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

[Cconvert2G36]

Why are you still entertaining the notion that a network wide hardfork can be deployed faster than SW can?

Because it's one line of code vs well... an untested and fairly complex reorg of the protocol.

No one proposes to rush through SegWit. It seems you are largely ignorant of what its deployment entail other than the couple posts you've read on reddit or Jeff's FUD.

Oh, I'm aware there is no rush... it's become painfully apparent. And doing a soft fork is ideal when you plan to keep hard forks, ie:max block size increase, quite contentious in the future as well.

SegWit is opt-in and if service providers are pro-active it can be ready to roll out when the code is implemented. At least that's what the dev of the 2nd most popular iOS app plans to do.

Spare us your concern trolling unless you can provide a detailed account of the "massive upgrade" you talk about.

Well, I apologize for concern trolling while a single company molds a decentralized protocol, of which I'm a long time participant, to its self interested will.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Why are you still entertaining the notion that a network wide hardfork can be deployed faster than SW can?

Because it's one line of code vs well... an untested and fairly complex reorg of the protocol.

No one proposes to rush through SegWit. It seems you are largely ignorant of what its deployment entail other than the couple posts you've read on reddit or Jeff's FUD.

Oh, I'm aware there is no rush... it's become painfully apparent. And doing a soft fork is ideal when you plan to keep hard forks, ie:max block size increase, quite contentious in the future as well.

SegWit is opt-in and if service providers are pro-active it can be ready to roll out when the code is implemented. At least that's what the dev of the 2nd most popular iOS app plans to do.

Spare us your concern trolling unless you can provide a detailed account of the "massive upgrade" you talk about.

Well, I apologize for concern trolling while a single company molds a decentralized protocol, of which I'm a long time participant, to its self interested will.

[brg444]

Why are you still entertaining the notion that a network wide hardfork can be deployed faster than SW can?

Because it's one line of code vs well... an untested and fairly complex reorg of the protocol.

See what you did here?

No matter how complex SW can still be deployed and made effective faster than a hard fork which will take at least a full year to deploy and activate.

Well, I apologize for concern trolling while a single company molds a decentralized protocol, of which I'm a long time participant, to its self interested will.

Your concerns would be appreciated if they were based on facts and legitimate understanding of the dynamics involved. Clearly these are not things you can bring to the table.

[johnyj]

Jeff Garzik and Gavin Andresen: Bitcoin is Being Hot-Wired for Settlement

We have a disappointing situation where a subset of dev consensus is disconnected from the oft-mentioned desire to increase block size on the part of users, businesses, exchanges and miners. This reshapes bitcoin in ways full of philosophical and economic conflicts of interest. As noted here, inaction changes bitcoin, sets it on a new path

It is interesting to see that Jeff is now teaming up with Gavin, what is happening inside the core devs? It seems the situation suddenly get weird after the HK conference

http://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-21-million-seed-capital/ Linkedin, Airbnb, Google, Yahoo ... many of the software heavy weights are backing blockstream, no doubt there are so much slides from that direction, they have been preparing for over one year with all these solutions

However the solutions from blockstream are all complex. Raised level of complexity will dramatically reduce its ability to survival long term wise, and the acceptance from miners/users will be very low

I think at these stage any more talk is meaningless, let the predictive market decide which fork will survive. Satoshi's one million coin can destroy any fork he does not like, so I think any design that is against Satoshi's original vision have a high risk of failure. Of course he might not react, but then independent core devs also hold lots of coins (Rich guys don't need a boss) that can be mass dumped, let the star wars begin

[brg444]

[00:08] <petertodd> bramc: but today we have a blocksize limit low enough that everyone has access to reasonably low orphan rates
[00:08] <petertodd> bramc: (remember that the networking code we have right now on the p2p network is *really* inefficient)
[00:09] <bramc> petertodd, And the blocksize limit is staying down there, by design
[00:09] <petertodd> bramc: what do you mean?
[00:10] <bramc> petertodd, The current 'plan of record' is for the block size to de facto go up by less than 2x with segwit and otherwise stay put, at least for now
[00:10] <bramc> For exactly that reason
[00:10] <petertodd> bramc: sure

Not tonight, dear.

