...

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

No, it's political because Gavin went off on his own and tried to fork bitcoin when core devs didn't take to his ideas, polarizing the community. And because certain parties sought to force the debate by spamming the blockchain; investors, speculators and the media are drawing a connection between this XT drama and the return to a bear market. It's political because Gavin's approach is "my way or the highway" when many do not support his ideas.

Hence you making hundreds of posts, doing very little but making baseless ad hominems and insulting people left and right, while not showing any evidence whatsoever that you "understand the topic better than" anyone. You simply keep repeating that you do. I didn't take this "FUD" without a grain of salt, and I was merely questioning the way it was carried out, and whether some of the changes were necessary given the contentious nature of this debate. Many of the points I was raising -- which you have not addressed -- do not require a technical understanding, so that point is moot anyway. And don't get it twisted; I wasn't calling anyone in here a shill but you.

It shouldn't be political, but it clearly is. But what it should never be is personal. Its software - we will work it out.

[1715544708]

1715544708

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

I am amased of the army of XT shill trolls in this thread trying to deny the obvious

Nobody is denying anything. Its been explained. If you cant grasp what it does and how it works then nobody is forcing you to do anything.

Do you need to call someone a shill troll for merely pointing that out? Or is there really only one side to this debate 

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

It explicitly says it disconnects addresses with low to negative priority.

This would be the first time in history that anyone was blacklisted from using Bitcoin if XT forks, it's a big deal and against the fundamental reasons Bitcoin is used.

Thanks for this...it is a definite eye-opener!

It sure was. >How one person can so misinterpret a few lines of code so badly is beyond most. Especially when he freely admits he doesn't understand the code and how tor peers work. Yet when propeller heads from both sides explain it, he persists.

A few lines?! There's tens of thousands of lines of code for this.

Do you how cvs diff works?

[meono]

The code isn't hard to find at all and clearly exist, so please stop saying that it doesn't.

Code:

#ifndef BITCOIN_CIPGROUPS_H
#define BITCOIN_CIPGROUPS_H

#include "netbase.h"

class CScheduler;

// A group of logically related IP addresses. Useful for banning or deprioritising
// sources of abusive traffic/DoS attacks.
struct CIPGroupData {
    std::string name;
    // A priority score indicates how important this group of IP addresses is to this node.
    // Importance determines which group wins when the node is out of resources. Any IP
    // that is not in a group gets a default priority of zero. Therefore, groups with a priority
    // of less than zero will be ignored or disconnected in order to make room for ungrouped
    // IPs, and groups with a higher priority will be serviced before ungrouped IPs.
    int priority;

    CIPGroupData() : priority(0) {}
};

Source: https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/commit/73c9efe74c5cc8faea9c2b2c785a2f5b68aa4c23
File: src/ipgroups.h
Lines: 5 to 24.

It can be found in the master and the latest release of Bitcoin XT:
https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/blob/master/src/ipgroups.h
https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/blob/0.11A/src/ipgroups.h

What? Are you talking about this ?

It would be such a damning move to insert such tracking code without telling anyone, that I don't think they'd do it. It's not like every bitcoiner is a total noob especially the hackers and thieves.

And I'm not even totally against IP blocking, maybe, finally some recourse for victims of theft, but it does go against one of the fundamental principals of BTC so it would need to get a huge concensus first

What tracking? Please let me know... If you are talking about leaking IP when running proxy and TOR that was in proposed QT(core) code but not in XT.

And there is no IP blocking. To this moment none pointed to the code that do that.

Also I'm interested how IP blocking will help victims of theft...

Why don't you read the code instead of post after post of misinformation? It clearly bans by IP, that isn't even in question.

Yes I did and there is no banning. But you can't point to something that is not there so I can't help you. But you can say where the code is doing that and I will explain to you why you are wrong...

