Bitcoin Forum
September 23, 2017, 07:20:35 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 »
  Print  
Author Topic: ...  (Read 58862 times)
sAt0sHiFanClub
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490


Warning: Confrmed Gavinista


View Profile WWW
August 19, 2015, 11:39:52 AM
 #81

And only active in certain situations. Lips sealed


Yes, in situations where the person running the node configures it that way.

We must make money worse as a commodity if we wish to make it better as a medium of exchange
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1506151235
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506151235

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506151235
Reply with quote  #2

1506151235
Report to moderator
1506151235
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506151235

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506151235
Reply with quote  #2

1506151235
Report to moderator
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2212


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 01:06:25 PM
 #82

i cant beleive it, if this is true XT loose all my respect, freedom and privacy and our flag and they destroy it.

i will wait for a reply from the XT core devs and watch this thread carefully, but if finally we discover that this is true.... well maybe this is a good news so we can concentrate our efforts on what is needed, THE ORIGINAL BITCOIN.

Whats your question?  The thread above was based on a flawedpremise to start with, but the substantive issue of IP Prioritization has been answered - its configurable by those running a node to be either on or disabled.

Bitcoin core still exists, so no need for extra concentration there. This is simply a poll to let nodes/miners make a choice as to whether they want to increase limits now or wait for consensus ( that doesnt look like happening)

If bitcoinxt achieves majority, it will be the one everyone continues with. If it fails to achieve the numbers required, it will become obsolete.

Are you ignoring stuff there for a reason?

If the XT altcoin became a defacto (which it wont) then people would be accepting a whole list of changes - not just the time controlled block size increases.

... and I don't see any direct mention of IP blacklists on the XT fud web page.

Although fungibility may mean nothing to you, it's a pretty important factor to me as I have brought up on the forum a few times over the years.

blacklists in there mean I wont support it

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
kelsey
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1582


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 01:14:10 PM
 #83

i cant beleive it, if this is true XT loose all my respect, freedom and privacy and our flag and they destroy it.

i will wait for a reply from the XT core devs and watch this thread carefully, but if finally we discover that this is true.... well maybe this is a good news so we can concentrate our efforts on what is needed, THE ORIGINAL BITCOIN.

Whats your question?  The thread above was based on a flawedpremise to start with, but the substantive issue of IP Prioritization has been answered - its configurable by those running a node to be either on or disabled.

Bitcoin core still exists, so no need for extra concentration there. This is simply a poll to let nodes/miners make a choice as to whether they want to increase limits now or wait for consensus ( that doesnt look like happening)

If bitcoinxt achieves majority, it will be the one everyone continues with. If it fails to achieve the numbers required, it will become obsolete.

Are you ignoring stuff there for a reason?

If the XT altcoin became a defacto (which it wont) then people would be accepting a whole list of changes - not just the time controlled block size increases.

... and I don't see any direct mention of IP blacklists on the XT fud web page.

Although fungibility may mean nothing to you, it's a pretty important factor to me as I have brought up on the forum a few times over the years.

blacklists in there mean I wont support it

what about this; "The Bitcoin Core project has shown it cannot reform and so it must be abandoned." Mike Hearn

no one could honestly with even half a brain not see that none of this is actually about blocksize, thats the distraction.
turvarya
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 01:31:58 PM
 #84

i cant beleive it, if this is true XT loose all my respect, freedom and privacy and our flag and they destroy it.

i will wait for a reply from the XT core devs and watch this thread carefully, but if finally we discover that this is true.... well maybe this is a good news so we can concentrate our efforts on what is needed, THE ORIGINAL BITCOIN.

Whats your question?  The thread above was based on a flawedpremise to start with, but the substantive issue of IP Prioritization has been answered - its configurable by those running a node to be either on or disabled.

Bitcoin core still exists, so no need for extra concentration there. This is simply a poll to let nodes/miners make a choice as to whether they want to increase limits now or wait for consensus ( that doesnt look like happening)

If bitcoinxt achieves majority, it will be the one everyone continues with. If it fails to achieve the numbers required, it will become obsolete.

Are you ignoring stuff there for a reason?

