Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)

[VeritasSapere]

Saying that XT is an altcoin is factually incorrect, this is also a false narrative. Bitcoin XT is compatible with the Bitcoin blockchain. The fork will only be triggered once a majority of mining power supports it, which means that post fork Bitcoin XT will also be compatible with the largest surviving Bitcoin blockchain. There is a fundamental difference between a blockchain fork and an altcoin. It would be wrong to equate these two separate phenomena.

That entirely depends on what the actual definition of altcoin is, this is an evolving space and definitions are being settled.

If Feathercoin is an altcoin then so would be XT.

If we define an altcoin as being a blockchain that is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain then according to this definition Bitcoin XT is not a altcoin.

[1714234950]

1714234950

[1714234950]

1714234950

[1714234950]

1714234950

[1714234950]

1714234950

[muyuu]

Saying that XT is an altcoin is factually incorrect, this is also a false narrative. Bitcoin XT is compatible with the Bitcoin blockchain. The fork will only be triggered once a majority of mining power supports it, which means that post fork Bitcoin XT will also be compatible with the largest surviving Bitcoin blockchain. There is a fundamental difference between a blockchain fork and an altcoin. It would be wrong to equate these two separate phenomena.

That entirely depends on what the actual definition of altcoin is, this is an evolving space and definitions are being settled.

If Feathercoin is an altcoin then so would be XT.

If we define an altcoin as being a blockchain that is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain then according to this definition Bitcoin XT is not a altcoin.

But that's not the definition many of us go by, certainly not me. By that definition Bitcoin today is an altcoin of Bitcoin from 2012.

You can look it up in the wiki linked above.

[hdbuck]

Saying that XT is an altcoin is factually incorrect, this is also a false narrative. Bitcoin XT is compatible with the Bitcoin blockchain. The fork will only be triggered once a majority of mining power supports it, which means that post fork Bitcoin XT will also be compatible with the largest surviving Bitcoin blockchain. There is a fundamental difference between a blockchain fork and an altcoin. It would be wrong to equate these two separate phenomena.

That entirely depends on what the actual definition of altcoin is, this is an evolving space and definitions are being settled.

If Feathercoin is an altcoin then so would be XT.

If we define an altcoin as being a blockchain that is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain then according to this definition Bitcoin XT is not a altcoin.

But that's not the definition many of us go by, certainly not me. By that definition Bitcoin today is an altcoin of Bitcoin from 2012.

You can look it up in the wiki linked above.

in any case, once the fork active (if ever), it will be considered an altcoin, incompatible with the holy blockchain, and the dumping shall start upon the mutineers..

[VeritasSapere]

Saying that XT is an altcoin is factually incorrect, this is also a false narrative. Bitcoin XT is compatible with the Bitcoin blockchain. The fork will only be triggered once a majority of mining power supports it, which means that post fork Bitcoin XT will also be compatible with the largest surviving Bitcoin blockchain. There is a fundamental difference between a blockchain fork and an altcoin. It would be wrong to equate these two separate phenomena.

That entirely depends on what the actual definition of altcoin is, this is an evolving space and definitions are being settled.

If Feathercoin is an altcoin then so would be XT.

If we define an altcoin as being a blockchain that is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain then according to this definition Bitcoin XT is not a altcoin.

But that's not the definition many of us go by, certainly not me. By that definition Bitcoin today is an altcoin of Bitcoin from 2012.

You can look it up in the wiki linked above.

It seems like you are just appropriating the term in order to use it to construct this false narrative. Furthermore according to this "wiki" that you have linked the definition of an altcoin is that it is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain. Therefore according to that "wikis" definition of an altcoin Bitcoin XT is not an altcoin. Therefore this wiki is wrong, it is even self evident based on their own enclosed reasoning.

If the definition of an altcoin is not that it is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain, please enlighten us with your definition of an altcoin instead. Then we can apply that definition to Bitcoin XT and see if it is consistent.

[muyuu]

It seems like you are just appropriating the term in order to use it to construct this false narrative. Furthermore according to this "wiki" that you have linked the definition of an altcoin is that it is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain. Therefore according to that "wikis" definition of an altcoin Bitcoin XT is not an altcoin. Therefore this wiki is wrong, it is even self evident based on their own enclosed reasoning.

If the definition of an altcoin is not that it is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain, please enlighten us with your definition of an altcoin instead. Then we can apply that definition to Bitcoin XT and see if it is consistent.