// A group of logically related IP addresses. Useful for banning or deprioritising
// sources of abusive traffic/DoS attacks.
struct CIPGroupData {
    std::string name;
    // A priority score indicates how important this group of IP addresses is to this node.
    // Importance determines which group wins when the node is out of resources. Any IP
    // that is not in a group gets a default priority of zero. Therefore, groups with a priority
    // of less than zero will be ignored or disconnected in order to make room for ungrouped
    // IPs, and groups with a higher priority will be serviced before ungrouped IPs.
    int priority;

//! Whether this peer should be disconnected and banned (unless whitelisted).
    bool fShouldBan;

That is just one segment describing that section of code, there are literally thousands of lines of code that deal with banning.
You are a liar.

Look closely, do you see there is anything missing in yours?

[Mitchell]

Look closely, do you see there is anything missing in yours?

Thank you, I did miss that part yeah. Here it is:

Code:

    //! Whether this peer should be disconnected and banned (unless whitelisted).
    bool fShouldBan;

Source: https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/blob/master/src/main.cpp
Lines: 223 and 224

Just because it isn't in the linked commit, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It exists in the master branch and the latest release.

[valiz]

I am amased of the army of XT shill trolls in this thread trying to deny the obvious

Nobody is denying anything. Its been explained. If you cant grasp what it does and how it works then nobody is forcing you to do anything.

Do you need to call someone a shill troll for merely pointing that out? Or is there really only one side to this debate 

Probably someone is shouting in the phone:
"Bring in more trolls! Now! They found out the candy!"

The following is so darn hard to understand, I'm so confused!  

IMO, the problem is here:



Having every single bitcoin XT client ping torproject.org (which is 100% definitely logging our IPs) doesn't sit right with me, considering the project is openly funded by the DOD/govt.

It even gives a nice "Bitcoin XT" useragent to identify us properly  




To be fair, this is normal application behavior by regular standards, but it's not in Bitcoin core.



Code referenced:

https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/blob/2b918beb7e822fdc4450165e2a0162a75b5160ff/contrib/torips/gen-tor-ips.py

https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/blob/master/src/ipgroups.cpp#L172

[dmwardjr]

Andreas Antonopoulous on blockchain size:

That conversation begins at the 30 minute and 37 second mark:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jqpKEHYGE0

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

I am amased of the army of XT shill trolls in this thread trying to deny the obvious

Nobody is denying anything. Its been explained. If you cant grasp what it does and how it works then nobody is forcing you to do anything.

Do you need to call someone a shill troll for merely pointing that out? Or is there really only one side to this debate  

Probably someone is shouting in the phone:
"Bring in more trolls! Now! They found out the candy!"

The following is so darn hard to understand, I'm so confused!  

IMO, the problem is here:



Having every single bitcoin XT client ping torproject.org (which is 100% definitely logging our IPs) doesn't sit right with me, considering the project is openly funded by the DOD/govt.







Code referenced:

https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/blob/2b918beb7e822fdc4450165e2a0162a75b5160ff/contrib/torips/gen-tor-ips.py

https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/blob/master/src/ipgroups.cpp#L172

You do know that is a python script, run at compile time to dynamically generate the list from tor? Unless you are recompiling bitcoin binaries ( on your live server!!) every time you start your node, then this is not an issue. If tor does indeed log ip addresses ( which makes the whole thing pointless anyway) then they are only logging the address of the machine that compiled the code. In most (intelligent) cases that will not be the one running the node. In most cases you will be downloading binaries.

Do I get my candy now?

[valiz]

You do know that is a python script, run at compile time to dynamically generate the list from tor? Unless you are recompiling bitcoin binaries ( on your live server!!) every time you start your node, then this is not an issue. If tor does indeed log ip addresses ( which makes the whole thing pointless anyway) then they are only logging the address of the machine that compiled the code. In most (intelligent) cases that will not be the one running the node. In most cases you will be downloading binaries.

Do I get my candy now?

Yes yes, you get candy!

Meanwhile a new commit will come up to "improve anti-ddos" which will move that stuff directly in the bitcoin binary. Gavin would ACK Mike's pull request and it's done!

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

You do know that is a python script, run at compile time to dynamically generate the list from tor? Unless you are recompiling bitcoin binaries ( on your live server!!) every time you start your node, then this is not an issue. If tor does indeed log ip addresses ( which makes the whole thing pointless anyway) then they are only logging the address of the machine that compiled the code. In most (intelligent) cases that will not be the one running the node. In most cases you will be downloading binaries.