[Cconvert2G36]

[00:08] <petertodd> bramc: but today we have a blocksize limit low enough that everyone has access to reasonably low orphan rates
[00:08] <petertodd> bramc: (remember that the networking code we have right now on the p2p network is *really* inefficient)
[00:09] <bramc> petertodd, And the blocksize limit is staying down there, by design
[00:09] <petertodd> bramc: what do you mean?
[00:10] <bramc> petertodd, The current 'plan of record' is for the block size to de facto go up by less than 2x with segwit and otherwise stay put, at least for now
[00:10] <bramc> For exactly that reason
[00:10] <petertodd> bramc: sure

Not tonight, dear.

Always cute.

[hdbuck]

I trust the BIP process and the socioeconomic majority's marketplace of ideas will figure it out.

Good one.

http://qntra.net/2015/07/chain-fork-reveals-bip-process-broken/

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Why are you still entertaining the notion that a network wide hardfork can be deployed faster than SW can?

because he clearly understands this better than you do. Block size limit can be changed in a heartbeat. Satoshi describes the whole process here. Most existing bitcoin elements will work with it without change.

However, seqwit requires complete and complex changes to:

• bitcoin transactions,
• blocks,
• addresses,
• scripts,
• full nodes,
• miners,
• wallets,
• explorers,
• exchanges,
• libraries,
• APIs

Not a single piece of the bitcoin ecosystem will work with segwit without an upgrade.
 

No one proposes to rush through SegWit. It seems you are largely ignorant of what its deployment entail other than the couple posts you've read on reddit or Jeff's FUD.

Except you. Have you short term memory issues, or have you hit your limit on simultaneous threads? Earlier you are banging on about how segwit is here, ready for deployment.  As regards what it involves to deploy - see above.

SegWit is opt-in and if service providers are pro-active it can be ready to roll out when the code is implemented into Core. At least that's what the dev of the 2nd most popular iOS app plans to do.

Wrong. segwit is no longer optional. you may ignore it, but that puts you back to spv mode.

Spare us your concern trolling unless you can provide a detailed account of the "massive upgrade" you talk about.

Spare us your Trolling, full stop.

[iCEBREAKER]

I can't wait to start generating 16MB blocks construed so as to take 128 minutes to verify.  Once your derp forks' chain(s?) cannot be verified in real time (and it becomes impossible to bootstrap new full nodes) it's game over.  Unless Mikey "Final Call" Hearn wants to sit around forever checkpointing out troll blocks....  

This assumes miners are idiots and will sit there for 128 min trying to verify a block rather than build on a longer chain of smaller, shorter blocks. Also, you're being absolutist here, many would be satisfied with 2MB to study the effects on nodes, gain time to carefully and methodically roll out segwit, and time to plan a more permanent solution.

Big pool/miner nodes use 15 or 18 core Xeons, and given competitive tx fees (and/or out-of-band arrangements) will be happy to quickly construe 16MB XT/BU blocks which take hours to verify on a normal laptop.

Core may change to 2MB eventually, if and only if the 1MB control variable in the Bitcoin experiment proves to be a threat to the antifragility of the entire system.

We must know if or exactly when 1MB causes Bitcoin to fail, and for what reasons.  Magic numbers picked before such an informative event (ie teachable moment) are worse than useless.

Premature increases retard development of fee markets critical for weaning Bitcoin off block subsidies and onto self-sufficient tx provision utility.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

http://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-21-million-seed-capital/ Linkedin, Airbnb, Google, Yahoo ... many of the software heavy weights are backing blockstream, no doubt there are so much slides from that direction, they have been preparing for over one year with all these solutions

Its funny how ice and brg construe any connection with yahoo and google on Mike or Gavins part as "Gubmint", but seem happy to take the feds sheckles when it is paid via Blockstream...