There is no established definition of what an altcoin is.

Currently the discussion is dominated by:

- Core devs
- The wiki
- The dev mailing list
- Theymos' forums and reddit subs

They all basically agree.

vs

- Hearndresen and their loyalist skeleton crew
- ~0.2% of the mining power and up to 8.6% of the nodes (the latter not verifiable).

Your call. I made mine.

[Peter R]

Saying that XT is an altcoin is factually incorrect, this is also a false narrative. Bitcoin XT is compatible with the Bitcoin blockchain. The fork will only be triggered once a majority of mining power supports it, which means that post fork Bitcoin XT will also be compatible with the largest surviving Bitcoin blockchain. There is a fundamental difference between a blockchain fork and an altcoin. It would be wrong to equate these two separate phenomena.

That entirely depends on what the actual definition of altcoin is, this is an evolving space and definitions are being settled.

If Feathercoin is an altcoin then so would be XT.

If we define an altcoin as being a blockchain that is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain then according to this definition Bitcoin XT is not a altcoin.

The definition of an "alt coin" that I like is the one based off Satoshi's description on page 3 of the Bitcoin white paper:



I summarize this as: "Bitcoin is the longest chain composed (exclusively) of valid transactions."  

With that definition, a coin is "not Bitcoin" if:

(a) it's based on a blockchain that doesn't begin from the Satoshi genesis block,

(b) the blockchain does begin from the Satoshi genesis block but is not the longest chain composed of valid transactions.

[muyuu]

the fact that Bitcoin XT is considered an altcoin instead of a protocol of bitcoin makes a huge difference and i suppose XT supporters doesn't accept that difference

Yep I guess they are rather butthurt about it. Sad day for them.

Satoshi does not mention the term altcoin anywhere in the whitepaper, and I don't even remember him mentioning it in passing.

[VeritasSapere]

It seems like you are just appropriating the term in order to use it to construct this false narrative. Furthermore according to this "wiki" that you have linked the definition of an altcoin is that it is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain. Therefore according to that "wikis" definition of an altcoin Bitcoin XT is not an altcoin. Therefore this wiki is wrong, it is even self evident based on their own enclosed reasoning.

If the definition of an altcoin is not that it is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain, please enlighten us with your definition of an altcoin instead. Then we can apply that definition to Bitcoin XT and see if it is consistent.

There is no established definition of what an altcoin is.

Currently the discussion is dominated by:

- Core devs
- The wiki
- The dev mailing list
- Theymos' forums and reddit subs

They all basically agree.

vs

- Hearndresen and their loyalist skeleton crew

Your call. I made mine.

So you are refusing to define a word that you are using to smear Bitcoin XT. I suppose if you refuse to define the word that you are using it is impossible to prove you wrong. Keep in mind however that if you make an argument that can not be disproved that such an argument is most definitely not based on reason or any type of sound argumentation whatsoever.

As for the rest of your argument it actually just comes down to an appeal to authority and an appeal to the majority.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

[muyuu]

So you are refusing to define a word that you are using to smear Bitcoin XT.

No, it's not a consideration for me since the term altcoin for me in reality is more respectable than XT by far.

I'd say the definition of altcoin covers it because it covers all rule changes that incurred bifurcations in the past as well, this undoubtedly should carry weight when considering the definition of this word. But if I were to choose, I'd pick another word like "altfork" or something like that. Altcoin flatters XT in my opinion.

The only thing I like about it is that apparently it offends and irks some tiny, tiny men.

I accept the definition as it's widely accepted and this is the most important consideration for definitions.

I suppose if you refuse to define the word that you are using it is impossible to prove you wrong. Keep in mind however that if you make an argument that can not be disproved that such an argument is most definitely not based on reason or any type of sound argumentation whatsoever.

As for the rest of your argument it actually just comes down to an appeal to authority and an appeal to the majority.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

Words work exactly like that, they are defined by authority and popularity, not because some enlightened or self-important person settled the matter. At least not in the general case.

[VeritasSapere]

With that definition, a coin is "not Bitcoin" if:

(a) it's based on a blockchain that doesn't begin from the Satoshi genesis block,

(b) the blockchain does begin from the Satoshi genesis block but is not the longest chain composed of valid transactions.

I do agree with your definition of an altcoin Peter R, well done.

