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

[TuLines]

Are we supposed to be using BitCoinXT yet? I forgot when we are supposed to change, I'm lazy and haven't moved over or read about it.. I just don't want my 1 PH/s farm to abruptly work on the wrong chain.

[VeritasSapere]

Are we supposed to be using BitCoinXT yet? I forgot when we are supposed to change, I'm lazy and haven't moved over or read about it.. I just don't want my 1 PH/s farm to abruptly work on the wrong chain.

If you want to support BIP101 support it now, if you do not then don't. If you are only concerned with being on the biggest chain wait and see what the other miners and the economic majority will do come January. If you are mining on BIP101 however there is no danger of being on the smaller chain since BIP101 will only activate with a mining majority anyway. Furthermore I presume that with the hash power that you have you are mining with a pool? If that is the case it is the pool that decides which code is being run, unless you are mining with a pool like Slush which gives miners the choice which implementation to support.

[TuLines]

Are we supposed to be using BitCoinXT yet? I forgot when we are supposed to change, I'm lazy and haven't moved over or read about it.. I just don't want my 1 PH/s farm to abruptly work on the wrong chain.

If you want to support BIP101 support it now, if you do not then don't. If you are only concerned with being on the biggest chain wait and see what the other miners and the economic majority will do come January. If you are mining on BIP101 however there is no danger of being on the smaller chain since BIP101 will only activate with a mining majority anyway. Furthermore I presume that with the hash power that you have you are mining with a pool? If that is the case it is the pool that decides which code is being run, unless you are mining with a pool like Slush which gives miners the choice which implementation to support.

Yes, Mining with a pool I just switched from Slush to eligius.st this morning. So if there is no risk because the pool I'm on now handles things I really don't care one way or another... I'm thinking of just using Multibit HD for my hot wallet anyways, and it looks like they'll handle the change for me.

Thanks for the response.

[VeritasSapere]

Are we supposed to be using BitCoinXT yet? I forgot when we are supposed to change, I'm lazy and haven't moved over or read about it.. I just don't want my 1 PH/s farm to abruptly work on the wrong chain.

If you want to support BIP101 support it now, if you do not then don't. If you are only concerned with being on the biggest chain wait and see what the other miners and the economic majority will do come January. If you are mining on BIP101 however there is no danger of being on the smaller chain since BIP101 will only activate with a mining majority anyway. Furthermore I presume that with the hash power that you have you are mining with a pool? If that is the case it is the pool that decides which code is being run, unless you are mining with a pool like Slush which gives miners the choice which implementation to support.

Yes, Mining with a pool I just switched from Slush to eligius.st this morning. So if there is no risk because the pool I'm on now handles things I really don't care one way or another... I'm thinking of just using Multibit HD for my hot wallet anyways, and it looks like they'll handle the change for me.

Thanks for the response.

It is a pleasure, eligius.st is also a good pool. One word of warning though if the majority of the network does fork to BIP101 then you might still be mining on the smaller chain, since eligius is run by lukejr who is a fanatical supporter of small blocks and I suspect will continue to do so regardless of the economic majority. Slush on the other hand will follow the economic majority if BIP101 does fork the network.

Multibit also has my recommendation it is a reliable and well respected wallet. Impressive mining operation you have there, I hope to build my operation up to 1PH one day.

[Lauda]

Are we supposed to be using BitCoinXT yet? I forgot when we are supposed to change, I'm lazy and haven't moved over or read about it.. I just don't want my 1 PH/s farm to abruptly work on the wrong chain.

No. That is never going to happen. Just keep mining with what you're used to.

I wonder why you didn't close this thread yet? XT is done, thus there is no need to discuss it.

[VeritasSapere]

Are we supposed to be using BitCoinXT yet? I forgot when we are supposed to change, I'm lazy and haven't moved over or read about it.. I just don't want my 1 PH/s farm to abruptly work on the wrong chain.

No. That is never going to happen. Just keep mining with what you're used to.