[johnyj]

http://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-21-million-seed-capital/ Linkedin, Airbnb, Google, Yahoo ... many of the software heavy weights are backing blockstream, no doubt there are so much slides from that direction, they have been preparing for over one year with all these solutions

Its funny how ice and brg construe any connection with yahoo and google on Mike or Gavins part as "Gubmint", but seem happy to take the feds sheckles when it is paid via Blockstream...

I still think any devs that have commit access should at least own 10000 bitcoins to make sure they can do R&D independently. Having large enterprise backing is politically disadvantage in a decentralized system, it reduces the trust

The reason we end up here is because there was not enough incentive for the core devs. I still remember during mining frenzy, many miners were donating bitcoins to mining software designer and even mining rig designer.  But for core devs? Almost none from average user, so that vacuum is spotted by enterprises quickly. First Gavin went to TBF, and then several others into Blockstream. We could avoid this if there is a mechanism to incentivize core devs

[VeritasSapere]

Bitcoin Unlimited is transcending this entire debate, a synthesis. A paradigm shift, a new awakening. A discovery of something that was already there. Something old and something new. I am exited to step into this new frontier, a new dawn. Bitcoin is growing up, it needs to shake itself lose from the paternalism of its past. It needs to realize itself and evolve into what it is meant to become. We are a part of this, humanity is a part of this great machine. The truth lights our path forward and exposes those that wish to block the stream of our future. Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom. The road of our salvation has been illuminated, as we travel towards our destiny and touch the stars, remember our history and our unlimited possibility.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

core block size limit should be made dynamic, put in the realm of software, outside of human hands

This might be the single most obvious statement ever and Blockstreamers aren't buyin' it.

[hdbuck]

core block size limit should be made dynamic, put in the realm of software, outside of human hands

This might be the single most obvious statement ever and Blockstreamers aren't buyin' it.

Except that this is practically some pipe dream  utopia if not completely irrelevant.

Forkers are free to fork into some altcoin with whatever parameter they want tho.

[Peter R]

Bitcoin Unlimited is transcending this entire debate, a synthesis. A paradigm shift, a new awakening. A discovery of something that was already there. Something old and something new. I am exited to step into this new frontier, a new dawn. Bitcoin is growing up, it needs to shake itself lose from the paternalism of its past. It needs to realize itself and evolve into what it is meant to become. We are a part of this, humanity is a part of this great machine. The truth lights our path forward and exposes those that wish to block the stream of our future. Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom. The road of our salvation has been illuminated, as we travel towards our destiny and touch the stars, remember our history and our unlimited possibility.

Great post!  Poetic too.

To me it seems the Bitcoin Unlimited is waking people up to the fact that they are in control of Bitcoin's destiny.  That the block size limit is just a figment of our collective imagination.  That it only exists if we agree it exists.

It is great to see individual nodes talking matters into their own hands by running Bitcoin Unlimited.  They are saying "I don't need to wait for the permission of the Blockstream Core Central Planning Committee!"

[notbatman]

Bitcoin Unlimited is transcending this entire debate, a synthesis. A paradigm shift, a new awakening. A discovery of something that was already there. Something old and something new. I am exited to step into this new frontier, a new dawn. Bitcoin is growing up, it needs to shake itself lose from the paternalism of its past. It needs to realize itself and evolve into what it is meant to become. We are a part of this, humanity is a part of this great machine. The truth lights our path forward and exposes those that wish to block the stream of our future. Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom. The road of our salvation has been illuminated, as we travel towards our destiny and touch the stars, remember our history and our unlimited possibility.

Great post!  Poetic too.

To me it seems the Bitcoin Unlimited is waking people up to the fact that they are in control of Bitcoin's destiny.  That the block size limit is just a figment of our collective imagination.  That it only exists if we agree it exists.