If the XT altcoin became a defacto (which it wont) then people would be accepting a whole list of changes - not just the time controlled block size increases.

... and I don't see any direct mention of IP blacklists on the XT fud web page.

Although fungibility may mean nothing to you, it's a pretty important factor to me as I have brought up on the forum a few times over the years.

blacklists in there mean I wont support it
Are you blind?
Quote
Anti-DoS attack improvements, by Mike Hearn. It's currently possible to jam a Bitcoin node by connecting to it repeatedly via different IP addresses, as there is a fixed limit on how many connections a node will accept. Once full, no other peers or wallets can connect to it any more and serving capacity for new nodes and P2P wallets is reduced. If the attack is repeated against every node, the entire network could become jammed.
This patch set introduces code that runs when a node is full and otherwise could not accept new connections. It labels and prioritises connections according to lists of IP ranges: if a high priority IP address connects and the node is full, it will disconnect a lower priority connection to make room. Currently Tor exits are labelled as being lower priority than regular IP addresses, as jamming attacks via Tor have been observed, and most users/merchants don't use it. In normal operation this new code will never run. If someone performs a DoS attack via Tor, then legitimate Tor users will get the existing behaviour of being unable to connect, but mobile and home users will still be able to use the network without disruption.
https://bitcoinxt.software/patches.html

Where exactly have you looked?

https://forum.bitcoin.com/
New censorship-free forum by Roger Ver. Try it out.
sAt0sHiFanClub
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490


Warning: Confrmed Gavinista


View Profile WWW
August 19, 2015, 01:52:33 PM
 #85

i cant beleive it, if this is true XT loose all my respect, freedom and privacy and our flag and they destroy it.

i will wait for a reply from the XT core devs and watch this thread carefully, but if finally we discover that this is true.... well maybe this is a good news so we can concentrate our efforts on what is needed, THE ORIGINAL BITCOIN.

Whats your question?  The thread above was based on a flawedpremise to start with, but the substantive issue of IP Prioritization has been answered - its configurable by those running a node to be either on or disabled.

Bitcoin core still exists, so no need for extra concentration there. This is simply a poll to let nodes/miners make a choice as to whether they want to increase limits now or wait for consensus ( that doesnt look like happening)

If bitcoinxt achieves majority, it will be the one everyone continues with. If it fails to achieve the numbers required, it will become obsolete.

Are you ignoring stuff there for a reason?

If the XT altcoin became a defacto (which it wont) then people would be accepting a whole list of changes - not just the time controlled block size increases.

... and I don't see any direct mention of IP blacklists on the XT fud web page.

Although fungibility may mean nothing to you, it's a pretty important factor to me as I have brought up on the forum a few times over the years.

blacklists in there mean I wont support it

And by the power of bitcoin, you have been given that choice. By continuing with core, you can demonstrate this.

So really, there is no issue unless people want to be divisive for a different agenda.

We must make money worse as a commodity if we wish to make it better as a medium of exchange
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2212


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 01:53:56 PM
 #86

I simply looked on the main page.

https://bitcoinxt.software/

I'd expect blacklists and fungibility changes to be listed there, but instead I see

"Decision making is quick and clear."
Followed by a paragraph about as vague as you could get.

Yeah I guess it's bad press to mention their blacklists on the front page Tongue

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2212


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 01:56:21 PM
 #87

i cant beleive it, if this is true XT loose all my respect, freedom and privacy and our flag and they destroy it.

i will wait for a reply from the XT core devs and watch this thread carefully, but if finally we discover that this is true.... well maybe this is a good news so we can concentrate our efforts on what is needed, THE ORIGINAL BITCOIN.

Whats your question?  The thread above was based on a flawedpremise to start with, but the substantive issue of IP Prioritization has been answered - its configurable by those running a node to be either on or disabled.

Bitcoin core still exists, so no need for extra concentration there. This is simply a poll to let nodes/miners make a choice as to whether they want to increase limits now or wait for consensus ( that doesnt look like happening)

If bitcoinxt achieves majority, it will be the one everyone continues with. If it fails to achieve the numbers required, it will become obsolete.

Are you ignoring stuff there for a reason?

If the XT altcoin became a defacto (which it wont) then people would be accepting a whole list of changes - not just the time controlled block size increases.