I wonder why you didn't close this thread yet? XT is done, thus there is no need to discuss it.

BIP101 will continue to live on as long as people still believe in it. It can not die in the same way that Bitcoin can not die, so long as there are people that still believe in it, it will live on, it is the power of ideas. I am running several XT nodes myself, so my experience is a counterfactual to your declaration. It seems like some major players within the Bitcoin space now also support BIP101 so this is certainly far from done.

[Carlton Banks]

It seems like some major players within the Bitcoin space now also support BIP101 so this is certainly far from done.

That was also true months ago, so little has changed. And to be fair, for "major players", read "major banking industry subversives/captives".

I challenge you to get real Bitcoiners to use Gavin Andresen's non-fungible alt-coin if a fork took place: why would a Bitcoin user be interested in something that's planned to become fiat 2.0?

[Lauda]

BIP101 will continue to live on as long as people still believe in it.

Unicorns will continue to live on as long as people still believe in them. Good argument indeed.

That was also true months ago, so little has changed. And to be fair, for "major players", read "major banking industry subversives/captives".

This is more than correct.
Update:

A straw man argument, ad hominem and a case of false equivalence.

Based on your argumentation with "straw men" "false dichotomies" whatever, "gold governance" exists as well.  

You were so close. Unfortunately he has become quite deluded and does not even know what a real fallacy is anymore. Old and predictable nonsense as always.

[VeritasSapere]

A straw man argument, ad hominem and a case of false equivalence. Whether I am right or wrong I would hope that most Bitcoiners would not be swayed by such primitive and obviously false arguments. I support BIP101 because I think this proposal would maximize decentralization and financial freedom over the long run more compared to the alternatives.

[brg444]

I wonder why you didn't close this thread yet? XT is done, thus there is no need to discuss it.

I thought about it but recent developments suggests the f0rkers still have some tricks up their sleeves so for the sake of noobs this thread is beneficial.

Consider it as some sort of public service announcement against these scammers.

[Adrian-x]

I prefer their understanding of free market economics and Bitcoin governance specifically.

"bitcoin governance" is a myth concept that has been generated by the MIT media lab as a divisive issue. The term was not in circulation until Brian Forde began pumping the "bitcoin governance" propaganda soon after taking up his role after leaving the Obama Whitehouse.

https://medium.com/mit-media-lab-digital-currency-initiative/launching-a-digital-currency-initiative-238fc678aba2

http://news.mit.edu/2015/brian-forde-media-lab-director-digital-currency-0415

... go figure, government guys want to "govern". Github or go home.

I don't think you've met your new overlords, you're just blindly supporting their employees.

I'm so confused by your Ideology it is in support of the founding principals that are unlocked by Bitcoin, yet you fail to see how it's being governed.

[marcus_of_augustus]

I'm so confused ...

I know you are. When I'm confused I check my assumptions ...

[johnyj]

BIP101 will continue to live on as long as people still believe in it. It can not die in the same way that Bitcoin can not die, so long as there are people that still believe in it, it will live on, it is the power of ideas. I am running several XT nodes myself, so my experience is a counterfactual to your declaration. It seems like some major players within the Bitcoin space now also support BIP101 so this is certainly far from done.

Good to hear this, and thanks for sharing the video from Vinay Gupta. I suddenly understand lots of thing in the latest HongKong consensus conference. Why Gavin was not there, why Pieter was rush to push in a strange soft fork proposal and why Jeff said you should not be afraid of hard fork. It seems there are still very strong political struggle inside

Although I do not run XT due to my personal perference (I'm the conservative type that prefer change nothing unless definitely necessary), but it is good to hear different voice since bitcoin should be politically neutral, not presenting any single faction's interest

However, any decision will make you either tilt to one side or the other, you can not really be 100% neutral. And because participants all have different interest, it is very difficult to reach agreement in a decentralized community

Typically in a open source project, people with the most knowledge get to decide what code should go in, what should not, this kind of governance structure has been existing since GIT was born. So from a political point of view, the governance structure is very centralized and hierachical. Then if we have two lead designer do not agree with each other, we have this XT branch, similar to a civil war in a centrally organized country

I think eventually there is a need for some kind of code like ten commandments in Bible, although you don't need government in anarchist community, but you still need some kind of basic principles to guide everyone. But so far I have only seen Nick Szabo mentioned a little about 4 priorities, and that also need completion/debate

[theymos]

You make it sound like Core just resurrected Hitler and reinstated the third reich.

