BitPay only supports BIP101, NOT BitcoinXT

[ChetnotAtkins]

It is hard work to rectify all the lies that XT shills keep spreading in this coordinated attack against Bitcoin.

Stop XT!

[BillyBobZorton]

It is hard work to rectify all the lies that XT shills keep spreading in this coordinated attack against Bitcoin.

Stop XT!

Obvious paid trolls are obvious. Let them spread their NSACoin shilling. Actually don't let them. I hate how they are trying to push XT. The 30 day spam attack is yet another obvious move of Hearncoin and friends.

[el kaka22]

So whats with this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1157516.0 which said the exactly opposite thing? So is BitPay supporting XT chain (or receive payments by XT), or the Core chain? I'm always on the core side, as it is the most secure client (some said XT is a virus).

[valiz]

It is hard work to rectify all the lies that XT shills keep spreading in this coordinated attack against Bitcoin.

Stop XT!

Obvious paid trolls are obvious. Let them spread their NSACoin shilling. Actually don't let them. I hate how they are trying to push XT. The 30 day spam attack is yet another obvious move of Hearncoin and friends.

Well we can't exactly stop XT but we can convince the people not to download and run such a thing. Hopefully everyone will realize the fake urgency problem with the doctored solution in their huge PR campaign.  

[knight22]

BIP101 is what XT is all about. The point is, if Core does't implement BIP101 than XT is the way to go.

[ticoti]

The point is why bitcoin core is not making the necessary changes to make this more efficient

[Dissonance]

I think XT only exist to force the issue with the core team.  IF they adopt bip101 or something similar XT goes away.

[zeroday]

BIP101 is what XT is all about. The point is, if Core does't implement BIP101 than XT is the way to go.

Besides BIP101, XT has shady features that help de-anonymizing people. Why didn't you mention this fact as well ?

It seems knight22 and a few new alts are the only people who push XT fork on the forum.
The most of hero/legendary people are against.

BIP101 is good thing, but it must be implemented in Core version. Also we have plenty of time and no need in hurry. CoinWallet attack threats is just bullshit and FUD spreading .

[Alley]

XT must have more support then i thought.  Every thread has people shouting from the mountaintop about evil XT.  So much fear.  If XT was ignored it would have been the better strategy.

[knight22]

BIP101 is what XT is all about. The point is, if Core does't implement BIP101 than XT is the way to go.

Besides BIP101, XT has shady features that help de-anonymizing people. Why didn't you mention this fact as well ?

It seems knight22 and a few new alts are the only people who push XT fork on the forum.
The most of hero/legendary people are against.

I'm pushing for BIP101. XT or Core I don't give a damn. I want bitcoin to scale. The blacklisting thing is just an OPTIONAL Ddos protection. Stop with all that paranoid FUD.

[zeroday]

I'm pushing for BIP101. XT or Core I don't give a damn. I want bitcoin to scale. The blacklisting thing is just an OPTIONAL Ddos protection. Stop with all that paranoid FUD.

So please stop mentioning XP in your topics. BIP101 is not equal to XT.

The blacklisting thing is just an OPTIONAL Ddos protection. Stop with all that paranoid FUD.

Yes, this leaves an option for NSA/CIA to start attack in order to de-anonymize all the Tor users.

[knight22]

I'm pushing for BIP101. XT or Core I don't give a damn. I want bitcoin to scale. The blacklisting thing is just an OPTIONAL Ddos protection. Stop with all that paranoid FUD.

So please stop mentioning XP in your topics. BIP101 is not equal to XT.

XT is the only implementation that support BIP101 right now so be it.

The blacklisting thing is just an OPTIONAL Ddos protection. Stop with all that paranoid FUD.

Yes, this leaves an option for NSA/CIA to start attack in order to de-anonymize all the Tor users.

How so?

[TinEye]

BIP101 is what XT is all about. The point is, if Core does't implement BIP101 than XT is the way to go.

what is bip101? the changes of increase block size and nothing else?

The point is why bitcoin core is not making the necessary changes to make this more efficient

because no dev is working on core anymore, you have two of them working on XT and the other against it with blockstream, none of them is interested in Core anymore
otherwise this discussion, would have been shut down from the beginning

[zeroday]

I'm pushing for BIP101. XT or Core I don't give a damn. I want bitcoin to scale. The blacklisting thing is just an OPTIONAL Ddos protection. Stop with all that paranoid FUD.

So please stop mentioning XP in your topics. BIP101 is not equal to XT.

XT is the only implementation that support BIP101 right now so be it.

Yet... They released it without waiting for consensus. It can be treated as just another altcoin fork.

The blacklisting thing is just an OPTIONAL Ddos protection. Stop with all that paranoid FUD.