... and I don't see any direct mention of IP blacklists on the XT fud web page.

Although fungibility may mean nothing to you, it's a pretty important factor to me as I have brought up on the forum a few times over the years.

blacklists in there mean I wont support it

And by the power of bitcoin, you have been given that choice. By continuing with core, you can demonstrate this.

So really, there is no issue unless people want to be divisive for a different agenda.
Yes indeed that's what I mean - what is your agenda for ignoring all the other changes in your statement?
It isn't just block size as you stated.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
meono
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 01:58:24 PM
 #88

i cant beleive it, if this is true XT loose all my respect, freedom and privacy and our flag and they destroy it.

i will wait for a reply from the XT core devs and watch this thread carefully, but if finally we discover that this is true.... well maybe this is a good news so we can concentrate our efforts on what is needed, THE ORIGINAL BITCOIN.

Whats your question?  The thread above was based on a flawedpremise to start with, but the substantive issue of IP Prioritization has been answered - its configurable by those running a node to be either on or disabled.

Bitcoin core still exists, so no need for extra concentration there. This is simply a poll to let nodes/miners make a choice as to whether they want to increase limits now or wait for consensus ( that doesnt look like happening)

If bitcoinxt achieves majority, it will be the one everyone continues with. If it fails to achieve the numbers required, it will become obsolete.

Are you ignoring stuff there for a reason?

If the XT altcoin became a defacto (which it wont) then people would be accepting a whole list of changes - not just the time controlled block size increases.

... and I don't see any direct mention of IP blacklists on the XT fud web page.

Although fungibility may mean nothing to you, it's a pretty important factor to me as I have brought up on the forum a few times over the years.

blacklists in there mean I wont support it

Really did you read it at all?

Especially the part : Anti DOS attack?
meono
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 02:00:33 PM
 #89

I simply looked on the main page.

https://bitcoinxt.software/

I'd expect blacklists and fungibility changes to be listed there, but instead I see

"Decision making is quick and clear."
Followed by a paragraph about as vague as you could get.

Yeah I guess it's bad press to mention their blacklists on the front page Tongue

WHAT is your AGENDA ignoring this:

Quote
Anti-DoS attack improvements, by Mike Hearn. It's currently possible to jam a Bitcoin node by connecting to it repeatedly via different IP addresses, as there is a fixed limit on how many connections a node will accept. Once full, no other peers or wallets can connect to it any more and serving capacity for new nodes and P2P wallets is reduced. If the attack is repeated against every node, the entire network could become jammed.
This patch set introduces code that runs when a node is full and otherwise could not accept new connections. It labels and prioritises connections according to lists of IP ranges: if a high priority IP address connects and the node is full, it will disconnect a lower priority connection to make room. Currently Tor exits are labelled as being lower priority than regular IP addresses, as jamming attacks via Tor have been observed, and most users/merchants don't use it. In normal operation this new code will never run. If someone performs a DoS attack via Tor, then legitimate Tor users will get the existing behaviour of being unable to connect, but mobile and home users will still be able to use the network without disruption.


Also stop with the FUDing about IP blacklist BS. You're a programmer i expect much better from you.
turvarya
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 02:00:54 PM
 #90

I simply looked on the main page.

https://bitcoinxt.software/

I'd expect blacklists and fungibility changes to be listed there, but instead I see

"Decision making is quick and clear."
Followed by a paragraph about as vague as you could get.

Yeah I guess it's bad press to mention their blacklists on the front page Tongue
They put this patch at the (surprise) patch Tab.
Acting like Mike Hearn is hiding something an 8-year old could find with a 5 minute search, is just another ridiculous aspect of this whole discussion.

Same with ignoring the only-bigblocks branch, I already mentioned in this thread:
There is an only-bigblocks-branch on Github:
https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/tree/only-bigblocks

If you have concerns about the other features but want to support bigger blocks, use this branch.

https://forum.bitcoin.com/
New censorship-free forum by Roger Ver. Try it out.
sAt0sHiFanClub
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490


Warning: Confrmed Gavinista


View Profile WWW
August 19, 2015, 02:03:52 PM
 #91

i cant beleive it, if this is true XT loose all my respect, freedom and privacy and our flag and they destroy it.

i will wait for a reply from the XT core devs and watch this thread carefully, but if finally we discover that this is true.... well maybe this is a good news so we can concentrate our efforts on what is needed, THE ORIGINAL BITCOIN.