IIRC that's not planned until 0.14.

[Lauda]

Good to hear this, and thanks for sharing the video from Vinay Gupta. I suddenly understand lots of thing in the latest HongKong consensus conference. Why Gavin was not there, why Pieter was rush to push in a strange soft fork proposal and why Jeff said you should not be afraid of hard fork. It seems there are still very strong political struggle inside

Just because you don't understand something properly that does not make it strange. Typical average humans. BIP101 would result in self-destruction within the first 2 increases.

I thought about it but recent developments suggests the f0rkers still have some tricks up their sleeves so for the sake of noobs this thread is beneficial.

Consider it as some sort of public service announcement against these scammers.

You are right about that though. They are posting nonsense wherever they can. Watch out though; incoming ad hominem and straw man fallacy.

[QuestionAuthority]

You make it sound like Core just resurrected Hitler and reinstated the third reich.

IIRC that's not planned until 0.14.

Humor theymos? Did you sell your account? lol

With Hearn gone on to feather his nest elsewhere, Andresen's support flopping around and XT dead I'm surprised this thread still has any momentum at all.

[hdbuck]

You make it sound like Core just resurrected Hitler and reinstated the third reich.

IIRC that's not planned until 0.14.

Humor theymos? Did you sell your account? lol

With Hearn gone on to feather his nest elsewhere, Andresen's support flopping around and XT dead I'm surprised this thread still has any momentum at all.

dead cat bounce.

[VeritasSapere]

You make it sound like Core just resurrected Hitler and reinstated the third reich.

IIRC that's not planned until 0.14.

That is a very dark joke theymos, I might even go as far as to say that it is distasteful.

[VeritasSapere]

I have been doing most of my writing on a different thread recently. I invite everyone to join me there, even my ideological opponents.

https://bitco.in/forum/threads/gold-collapsing-bitcoin-up.16/page-162#post-5549

I have found that the discussion on this thread is far more civil and constructive.

[johnyj]

Good to hear this, and thanks for sharing the video from Vinay Gupta. I suddenly understand lots of thing in the latest HongKong consensus conference. Why Gavin was not there, why Pieter was rush to push in a strange soft fork proposal and why Jeff said you should not be afraid of hard fork. It seems there are still very strong political struggle inside

Just because you don't understand something properly that does not make it strange. Typical average humans. BIP101 would result in self-destruction within the first 2 increases.

I can give you a 10 pages proposal written in ancient chinese + arabic, and tell you this one can solve all the problems for bitcoin, would you accept my proposal? You need to first go into some university for 10 years before you understand what I'm talking about, or you simply ignore it?

Same thing here, if a proposal is too complex for average people to understand, it will just be ignored. In fact, BIP101's problem is just because it introduced a very radical scheme of block size increase that people don't fully understand the consequence of that change. Suppose that it promoted a 2MB block size increase, it should have much larger support than today

But at least you understand that BIP101 will increase the risk of centralization. However for SW proposal, I totally don't understand anything at all: By changing the bitcoin architecture, Pieter essentially change it to something else, an alt-coin. So all the talks about SW should go into alt-coin section, not here. And all this large degree of deviation from Satoshi's original design for what? A mere one time increase for capacity of light nodes, not even helping full nodes?

Nassim Nicholas Taleb: "Solutions need to be at least as simple as the problem they solve. Anything else brings multiplicative unintended side effects."