies on Bitcoin's infrastructure, they would fall flat on their faces (and they've not done much better than that otherwise). There is little to no demand for alts, people want bitcoin.

If chaos is the point, then another thing to consider when using this.

If one believes in XT, he should switch to XT, if one believes in Core he should stay with core.

[knight22]

I don't care about the outcome of BitcoinXT BUT

Those who fear BitcoinXT and try to stop organic consensus does not understand decentralization nor consensus based on economic incentive so one could argue they don't understand bitcoin at all.

Period.

[iCEBREAKER]

This kind of spoofing will just drive away further Bitcoiners. If a fork is prematurely deployed, it will be even bigger chaos than it already is. More harm done with these fake nodes.

I think that's the point though. Why risk switching to XT and the potential chaos, even if you support it or it's features?

This is kind of a crucial point that's not been made enough: if Mike and Gavin tried to start a real alt coin, not one that relies on Bitcoin's infrastructure, they would fall flat on their faces (and they've not done much better than that otherwise). There is little to no demand for alts, people want bitcoin.

If any brave soul was previously considering being the first to defect from Bitcoin's economic majority to begin the process of forming an alternative XT economic majority, they now have to account for the even greater risks due to the uncertainty introduced by spoofed version stamps and NotXT sybil nodes.

No business could possibly justify such a risky move, for no potential gain other than the good feeling of winning an obscure internet nerd fight.

Now its up to some very courageous individuals to jump-start XT's economy, by doing such things as selling me their bullion and coins in exchange for XTcoins.

I was sure smoothie would be XT's one crazy dancer guy who starts a party but he chickened out.  Apparently his support, being limited to running an XT node as a 'fuck you' to Team Core, is a mile wide and an inch deep.   

[knight22]

This kind of spoofing will just drive away further Bitcoiners. If a fork is prematurely deployed, it will be even bigger chaos than it already is. More harm done with these fake nodes.

I think that's the point though. Why risk switching to XT and the potential chaos, even if you support it or it's features?

This is kind of a crucial point that's not been made enough: if Mike and Gavin tried to start a real alt coin, not one that relies on Bitcoin's infrastructure, they would fall flat on their faces (and they've not done much better than that otherwise). There is little to no demand for alts, people want bitcoin.

If any brave soul was previously considering being the first to defect from Bitcoin's economic majority to begin the process of forming an alternative XT economic majority, they now have to account for the even greater risks due to the uncertainty introduced by spoofed version stamps and NotXT sybil nodes.

No business could possibly justify such a risky move, for no potential gain other than the good feeling of winning an obscure internet nerd fight.

Now its up to some very courageous individuals to jump-start XT's economy, by doing such things as selling me their bullion and coins in exchange for XTcoins.

I was sure smoothie would be XT's one crazy dancer guy who starts a party but he chickened out.  Apparently his support, being limited to running an XT node as a 'fuck you' to Team Core, is a mile wide and an inch deep.  

You are totally missing the point of bitcoinXT. The only thing that will lead to a majority of honest node is a bloat in the blockchain itself where businesses won't be able to process the transactions they need due to a fail of bitcoin core to deliver proper scaling on time. BitcoinXT is just a fall back plan in case of a bitcoin core failure and will happen naturally if there is a need in the market. If bitcoin core delivers then nothing will happen. I don't see the point of so much fear mongering over hard forking. THERE IS AN ECONOMIC INCENTIVE TO REACH CONSENSUS NO MATTER THE OUTCOME. Releasing the code in the wild might not be pleasing you but it relieved the stress of many people about their concerns over a bitcoin core failure. If that concern reaches consensus then be it!

[iCEBREAKER]

THERE IS AN ECONOMIC INCENTIVE TO REACH CONSENSUS NO MATTER THE OUTCOME.

BITCOIN ALREADY HAS A MULTI-YEAR, MULTI-BILLION $$$$$ CONSENSUS, AND ANYONE "BRAVE" AND "COURAGEOUS" ENOUGH TO BE THE FIRST TO DEFECT FROM IT IS GOING TO HAVE A BAD TIME.  ESPECIALLY NOW, WITH NOTXT AND PSEUDONODE ADDING TO THE FUN!

