...

[iCEBREAKER]

It was plain bad judgment to do anything else at the same time though, because now the block stream shills get to scream FUD about something else in order to fight the block size increase.

You're damn right we do.   

Thanks to the spectacle of unforced Gavinista errors, our FUD screaming is now more effective as it draws additional attention to their "plain bad judgement" (a perennial problem with Heam).

"Do you really want these two blundering possibly compromised idiots in charge of Bitcoin?" is our new narrative.  Better get used to it.   

[1714940602]

1714940602

[1714940602]

1714940602

[1714940602]

1714940602

[iCEBREAKER]

This needs more exposure! I don't understand why the Core team won't just double size to 2mb and end this nonsense. In a few years time, we can re-visit the issue and possibly bump it up to 4mb if there are still no solutions. The devs are acting like babies.

Even if they wanted to, core devs have no power to force the rest of the system to support 2mb.  That's not how Bitcoin works.  XT works like that (Mike "Final Call" Heam), and that's exactly why Gavin, Mike, you, and all the other malcontents are most welcome to fuck off and launch your own independent altcoin.

You are the one demanding instant satisfaction (regardless of consequences) and complaining about the delay of your gratification.  That is acting like a baby.

[meono]

meono, you can be observed to repeatedly evade facts and to conduct continuous personal attacks against people like turtlehurricane who support this community by working through the code to reveal things that every Bitcoin user needs to know.

I can see your account was created just for the blocksize debate. So please inform us, why exactly are your here? Why do you have an interest in dividing Bitcoin and it's userbase?

Speak for yourself, some kind of twisted character you got there


Are you sure you dont have a mental issue?


This is what you wrote, isnt it

Already have there been dubious code segments detected in XT's code base. XT is a trojan horse that plans to base it's hostile takeover of Bitcoin on manipulating the notoriously stupid masses.

I for one will dump ALL my Bitcoins immediately on the XT chain, should it ever be tradeable, which will certainly not be without effect. Bitcoin simply cannot be in control of two people with very questionable motives and tactics. It is a tool of the cypherpunks

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.

[Lucko]

More then 30 hours and still no code? Come on if it is there you should have found it by now! Unless it is not there...

[ChetnotAtkins]

meono, meono, I know the matter at hand exceeds your mental capacity, which leads to never ending personal attacks. The next time you want to have something explained, I advise you to just politely ask for it.

The quote you posted referred to a suggestion of a local tx/s limit in standardized executions and is in no way contradictory - in fact not even related - to the other quote you posted.


So meono, please again, tell us all why you are here? What is your interest in spreading continuous lies and personal attacks?

[turvarya]

meono, you can be observed to repeatedly evade facts and to conduct continuous personal attacks against people like turtlehurricane who support this community by working through the code to reveal things that every Bitcoin user needs to know.

I can see your account was created just for the blocksize debate. So please inform us, why exactly are your here? Why do you have an interest in dividing Bitcoin and it's userbase?

Instead of attacking meono, because he uses a new account, you should attack his arguments. Attacking a person instead of his arguments, just shows how weak your standpoint is.
turtlehurricane hasn't worked through the code, he worked through comments of the code and variable-names, which are also in Bitcoin Core. This whole thread is based on a mail someone else send to the dev-mailing list and turtlehurricane  just picked it up to make this thread. He was repeatedly asked to point to the code snipped(not comments), on which he takes so much offense, but failed to do so.
If you think, meono is dodging questions or facts, point us to them.

And btw. you might see, that my account was not just created for the blocksize debate. My account is older than yours, but I don't hold that as an argument, that would be silly, wouldn't it?

[ChetnotAtkins]

turvarya - It is nonsensical to jump into a debate to accuse one of the participants if you have no knowlege of the course of this debate. I was only reacting to an attack by meono, and I am just one of the people he attacked. I have posted enough arguments, but you ignoring that fact and jumping to conclusions is interesting in and of itself.

Let me guess turvarya, do you support XT? If so, please tell us why exactly?

[turvarya]

turvarya - It is nonsensical to jump into a debate to accuse one of the participants if you have no knowlege of the course of this debate. I was only reacting to an attack by meono, and I am just one of the people he attacked. I have posted enough arguments, but you ignoring that fact and jumping to conclusions is interesting in and of itself.

Let me guess turvarya, do you support XT? If so, please tell us why exactly?

I am all over this XT-bashing-threads, I read most of them. And again, I was in this thread before you. And again, I can just beg you, to stick to the facts.

Why do I support XT? Because there is currently no better solution. If another solution arrives(in code not just endless talk), I might jump ship. I am not really that big of a fan of Mike Hearn and I don't like the position, that I have to defend BitcoinXT, but I just can't stand the bullshit, that is all over this place.

[meono]

meono, meono, I know the matter at hand exceeds your mental capacity, which leads to never ending personal attacks. The next time you want to have something explained, I advise you to just politely ask for it.

The quote you posted referred to a suggestion of a local tx/s limit in standardized executions and is in no way contradictory - in fact not even related - to the other quote you posted.


So meono, please again, tell us all why you are here? What is your interest in spreading continuous lies and personal attacks?

