Consensus Decision Making is what bitcoin needed

[Hazir]

I agree with consensus being what we need, but 75% is not enough for a hard fork, we would need more, also, they don't tell all the shitty stuff XT does, they only talk about the 8MB blocksize increase (which we don't need that much now, BTC is still a niche used software).

75% consensus is enough, there is not possible to gather 75% of users and make them chose something awfully wrong with that number.
Block Size increase is not needed now but you need to do stuff like that before it will be needed. If it will be truly needed in the future there will be already too late.

[johnyj]

I agree with consensus being what we need, but 75% is not enough for a hard fork, we would need more, also, they don't tell all the shitty stuff XT does, they only talk about the 8MB blocksize increase (which we don't need that much now, BTC is still a niche used software).

75% consensus is enough, there is not possible to gather 75% of users and make them chose something awfully wrong with that number.
Block Size increase is not needed now but you need to do stuff like that before it will be needed. If it will be truly needed in the future there will be already too late.

75% of hash power is far from 75% consensus. If that's the case, chinese government would easily lunch a super mining farm and take over 75% of hash power and modify bitcoin to whatever they see fit (we already have more than 50% hash power in china, the chinese government just need to confiscate them)

There is no such worry about being too late to change. The stress test recently showed that even every block is full, the network still works well, only a minority of people start to experience problem, and after nodes changed some configurations to block the spam transactions, the network works just like normal







 

[johnyj]

The difficult part is how to count the opinion voting. I think currently it is enough that core devs use this model to build consensus, Gavin can be a little bit forgiving when it comes to the size of increase, and others can at least cope with a relatively small first time change. Anything beyond 4 years should not be discussed at this stage, a plan of increase xxx every xxx years is just a blind guess

[Ingatqhvq]

I agree with consensus being what we need, but 75% is not enough for a hard fork, we would need more, also, they don't tell all the shitty stuff XT does, they only talk about the 8MB blocksize increase (which we don't need that much now, BTC is still a niche used software).

75% is not enough?
75% can change any law in any country.
100% will make nothing to be done.

[Ingatqhvq]

The difficult part is how to count the opinion voting. I think currently it is enough that core devs use this model to build consensus, Gavin can be a little bit forgiving when it comes to the size of increase, and others can at least cope with a relatively small first time change. Anything beyond 4 years should not be discussed at this stage, a plan of increase xxx every xxx years is just a blind guess

The real and only power is hash power, that why proof of work.
                                                                                                       

[andysbizz]

Thanks, good topic 

[johnyj]

The difficult part is how to count the opinion voting. I think currently it is enough that core devs use this model to build consensus, Gavin can be a little bit forgiving when it comes to the size of increase, and others can at least cope with a relatively small first time change. Anything beyond 4 years should not be discussed at this stage, a plan of increase xxx every xxx years is just a blind guess

The real and only power is hash power, that why proof of work.
                                                                                                        

Imagine that Chinese government took over most of the mining farms in china and controlled 75% of network hash power, made their fork and created client bitcoin BJ (BJ stands for BeiJing), with their party leader deciding the future coin generation scheme. What will happen?

No one will use their fork, no merchant will accept that client, no exchange will provide exchange, coins on that chain would worth nothing, those hash power working on that chain would just be wasted electricity

The soul of bitcoin network is not maintained by physical hash power(In this case you can't fight against BJ coin fork since it has majority of hash power), but through a consensus. Anything that brake this consensus automatically becomes an altcoin and will be excluded out of the current bitcoin ecosystem

Of course those hash power are strong enough to do double spending and harm the network, but they must stay in the original chain to carry out the attack. And while they are attacking, reserve hash power from everywhere of the world will fire up to regain the ground, and they better play by the rules instead of go against the system