Do I get my candy now?

Yes yes, you get candy!

Meanwhile a new commit will come up to "improve anti-ddos" which will move that stuff directly in the bitcoin binary. Gavin would ACK Mike's pull request and it's done!

Thanks!  

It would be a pointless way to do it - if it was that urgent to update exit nodes then you would just use a relay service. That way 'they' (as in gubmint) could only track the relay.

[StarenseN]

Needless to say, it's very concerning.

[ChetnotAtkins]

OK this really looks serious. Gavin and Mike are starting the first real attack against Bitcoin and all that it stands for.

Stop XT!

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

OK this really looks serious. Gavin and Mike are starting the first real attack against Bitcoin and all that it stands for.

Stop XT!

Did you really write this?

How are developers responding to this severe limitation of Bitcoin's usage. There are currently 72000 (!) unconfirmed transactions but it seems they don't really want to acknowledge it.

Perhaps set a limit of tx/s to discourage spamming the mempool and block malicious nodes.

You complete and utter tool.

[BTCat]

If someone could control IP addresses then he could potentially destroy use of the network by simply banning every IP that has used it in history.
BitcoinXT is more suited for North Korea.

[RaXmOuSe]

so

We have two chains

If one gains 75% the system will change? Will that be easy done without affecting the network in a negative way?

Did bitcoin "run out of capacity due to someone ddos attacking the network"? https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/bitcoin-xt/Iov4vcCOg9M/qOTSP07wQEUJ

Code:

{
    "version" : 100200,
    "protocolversion" : 70002,
    "blocks" : 370651,
    "timeoffset" : -1,
    "connections" : 124,
    "proxy" : "",
    "difficulty" : 52699842409.34700775,
    "testnet" : false,
    "paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
    "relayfee" : 0.00001000,
    "errors" : ""
}

So ... if I was running XT at the moment, I would effectively have a blacklist of IPs in there each time someone connects ... anyone in that blacklist of IP addresses being dropped each time someone not in that list connects.
Yes I do actually randomly DROP connections, with my firewall, that have a low "blocks=" when they connect so that bitcoind is getting connections all the time and staying at 124/125
... so it's certainly not a case of ONLY happening with a DDOS

But irrelevant of that, it's a blacklist.
Distributing software with an IP blacklist in it is what XT is doing.

Feel free to argue semantics, but it's a blacklist of IP addresses.

I would like to have a second thought about this from you

[Cryptology]

Is making the headlines now.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/115153/bitcoin-xt-fork-can-blacklist-tor-exits-may-reveal-users-ip-addresses

[krile]

Just my two cents,

I support the block size limit increase and was already on the way to upgrade my nodes to XT, I was assuming that the block size limit was the only change.

At this moment I really don't care if its prioritization or banning in the code, the main reason I will not upgrade to XT is the fact that other changes were implemented that were not advertised - changes that obviously deserve their own separate vote.

The block size limit should be the only thing we should be talking (fighting) about right now, and the XT devs made a huge mistake by implementing this kind of stuff, they just made everything more complicated. This could easily wait for another version, and from my knowledge of the network, DDOS is not such a big problem for the network at the moment as is this block size limit controversy.

I think we need an upgrade that includes only the block size limit change, everything else should be left for other upgrades since the block size is important enough by itself. So that people have only one thing to vote for.

Hope the core team will do a cleaner alternative for the block size limit increase. XT is way too tainted in my eyes now.

[Amph]

OK this really looks serious. Gavin and Mike are starting the first real attack against Bitcoin and all that it stands for.

Stop XT!

actually this could be a good test to see how strong bitcoin is, if we can sustain this giant problem caused by two influent guy, then we are done, bitcoin will prove that can defeat anything even internal disputes

all those problems will make bitcoin stronger

[neutraLTC]

Slush Pool mines the second BIP101 (BitcoinXT) Block. Block 370661

https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/blocks/1

[ChetnotAtkins]

http://cointelegraph.com/news/115153/bitcoin-xt-fork-can-blacklist-tor-exits-may-reveal-users-ip-addresses

Lets see how meono and co try their best to hide facts now


Stop XT!