Yes, this leaves an option for NSA/CIA to start attack in order to de-anonymize all the Tor users.

How so?

This:

Connections are made over clearnet even when using a proxy or
onlynet=tor, which leaks connections on the P2P network with the real
location of the node. Knowledge of this traffic along with uptime metrics
from bitnodes.io can allow observers to easily correlate the location and
identity of persons running Bitcoin nodes. Denial of service can also be
used to crash and force a restart of an interesting node, which will
cause them to make a new request to the blacklist endpoint via the
clearnet on relaunch at the same time their P2P connections are made
through a proxy. Requests to the blacklisting URL also use a custom
Bitcoin XT user agent which makes users distinct from other internet
traffic if you have access to the endpoints logs.

source: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010379.html

[meono]

It is hard work to rectify all the lies that XT shills keep spreading in this coordinated attack against Bitcoin.

Stop XT!

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.

[LiteCoinGuy]

BIP101 is what XT is all about. The point is, if Core does't implement BIP101 than XT is the way to go.

iam sure that night22 and me are not paid trolls but we want a bitcoin, that can live up to its potential.

like someone said before:

"If Bitcoin is a tiny, obscure currency used by drug dealers and a handful of crypto-at-any-cost geeks, the cost of simply banning it outright
will seem trivial and the hammer will drop. There won't be a large scale
payment network OR a high-value settlement network. And then the world is
really screwed, because nobody will get a second chance for a very long time."

[meono]

Jesus christ the amount of idiots in here are heartbreaking.



Support BIP101 means the BitcoinXT is completely compatible with whatever chain it is after the fork


Hence the BitcoinXT will remain as alternative client just as it is now.


This is EXACTLY the point Gavin wants to make by letting it out in the wild and LET THE NETWORK COMES TO CONSENSUS..


Now go laugh at your core devs because the Network WON.

[BitcoinNewsMagazine]

There will not be a hard fork until January 2016 at the earliest. BIP 101 patch can be implemented in Bitcoin Core as well, and I hope it is and soon. What bothers me is that Mike Hearn used his commit privileges to publish Bitcoin XT with only a 75% adoption threshold by miners. Hard forks are dangerous, and the threshold for adoption should have been 90% or even safer 95%. I suspect he set the threshold too low because he realized chances of 90% consensus approval for Bitcoin XT was slim.

[oblivi]

There will not be a hard fork until January 2016 at the earliest. BIP 101 patch can be implemented in Bitcoin Core as well, and I hope it is and soon. What bothers me is that Mike Hearn used his commit privileges to publish Bitcoin XT with only a 75% adoption threshold by miners. Hard forks are dangerous, and the threshold for adoption should have been 90% or even safer 95%. I suspect he set the threshold too low because he realized chances of 90% consensus approval for Bitcoin XT was slim.

Well they better hurry up with the BIP101 in Core because they are so slow to take measures that XT guys may end up taking the cake. Im all for making things slow and right but right now Core is under pressure.

[uxgpf]

I'm pushing for BIP101. XT or Core I don't give a damn. I want bitcoin to scale. The blacklisting thing is just an OPTIONAL Ddos protection. Stop with all that paranoid FUD.

So please stop mentioning XP in your topics. BIP101 is not equal to XT.

XT is the only implementation that support BIP101 right now so be it.

Yet... They released it without waiting for consensus. It can be treated as just another altcoin fork.

The blacklisting thing is just an OPTIONAL Ddos protection. Stop with all that paranoid FUD.

Yes, this leaves an option for NSA/CIA to start attack in order to de-anonymize all the Tor users.

How so?

This:

Connections are made over clearnet even when using a proxy or
onlynet=tor, which leaks connections on the P2P network with the real
location of the node. Knowledge of this traffic along with uptime metrics
from bitnodes.io can allow observers to easily correlate the location and
identity of persons running Bitcoin nodes. Denial of service can also be
used to crash and force a restart of an interesting node, which will
cause them to make a new request to the blacklist endpoint via the
clearnet on relaunch at the same time their P2P connections are made
through a proxy. Requests to the blacklisting URL also use a custom
Bitcoin XT user agent which makes users distinct from other internet
traffic if you have access to the endpoints logs.

source: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010379.html

It was a false alert:

So I checked, and the code described *does not* run when behind a
proxy of any kind, including tor:

https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/commit/73c9efe74c5cc8faea9c2b2c785a2f5b68aa4c23#diff-11780fa178b655146cb414161c635219R265

At least based on my admittedly weak understanding of how the internal works.

Hopefully I save the next reader of your post from also having to dig
around to find the code and realize this is a false alert.

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:36 PM F L via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

Source: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010384.html