[VeritasSapere]

So you are refusing to define a word that you are using to smear Bitcoin XT.

No, it's not a consideration for me since the term altcoin for me in reality is more respectable than XT by far.

I'd say the definition of altcoin covers it because it covers all rule changes that incurred bifurcations in the past as well, this undoubtedly should carry weight when considering the definition of this word. But if I were to choose, I'd pick another word like "altfork" or something like that. Altcoin flatters XT in my opinion.

So now you are defining an altcoin as any rule change that cause bifurcations. Though under this definition if Core hypothetically decreased the blocksize causing a split, under this definition Core would then be an altcoin. Even if Core increases the blocksize in the far future this would also then make Bitcoin Core an altcoin. Surely this example proves that your definition is lacking. Unless you are now taking what I think is the correct position that XT is not an altcoin and you can define it as an "altfork" instead, since I can agree with that definition.

I suppose if you refuse to define the word that you are using it is impossible to prove you wrong. Keep in mind however that if you make an argument that can not be disproved that such an argument is most definitely not based on reason or any type of sound argumentation whatsoever.

As for the rest of your argument it actually just comes down to an appeal to authority and an appeal to the majority.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

Words work exactly like that, they are defined by authority and popularity, not because some enlightened or self-important person settled the matter. At least not in the general case.

I am shocked by you saying this, do you really believe that we should determine what is truth by applying these logical fallacies? I have studied philosophy and politics for most of my life and I can tell you that this is a terrible way to judge truth from falsehood. I urge you to study some history and to think for your self.

[muyuu]

So now you are defining an altcoin as any rule changes that cause bifurcations. Though under this definition if Core hypothetically decreased the blocksize causing a split, under this definition Core would then be an altcoin. Even if Core increases the blocksize in the far future this would also then make Bitcoin Core an altcoin. Surely this example proves that your definition is lacking. Unless you are now taking what I think is the correct position that XT is not an altcoin and you can define it as an "altfork" instead, since I can agree with that definition.

I'm not defining it, read the wiki.

I am shocked by you saying this, do you really believe that we should determine what is truth by applying these logical fallacies? I have studied philosophy and politics for most of my life and I can tell you that this is a terrible way to judge truth from falsehood. I urge to study some history and to think for your self.

This is because you don't seem to understand what a fallacy even is. These are unsound arguments for an underlying reality, not something that applies to a subjective definition which is in the process of being settled.

[hdbuck]

I am shocked by you saying this, do you really believe that we should determine what is truth by applying these logical fallacies? I have studied philosophy and politics for most of my life and I can tell you that this is a terrible way to judge truth from falsehood. I urge to study some history and to think for your self.

This is because you don't seem to understand what a fallacy even is. These are unsound arguments for an underlying reality, not something that applies to a subjective definition which is in the process of being settled.

Its pointless to argue with this politician/philosopher wannabe.

Besides, he knows nothing about economics and cryptography.

Just spewing words in the wind.

[VeritasSapere]

So now you are defining an altcoin as any rule changes that cause bifurcations. Though under this definition if Core hypothetically decreased the blocksize causing a split, under this definition Core would then be an altcoin. Even if Core increases the blocksize in the far future this would also then make Bitcoin Core an altcoin. Surely this example proves that your definition is lacking. Unless you are now taking what I think is the correct position that XT is not an altcoin and you can define it as an "altfork" instead, since I can agree with that definition.

I'm not defining it, read the wiki.

I am shocked by you saying this, do you really believe that we should determine what is truth by applying these logical fallacies? I have studied philosophy and politics for most of my life and I can tell you that this is a terrible way to judge truth from falsehood. I urge to study some history and to think for your self.

This is because you don't seem to understand what a fallacy even is. These are unsound arguments for an underlying reality, not something that applies to a subjective definition which is in the process of being settled.

The "wiki" is wrong as I have already demonstrated.

The definition of a word can be whatever you want it to be, as long as we can agree on what this definition is, for the purpose of a specific discussion. You are correct that these definitions are subjective, this subjective definition however should be determined by the free thinking individual. Not the authority or the majority since otherwise language and meaning can be perverted.

The concept of thinking for our self and not accepting the position of the authority or the majority lies at the heart of philosophy and enlightenment thinking. Which brought about the scientific and political revolutions of the modern world, it is the foundation of rationalism and humanism. I mention history because there are many examples where the authority or the majority where wrong, in retrospect the minority is often on the right side of history.