UNTIL SOMEONE IS WILLING TO SELL THEIR BULLION FOR MY XTCOINS, AN ALTERNATIVE XT ECONOMIC MAJORITY IS PURELY HYPOTHETICAL AND REMAINS BOUND TO THE REALM OF PURE SPECULATION.

/ZOMG ALLCAPS!!1!   

[knight22]

THERE IS AN ECONOMIC INCENTIVE TO REACH CONSENSUS NO MATTER THE OUTCOME.

BITCOIN ALREADY HAS A MULTI-YEAR, MULTI-BILLION $$$$$ CONSENSUS, AND ANYONE "BRAVE" AND "COURAGEOUS" ENOUGH TO BE THE FIRST TO DEFECT FROM IT IS GOING TO HAVE A BAD TIME.  ESPECIALLY NOW, WITH NOTXT AND PSEUDONODE ADDING TO THE FUN!

UNTIL SOMEONE IS WILLING TO SELL THEIR BULLION FOR MY XTCOINS, AN ALTERNATIVE XT ECONOMIC MAJORITY IS PURELY HYPOTHETICAL AND REMAINS BOUND TO THE REALM OF PURE SPECULATION.

/ZOMG ALLCAPS!!1!  

It is hypothetical until it is not. Your fear of bitcoinXT is irrational and even toxic. The day bitcoin transactions becomes so bloated that big companies like Coinbase, Circle, Xapo and all and even decentralized services like OpenBazaar have no choices to use bitcoinXT to process their transactions, big mining pools will follow and a consensus will emerge  simply because there is an incentive. This is hypothetical in a sense that it will only happen if bitcoin core doesn't offer scaling on time. NotbitcoinXT is not only useless but even more dangerous than XT itself as it gives false market indicators that could lead to an unnecessary forking or bad forking timing. This war mongering attitude is the only dangerous and childish behavior in this debate.

[mmortal03]

This is gentlemen:



 

It's not using log scale, therefore it is invalid.

[iCEBREAKER]

NotbitcoinXT is not only useless but even more dangerous than XT itself as it gives false market indicators that could lead to an unnecessary forking or bad forking timing. This war mongering attitude is the only dangerous and childish behavior in this debate.

Nobody cares about your lulzy, incomplete attempt to rehash of the block size debate, so I deleted it.

The entire point of NotXT is to give "false market indicators that could lead to an unnecessary forking or bad forking timing."

That's why it exists.  That's why we love it.  How could you not understand that by now?

We are leading XT into an ambush, wherein it will be contained and exterminated.

Isn't that wonderful, and hilarious?   

[achow101]

NotbitcoinXT is not only useless but even more dangerous than XT itself as it gives false market indicators that could lead to an unnecessary forking or bad forking timing. This war mongering attitude is the only dangerous and childish behavior in this debate.

Nobody cares about your lulzy, incomplete attempt to rehash of the block size debate, so I deleted it.

The entire point of NotXT is to give "false market indicators that could lead to an unnecessary forking or bad forking timing."

That's why it exists.  That's why we love it.  How could you not understand that by now?

We are leading XT into an ambush, wherein it will be contained and exterminated.

Isn't that wonderful, and hilarious?   

I'm sorry, perhaps I'm a litttle slow, but I still don't understand how causing a premature fork is good for Bitcoin and maintains the status quo?

Wouldn't a fork create two blockchains with some people on one and others on the other. If exchanges and miners don't specify which blockchain they are on, then users get confused, new users are even more confused, and people stop using Bitcoin. People then stop using Bitcoin both because of the confusion, and the fact that two of them now exist completely discredits Bitcoin. So not only is XT discredited and abandoned, but so is Bitcoin. So please explain to me how a premature fork is actually good since it has long been established that FORKING WITHOUT CONSENSUS IS NOT A GOOD THING which is what this client is doing.

[Carlton Banks]

I'm sorry, perhaps I'm a litttle slow, but I still don't understand how causing a premature fork is good for Bitcoin and maintains the status quo?