Whats your question?  The thread above was based on a flawedpremise to start with, but the substantive issue of IP Prioritization has been answered - its configurable by those running a node to be either on or disabled.

Bitcoin core still exists, so no need for extra concentration there. This is simply a poll to let nodes/miners make a choice as to whether they want to increase limits now or wait for consensus ( that doesnt look like happening)

If bitcoinxt achieves majority, it will be the one everyone continues with. If it fails to achieve the numbers required, it will become obsolete.

Are you ignoring stuff there for a reason?

If the XT altcoin became a defacto (which it wont) then people would be accepting a whole list of changes - not just the time controlled block size increases.

... and I don't see any direct mention of IP blacklists on the XT fud web page.

Although fungibility may mean nothing to you, it's a pretty important factor to me as I have brought up on the forum a few times over the years.

blacklists in there mean I wont support it

And by the power of bitcoin, you have been given that choice. By continuing with core, you can demonstrate this.

So really, there is no issue unless people want to be divisive for a different agenda.
Yes indeed that's what I mean - what is your agenda for ignoring all the other changes in your statement?
It isn't just block size as you stated.

Ahhhh... look at the title of the thread.  Just following the topic.

edit: to clarify,..
Quote
The thread above was based on a flawed premise to start with, but the substantive issue of IP Prioritization has been answered

We must make money worse as a commodity if we wish to make it better as a medium of exchange
qwep
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008



View Profile
August 19, 2015, 02:04:43 PM
 #92

coming back to bitcoin talk after the price tank from yesterday, lets me know i shouldnt stay away from the forum too long.

colinistheman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966



View Profile
August 19, 2015, 03:57:00 PM
 #93

Blacklisting techniques, however well intentioned, can become abused due to their centralized nature.

I wish it were not a part of XT....

The solution could be to run the BIP 101 version for the block size increase, without any of Mike's extra additions. It's too bad because some of the additions are good. But a blacklist cannot just be bunched up with it and ignored.
mayax
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 03:59:53 PM
 #94

that means more centralization. Anyway, there is one now too....but it will be more visible with XT.

well, that means BTC end. BTC is based on anonymity. Why shouldn't I use any other e-currency if BTC will be centralized more than now? Smiley
BillyBobZorton
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 952



View Profile
August 19, 2015, 04:03:32 PM
 #95

Right now most bitcoin users are completely unaware of the blacklist, we need to spread this information asap. Please retweet my tweet or make your own. We need this information to reach both the media and the community, it's a fundamental threat to bitcoin https://twitter.com/turtlehurricane/status/633844328205430784

Heck, what's the big deal? Can't you just remove the IPs in list above, recompile and run your own XT version that would even trust Stalin's personal node?

This is not a fundamental issue. The code is open-source: you are free to remove/edit any source code to your liking.

The average joe is never going to do all that nerd stuff, it's all about protecting the vulnerable, the geeks that are going to do that are 1%. You are an idiot by excusing it out like that and saying "just go on your linux machine and compile your own self modified code". That's just ridiculous.

    ▄██████████████████▄▄
  ▄█████████████████████▄▀▄
▄█████████████████████▄▀▄▀▄▀
███████▀             ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
███████▄
▀███████████████████▀▄▀▄
  ▀█████████████████▀▄▀▄▀▄
    ▀▀████████████▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄
                    ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄
▀▄▀▄▀▄▀            ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄
▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄
  ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
    ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
Solar DAO████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
..PV Solar Plants Construction..
    through CROWDFUNDING
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
[/center]
meono
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 04:08:53 PM
 #96

Right now most bitcoin users are completely unaware of the blacklist, we need to spread this information asap. Please retweet my tweet or make your own. We need this information to reach both the media and the community, it's a fundamental threat to bitcoin https://twitter.com/turtlehurricane/status/633844328205430784

Heck, what's the big deal? Can't you just remove the IPs in list above, recompile and run your own XT version that would even trust Stalin's personal node?