My point being is that these principles do still apply in the way that I was using them. It is always wrong to think that something is true just because that is what the majority or the authority believes. We should think for ourselfs and allow the collective consensus to rise from this foundation instead of just falling victim to group think.

[muyuu]

The definition of a word can be whatever you want it to be, as long as we can agree on what this definition is, for the purpose of a specific discussion. You are correct that these definitions are subjective, this subjective definition however should be determined by the free thinking individual. Not the authority or the majority since otherwise language and meaning can be perverted.

The concept of thinking for our self and not accepting the position of the authority or the majority lies at the heart of philosophy and enlightenment thinking. Which brought about the scientific and political revolutions of the modern world, it is the foundation of rationalism and humanism. I mention history because there are many examples where the authority or the majority where wrong, in retrospect the minority is often on the right side of history.

My point being is that these principles do still apply in the way that I was using them. It is always wrong to think that something is true just because that is what the majority or the authority believes. We should think for ourselfs and allow the collective consensus to rise from this foundation instead of just falling victim to group think.

I think you need to look up on how the meaning of words is established.

[Holliday]

Saying that XT is an altcoin is factually incorrect, this is also a false narrative. Bitcoin XT is compatible with the Bitcoin blockchain. The fork will only be triggered once a majority of mining power supports it, which means that post fork Bitcoin XT will also be compatible with the largest surviving Bitcoin blockchain. There is a fundamental difference between a blockchain fork and an altcoin. It would be wrong to equate these two separate phenomena.

That entirely depends on what the actual definition of altcoin is, this is an evolving space and definitions are being settled.

If Feathercoin is an altcoin then so would be XT.

If we define an altcoin as being a blockchain that is incompatible with the main Bitcoin blockchain then according to this definition Bitcoin XT is not a altcoin.

The definition of an "alt coin" that I like is the one based off Satoshi's description on page 3 of the Bitcoin white paper:



I summarize this as: "Bitcoin is the longest chain composed (exclusively) of valid transactions."  

With that definition, a coin is "not Bitcoin" if:

(a) it's based on a blockchain that doesn't begin from the Satoshi genesis block,

(b) the blockchain does begin from the Satoshi genesis block but is not the longest chain composed of valid transactions.

With that definition, there have been times in the past when Bitcoin was "not Bitcoin".

[muyuu]

Small recap.

As the "official wiki" says, it's technically an altcoin.  

https://archive.is/rjhmO

Since it is incompatible with the Bitcoin protocol, it is technically an altcoin, but due to an unusually large economic acceptance it may potentially become a "new Bitcoin" some day.

If insufficient mining hash power runs XT to reach supermajority then nothing will happen. If enough does, XT users will follow a new blockchain and cease to be using and trading bitcoins.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_XT

Warning: you will be banned if you try to vandalise the wiki.

Week after week more desktop full node users are left behind than new ones can join. As long as this is the case the blocks are too big, not too small. No ifs or buts.

-----

In the context of this discussion this image might be helpful



It is interesting to consider that more or less half of the rural US population don't have access to upload speed of 6 mbps or more.

[muyuu]

With that definition, there have been times in the past when Bitcoin was "not Bitcoin".

Not to mention that he just picked a few words from Satoshi and pretended he called that an altcoin despite the absolute absence of that term.

The charlatan Peter R Rizun doing what he does best.

[OrientA]

Saying that XT is an altcoin is factually incorrect, this is also a false narrative. Bitcoin XT is compatible with the Bitcoin blockchain. The fork will only be triggered once a majority of mining power supports it, which means that post fork Bitcoin XT will also be compatible with the largest surviving Bitcoin blockchain. There is a fundamental difference between a blockchain fork and an altcoin. It would be wrong to equate these two separate phenomena.

That entirely depends on what the actual definition of altcoin is, this is an evolving space and definitions are being settled.

If Feathercoin is an altcoin then so would be XT.

If most bitcoiners accept XT, then XT becomes Bitcoin main protocol, the old Core becomes altcoin.

[muyuu]

If most bitcoiners accept XT, then XT becomes Bitcoin main protocol, the old Core becomes altcoin.

Also covered in the wiki. Big IF that implies overwhelming economic consensus to break away from the dev consensus, as it has never happened before.

Currently the altcoin is XT, and it looks like it will stay an altcoin.