In your post you asked core dev to "block malicious nodes", did you not?

Yeah its everything related to this thread.

So i guess i'm right that you're a hypocrite asshole

[brg444]

turvarya - It is nonsensical to jump into a debate to accuse one of the participants if you have no knowlege of the course of this debate. I was only reacting to an attack by meono, and I am just one of the people he attacked. I have posted enough arguments, but you ignoring that fact and jumping to conclusions is interesting in and of itself.

Let me guess turvarya, do you support XT? If so, please tell us why exactly?

I am all over this XT-bashing-threads, I read most of them. And again, I was in this thread before you. And again, I can just beg you, to stick to the facts.

Why do I support XT? Because there is currently no better solution. If another solution arrives(in code not just endless talk), I might jump ship. I am not really that big of a fan of Mike Hearn and I don't like the position, that I have to defend BitcoinXT, but I just can't stand the bullshit, that is all over this place.

Who told you there was need for a solution? Mike Hearn?

What is the problem?

[illyiller]

turvarya - It is nonsensical to jump into a debate to accuse one of the participants if you have no knowlege of the course of this debate. I was only reacting to an attack by meono, and I am just one of the people he attacked. I have posted enough arguments, but you ignoring that fact and jumping to conclusions is interesting in and of itself.

Let me guess turvarya, do you support XT? If so, please tell us why exactly?

I am all over this XT-bashing-threads, I read most of them. And again, I was in this thread before you. And again, I can just beg you, to stick to the facts.

Why do I support XT? Because there is currently no better solution. If another solution arrives(in code not just endless talk), I might jump ship. I am not really that big of a fan of Mike Hearn and I don't like the position, that I have to defend BitcoinXT, but I just can't stand the bullshit, that is all over this place.

Who told you there was need for a solution? Mike Hearn?

What is the problem?

There is a problem -- that bitcoin will eventually need to scale to meet needs for timely confirmations on transactions (or alternatively, we could pay fees that would be adjusted for the amount of transactions backed up in the mempool). But it's not nearly as urgent as some make it out to be. A lot of people pushing for XT make it seem as if tomorrow is doomsday and we need to implement the change today. That is not the case at all. Based on growth over the last year or so in transactions, ideally -- if we are to increase the block size -- we would implement the change before, say, a year from now, at which point natural growth in transaction volume may make the issue more urgent than it is now.

In the meantime, I see no reason why we can't update the limit to 2-4 MB, while the community tries to reach a consensus on the best way to move forward. I support BIP 102 for this reason.

[iCEBREAKER]

Why do I support XT?

Because I am butthurt about XT-bashing-threads and offended by thermos censorship (never mind the contradiction there!)

^FTFY.

XT is a solution in search of a problem.  Currently there is no problem in Bitcoin for XT to solve.

By presuming there is, you commit the fallacy of affirming the consequent.

Since Gavinistas often use this fallacy as they seek to mislead the public, allow me to draw you a picture for the sake of clarity.

1. If [Bitcoin problem], then [XT].

2. [XT].

3. Therefore, [Bitcoin problem].

[Pab]

 All that XT fork is very much confusing me and not only me,ordinary people who dont know so much about technology
all that fork is done without not or any informations,no transparency,all that is causing  loosing trust in btc
together with margine sales on Bitffinex it looks like that some people want to steal some btcat low prices or thay seriously want to disturb digital currency evolution

[Dire]

So whats the consensus here?

Are we agreeing to differ?  

Look, I think we all want bitcoin to succeed, or we would all be on pornhub right now.

At the beginning of this thread when reading what Turtlehurricane had posted I asked if any coders could weigh in. FUD was called a bit too quickly, although I admit, there are some posts from Turtlehurrican which are often inflammatory in nature. I don't consider this a bad thing necessarily, as it draws attention and debate to things which may or may not be of concern.

But...

After reading all of this thread and others elsewhere, I find that although people who code have made their point - and it seems Turtlehurricane hasn't yet been able to exactly point to the code he refers to that isn't already in core - this subject is still confusing, for want of a better word.

So far, this is what I understand.

1. Blacklisting/whitelisting is either already within the core code, or they are code terms that don't actually mean blacklisting/whitelisting in view of the English language usage, per se.

2. The above referred to blacklisting/whitelisting doesn't ban anyone, it simply deprioritizes Tor, as this is a defence against possible spam attacks. It only does this for the period of time of the spam attack, and then resumes as normal.

3. The blacklisting/whitelisting code in fact doesn't get (hidden) IP's, the only IP it's concerned with is a Tor operating IP(?) This is maybe/maybe not (as far as my understanding goes at the moment) a somewhat unfair penalization for Tor users, but at least it doesn't compromise the Tor users IP's.

4. Although many node users may not be aware of it, they are able to disable this part of the blacklisting/whitelisting code, but it is set to default.

I'm sure I've missed something, so anyone feel free to add logic/proof based points.


Although the above seems (somewhat) clear to me, I think it's hard to deny the recent spam attacks were quite obviously deliberate and used to push a certain agenda forward, ie. block size.