This is not a fundamental issue. The code is open-source: you are free to remove/edit any source code to your liking.

The average joe is never going to do all that nerd stuff, it's all about protecting the vulnerable, the geeks that are going to do that are 1%. You are an idiot by excusing it out like that and saying "just go on your linux machine and compile your own self modified code". That's just ridiculous.

What ridiculous is ppl blindly listen to some FUD without even checking.

The changelog show it. Had BitcoinXT been allowed to be discussed then we wouldnt have this FUD in the first place.

hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274



View Profile
August 19, 2015, 04:12:16 PM
 #97

MEONO IS A xtSHILL

not even brave enough to post under his real account.
as for gavin and mickey, go fuck yourself. ignored.
BillyBobZorton
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 952



View Profile
August 19, 2015, 04:15:12 PM
 #98

Right now most bitcoin users are completely unaware of the blacklist, we need to spread this information asap. Please retweet my tweet or make your own. We need this information to reach both the media and the community, it's a fundamental threat to bitcoin https://twitter.com/turtlehurricane/status/633844328205430784

Heck, what's the big deal? Can't you just remove the IPs in list above, recompile and run your own XT version that would even trust Stalin's personal node?

This is not a fundamental issue. The code is open-source: you are free to remove/edit any source code to your liking.

The average joe is never going to do all that nerd stuff, it's all about protecting the vulnerable, the geeks that are going to do that are 1%. You are an idiot by excusing it out like that and saying "just go on your linux machine and compile your own self modified code". That's just ridiculous.

What ridiculous is ppl blindly listen to some FUD without even checking.

The changelog show it. Had BitcoinXT been allowed to be discussed then we wouldnt have this FUD in the first place.



What are you talking about? The code is there. I have been doing lots of reading, you should begin too, this is a good start:

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010386.html

Im not sure yet what to do just like most people, but I don't like how this sounds like, I definitely don't, so im keeping my core node running for now.

    ▄██████████████████▄▄
  ▄█████████████████████▄▀▄
▄█████████████████████▄▀▄▀▄▀
███████▀             ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
███████▄
▀███████████████████▀▄▀▄
  ▀█████████████████▀▄▀▄▀▄
    ▀▀████████████▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄
                    ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄
▀▄▀▄▀▄▀            ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄
▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄
  ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
    ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
Solar DAO████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
..PV Solar Plants Construction..
    through CROWDFUNDING
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄
████  ████  ████
▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀
████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
[/center]
meono
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
August 19, 2015, 04:20:49 PM
 #99

Right now most bitcoin users are completely unaware of the blacklist, we need to spread this information asap. Please retweet my tweet or make your own. We need this information to reach both the media and the community, it's a fundamental threat to bitcoin https://twitter.com/turtlehurricane/status/633844328205430784

Heck, what's the big deal? Can't you just remove the IPs in list above, recompile and run your own XT version that would even trust Stalin's personal node?

This is not a fundamental issue. The code is open-source: you are free to remove/edit any source code to your liking.

The average joe is never going to do all that nerd stuff, it's all about protecting the vulnerable, the geeks that are going to do that are 1%. You are an idiot by excusing it out like that and saying "just go on your linux machine and compile your own self modified code". That's just ridiculous.

What ridiculous is ppl blindly listen to some FUD without even checking.

The changelog show it. Had BitcoinXT been allowed to be discussed then we wouldnt have this FUD in the first place.



What are you talking about? The code is there. I have been doing lots of reading, you should begin too, this is a good start:

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010386.html

Im not sure yet what to do just like most people, but I don't like how this sounds like, I definitely don't, so im keeping my core node running for now.

Stop posting and read the bitcoinXT changelog. Its not sneaky and blacklist bs as the FUD said
sAt0sHiFanClub
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490


Warning: Confrmed Gavinista


View Profile WWW
August 19, 2015, 04:48:40 PM
 #100

MEONO IS A xtSHILL

not even brave enough to post under his real account.
as for gavin and mickey, go fuck yourself. ignored.

Life's not been a happy experience for you, has it?   Cry

We must make money worse as a commodity if we wish to make it better as a medium of exchange
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!