Don't use the XT client then. That's the idea (hope that's got you up to speed)

[DooMAD]

NotBitcoinXT can be used to protect the status quo

Of everything you've ever said on this forum, your current signature is quite possibly the most honest you've even been about your views towards Bitcoin.  You genuinely believe Bitcoin is a means to provide enormous value to a small minority.  For you it's all about preserving the status quo.  It's not just that you don't care if Bitcoin becomes a niche plaything for a wealthy elite, in fact that's your actual goal here.  You're doing everything you can to try to undermine larger blocks, because you know that your endgame doesn't involve making Bitcoin scalable, it involves forcing everyone else off of "your" chain.

Bitcoin is not and will never be about preserving the status quo.  Keep dreaming if that's how you think this plays out in the long term. 

[Carlton Banks]

NotBitcoinXT can be used to protect the status quo

Of everything you've ever said on this forum, your current signature is quite possibly the most honest you've even been about your views towards Bitcoin.  You genuinely believe Bitcoin is a means to provide enormous value to a small minority.  For you it's all about preserving the status quo.  It's not just that you don't care if Bitcoin becomes a niche plaything for a wealthy elite, in fact that's your actual goal here.  You're doing everything you can to try to undermine larger blocks, because you know that your endgame doesn't involve making Bitcoin scalable, it involves forcing everyone else off of "your" chain.

Bitcoin is not and will never be about preserving the status quo.  Keep dreaming if that's how you think this plays out in the long term. 

I think most on this sub-forum are aware that scaling up the current design isn't the only way to allow for mainstream sized transaction rates.

[knight22]

NotBitcoinXT can be used to protect the status quo

Of everything you've ever said on this forum, your current signature is quite possibly the most honest you've even been about your views towards Bitcoin.  You genuinely believe Bitcoin is a means to provide enormous value to a small minority.  For you it's all about preserving the status quo.  It's not just that you don't care if Bitcoin becomes a niche plaything for a wealthy elite, in fact that's your actual goal here.  You're doing everything you can to try to undermine larger blocks, because you know that your endgame doesn't involve making Bitcoin scalable, it involves forcing everyone else off of "your" chain.

Bitcoin is not and will never be about preserving the status quo.  Keep dreaming if that's how you think this plays out in the long term. 

I think most on this sub-forum are aware that scaling up the current design isn't the only way to allow for mainstream sized transaction rates.

Not the only way indeed but currently the only way. It's kind of the point.

[arnuschky]

Completely independent from whether or not we need to increase block sizes,
this fork is about the most destructive thing in the community that I've seen to date.

At the moment, only the developers get to decide on what's merged into Bitcoin Core, and what isn't.
Additionally to that, theymos took away the possibility of open discussion on this forum and reddit.
In the end, bitcoin consensus is the only method of voting left to the community.

Whichever fork wins the vote, so be it, it got consensus. Removing this possibility
from the community seems really counter-productive.

By using this fork, you're not voting for one of option or the other. Instead, you're
the guy gunning down people standing in line in front of the ballot.

[Seccour]

NotBitcoinXT can be used to protect the status quo

Of everything you've ever said on this forum, your current signature is quite possibly the most honest you've even been about your views towards Bitcoin.  You genuinely believe Bitcoin is a means to provide enormous value to a small minority.  For you it's all about preserving the status quo.  It's not just that you don't care if Bitcoin becomes a niche plaything for a wealthy elite, in fact that's your actual goal here.  You're doing everything you can to try to undermine larger blocks, because you know that your endgame doesn't involve making Bitcoin scalable, it involves forcing everyone else off of "your" chain.

Bitcoin is not and will never be about preserving the status quo.  Keep dreaming if that's how you think this plays out in the long term. 

I think most on this sub-forum are aware that scaling up the current design isn't the only way to allow for mainstream sized transaction rates.

Not the only way indeed but currently the only way. It's kind of the point.

Yes it's currently the only way. And protect the status quo is just useless. We need to push the block size higher, but BIP 101 isn't the only way to do it... BIP 102 & BIP 103 are some other way to do it but people here prefer to fight against XT than finding solution until we got some working other solution like lightning network [...]