A considerable amount of finances were used for those attacks and I think it's fairly safe to say that whichever party/parties did it, they stood to (financially) gain in return.

So where do the fingers point to that financial gain? I'm not about to answer that question, and it would be useless to try. But I find it hard to believe Bitcoin has a mysterious benefactor that spends all that money out of the goodness or his/her/their own heart just to push further block size increase adoption for the common good.

I should make it clear that I'm not against block size increase and scaling, undecided, maybe, but not against.


Honestly, the most useful and enlightening post on the subject I've seen was posted in an XT alt coin thread by Canth, who I hope won't mind me posting it here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1157289.0 :

BitcoinXT has an anti-ddos feature, it can block connections to certain IPs, it downloads a list from an SSL site. Yes, the site might get your IP address. The entire feature can be disabled with one flag in the config.

Unless you're running behind Tor and/or VPN, ALL bitcoin full node products 'leak' your IP address to other bitcoin nodes and the internet in general...

The bold is mine. That point surprised me.

ps: I'm grateful for everyone in this thread that has taken their time to go over this as I really wanted to understand it.

[BTCBinary]

It seems like they just want to force control with this new BTC XT nonsense...

[meono]

More then 30 hours and still no code? Come on if it is there you should have found it by now! Unless it is not there...

Why don't you look through it? You act like I work for you. I might've gone through the effort of analyzing it but regardless of what I find you'll shoot it down. You and a few other people tried your hardest to hide this info from the public by spamming the thread with nonsense.

I'll let an expert be the one to analyze this, I scanned through it and saw plenty of things that looked bad but don't want red herrings thrown at me anymore.

If you still have any ounce of self respect in you , you would have stopped posting here and only came back after having an "expert" to "analyze" . Hopefully by then you would have something to prove us wrong.

You know any self respecting person would have done that b4 making this thread to mislead people and intentionally spread FUD.

[meono]

More then 30 hours and still no code? Come on if it is there you should have found it by now! Unless it is not there...

Why don't you look through it? You act like I work for you. I might've gone through the effort of analyzing it but regardless of what I find you'll shoot it down. You and a few other people tried your hardest to hide this info from the public by spamming the thread with nonsense.

I'll let an expert be the one to analyze this, I scanned through it and saw plenty of things that looked bad but don't want red herrings thrown at me anymore.

If you still have any ounce of self respect in you , you would have stopped posting here and only came back after having an "expert" to "analyze" . Hopefully by then you would have something to prove us wrong.

You know any self respecting person would have done that b4 making this thread to mislead people and intentionally spread FUD.

It's easy to troll and insult people when you have a throwaway account. You've shown zero evidence, just insults all the time to try and obfuscate the facts. I'm going to have to put you on ignore cause it's non stop.

I'm not the one making misleading claim and statement, why would i have to show evidence?
What a fcked up mental you got there. You make a claim, its your responsibility to back that up,

Go on keep dodging requests for evidence to back your bogus claim. Your reputation has gone to shit by your action not my words.

[Bitaurox]

Go on keep dodging requests for evidence to back your bogus claim. Your reputation has gone to shit by your action not my words.

no it has not,

since that gross meono sock puppet account didn't have any to begin with. The sole purpose of the meono account is to derail the discussion and fling poo.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1064824.msg11412701#msg11412701


But the cat is out of the bag: The issue of course is no longer about block size, but about sneaking in something extra into BTC.
And of course even if it could be deactivated by the most tech savvy users, once the foot is in the door, of course it will be expanded incrementally.
That is the strategy and so all that whining and bitching about how it is only optionally is a malicious little smokescreen that fools no one.

Signature:
Hey bitcoiners, My name is Adam Allcocks. I'm bisexual and i can suck cocks for bitcoin. Just PM and i will link you to my cam channel for viewing....

yeah right- that makes meono a credible expert on what exactly?

[volyova]

Oh dear...

What a bloody mess.

It appears that the "leader-less model" doesn't work...(big surprise, I know)

It's like trying to herd cats!

Divide and conquer, I suppose..

But who are the "bad guys"?

I propose a name-change to "Splitcoin".

[OBAViJEST]

Go on keep dodging requests for evidence to back your bogus claim. Your reputation has gone to shit by your action not my words.

no it has not,

since that gross meono sock puppet account didn't have any to begin with. The sole purpose of the meono account is to derail the discussion and fling poo.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1064824.msg11412701#msg11412701


But the cat is out of the bag: The issue of course is no longer about block size, but about sneaking in something extra into BTC.
And of course even if it could be deactivated by the most tech savvy users, once the foot is in the door, of course it will be expanded incrementally.
That is the strategy and so all that whining and bitching about how it is only optionally is a malicious little smokescreen that fools no one.

Signature:
Hey bitcoiners, My name is Adam Allcocks. I'm bisexual and i can suck cocks for bitcoin. Just PM and i will link you to my cam channel for viewing....

yeah right- that makes meono a credible expert on what exactly?

Just ignore the troll.  In doing so, this thread will remain free of further drivel that does nothing but derail the thread.  no attention = no shitposts.