It is great to see individual nodes talking matters into their own hands by running Bitcoin Unlimited.  They are saying "I don't need to wait for the permission of the Blockstream Core Central Planning Committee!"

[ATguy]

core block size limit should be made dynamic, put in the realm of software, outside of human hands

This might be the single most obvious statement ever and Blockstreamers aren't buyin' it.

Except that this is practically some pipe dream  utopia if not completely irrelevant.

Forkers are free to fork into some altcoin with whatever parameter they want tho.

Even though Bitcoin core is highly infiltrated with Blockstream agents, it doesnt mean your vision of centralized offchain solution as the main Bitcoin function will be accepted by most Bitcoiners, and even though your Bitcoin core infiltration is impressive and the proposed Bitcoin roadmap succesfully removes any hardfork possibility from 2016 *, it doesnt mean your sure longterm winner with your centralized offchain Bitcoin vision.

* for acceptable hardfork no one needs to fear (or make argue of fear to prevent hardfork), you need the change in Bitcoin client long time preferrably a year before most nodes naturally updates to this version of the Bitcoin client unless you want create emergency hardfork with the havoc associated

[btcusury]

While they do bring up some good points, authoritarian statists Jeff Garzik and Gavin Andresen write:

The proposed roadmap currently being discussed in the bitcoin community has some good points in that it does have a plan to accommodate more transactions, but it fails speak plainly to bitcoin users and acknowledge key downsides. The roadmap summary most relevant to bitcoin users is:
Bitcoin is shifting to a new economic policy, with possibly higher fees.
Core block size does not change; there has been zero compromise on that issue. In the face of rising transaction volume — it has doubled over the past year — getting stuck at 1M results in higher fees, notable economic changes, and suffers from increased political risk by embracing an accidentally-created economic policy tool.

There's that word again! It seems to me that anyone talking about "compromises" or "compromising" is coming from a position of pushing a pre-set agenda, not from the mindset of a dialogue in which all the participants share their ideas/arguments for the purpose of arriving at the best solution.

And as commenter Eric Voskuil observes:

This piece is agitprop. Witness the terms "way forward", "leadership" and "plain talk" in the same sentence.

More and more and more it looks like it's all about "compromising" the greatest threat to the central banksters since Andrew fucking Jackson.

Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom.

That should be voluntaryism, you statist shill. When was the last time you had a thought that was your own?

[VeritasSapere]

When faced with irreconcilable differences in the vision of Bitcoin, we can either compromise or split. It is that simple. There is no need to insult me, I stand by my convictions and I am not a statist shill. Decentralization and financial freedom for all is my war cry in this battle of ideas. I stand by the original vision of Satoshi and we can all choose our own destiny.

[valiz]

Bitcoin Unlimited is transcending this entire debate, a synthesis. A paradigm shift, a new awakening. A discovery of something that was already there. Something old and something new. I am exited to step into this new frontier, a new dawn. Bitcoin is growing up, it needs to shake itself lose from the paternalism of its past. It needs to realize itself and evolve into what it is meant to become. We are a part of this, humanity is a part of this great machine. The truth lights our path forward and exposes those that wish to block the stream of our future. Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom. The road of our salvation has been illuminated, as we travel towards our destiny and touch the stars, remember our history and our unlimited possibility.

What's that? Dictator speech?

You stand no chance against Blockstream's wrath! Resistance is futile!

Statist Empire Unlimited is transcending this entire debate, a synthesis. A paradigm shift, a new awakening. A discovery of something that was already there. Something old and something new. I am exited to step into this new frontier, a new dawn. The empire is growing up, it needs to shake itself lose from the paternalism of its past. It needs to realize itself and evolve into what it is meant to become. We are a part of this, humanity is a part of this great machine. The truth lights our path forward and exposes those that wish to block the stream of our future. Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom. The road of our salvation has been illuminated, as we travel towards our destiny and touch the stars, remember our history and our unlimited possibility.