It's the PROTOCOL that matters.. Nothing else..

[spartacusrex]

Well, these certainly are 'interesting' times in the Bitcoin sphere.. (They always are to be fair.. )

In my humble opinion, the current 'Situation' stems from the fact that the protocol is NOT FINISHED. This is the issue. Not the client software, as that is simply an implementation of the protocol.

We should WANT lots of implementations of the protocol. Trying to use just ONE client, CORE or whatever, is not a good idea. 

Imagine if we all had to use the same web browser ? That would be rubbish.

Imagine if the Core HTTP protocol could change.. What a nightmare.. All the browsers/servers in the world having to argue and fight over who is right, and who is dead.. Well that's the situation we currently find ourselves in.

What this needs, is to finally and concretely define the Bitcoin protocol. No more Hard-BIPS. No more protocol level changes. One more MEGA-FORK, and then we live with what we have created. Full stop.

Tried to work out what future forks might occur here.. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1123605

Once the 'Protocol' is specified, done and dusted, then, and ONLY then, will this uncertainty about the future disappear. Otherwise we are all just waiting around for the next change.. and round and round the merry-go-round goes..

[Mickeyb]

Well, these certainly are 'interesting' times in the Bitcoin sphere.. (They always are to be fair.. )

In my humble opinion, the current 'Situation' stems from the fact that the protocol is NOT FINISHED. This is the issue. Not the client software, as that is simply an implementation of the protocol.

We should WANT lots of implementations of the protocol. Trying to use just ONE client, CORE or whatever, is not a good idea. 

Imagine if we all had to use the same web browser ? That would be rubbish.

Imagine if the Core HTTP protocol could change.. What a nightmare.. All the browsers/servers in the world having to argue and fight over who is right, and who is dead.. Well that's the situation we currently find ourselves in.

What this needs, is to finally and concretely define the Bitcoin protocol. No more Hard-BIPS. No more protocol level changes. One more MEGA-FORK, and then we live with what we have created. Full stop.

Tried to work out what future forks might occur here.. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1123605

Once the 'Protocol' is specified, done and dusted, then, and ONLY then, will this uncertainty about the future disappear. Otherwise we are all just waiting around for the next change.. and round and round the merry-go-round goes..

You have said it nicely, and that's why I am so afraid of the current fork situation and would like that we reach the consensus and leave all this behind. Many people are unaware, but Bitcoin is having an open heart surgery at the moment. These are huge changes, this is how Bitcoin essentially works.

I hope also that if and after we reach consensus, this will be the last debate of this kind. OK about adding things on the top of, sidechains, etc, but leave the core alone.

[onemorexmr]

i'd love to see the bitcoin protocol to be fixated and with good documantation.
but i dont think this will ever happen - even http changes btw....

IMHO if we fixate bitcoin protocol in the long run this would hinder mass adoption. because if new requirements arise they cant be included and may force(!) users to altcoins. normal users wont accept a currency who they need to worry if its the right one or they have to constantly check if there is a need to move.

one solution may be sidechains. but i'd like to see them in practice before i can make some conclusions (afaik they need ugly addresses; but i hope there is a solution for that problem)

[poeEDgar]

People be tripping if they think this will be the last controversial debate or hard fork. LOL.

This is how bitcoin works. Whether or not you get swept up in retard populism is up to you.

[RustyNomad]

Have to agree with your point of view.

The client software is getting there in leaps and bounds with more being released on an almost daily basis and they are also getting less complicated to use making bitcoin much more accessible to all. However, they all depend on the protocol and if that is 'not working' then essentially nothing works.

There is, in my opinion, a very large risk from the side of the banks who are all starting to seriously look at the protocol/blockchain and some are even nearing the implementation/testing phases. I see this as a risk as the majority of people will favour a crypto like service delivered by their banks instead of making use of bitcoin especially with everything that is going on with bitcoin at this stage. We know that a 'bank coin' will never be the same thing but for the masses it will look like the better option.

[medUSA]

In my humble opinion, the current 'Situation' stems from the fact that the protocol is NOT FINISHED. This is the issue. Not the client software, as that is simply an implementation of the protocol.
<snip>
We should WANT lots of implementations of the protocol. Trying to use just ONE client, CORE or whatever, is not a good idea.  

IMHO the protocol is finished, the problem we are facing is the disagreement on how to scale. Some people believe we should add new things to the protocol while others believe we should only change the variables in the protocol. The person who designed the whole thing is gone and the current decision makers are fragmented. The worst part is "Core" IS the protocol, and this protocol is enforced by miners who are driven by their own agenda. Tens of thousands of real users switching to another client wouldn't matter. The future of their savings are dictated by less than 50 individuals in the whole world.

"Not a good idea" cannot describe how troubled this situation is.  

[uxgpf]

It might be a good idea to separate protocol and client development if anyway possible. Protocol can evolve, but it shouldn't be tied to or favor one implementation over others. Now all protocol changes have to be done inside Bitcoin Core development or otherwise they are viewed as attacks against bitcoin.

[ashour]

I agree bitcoin is still far away from a complete protocol. But with  time it will adapt and grow like all technologies do.

[turvarya]

Ahm ...
You are aware of IPv6 aren't you? So, yes, a Protocol can also change.
That't the beauty about software: It can adapt to new problems and sometimes you have to make radical changes for that.
Taking that away from Bitcoin doesn't make a lot of sense.

[spartacusrex]

Ahm ...
You are aware of IPv6 aren't you? So, yes, a Protocol can also change.
That't the beauty about software: It can adapt to new problems and sometimes you have to make radical changes for that.
Taking that away from Bitcoin doesn't make a lot of sense.

Ahm.. Yeeess..

But thanks, you bring up a nice point that I shall now throw back at ya'..   

How long has IPv6 been rolling out ? Years.. ?

Now imagine that you couldn't even use it unless 75% of the ENTIRE internet has upgraded to it..

Because that's how Bitcoin works, you can't just have some people upgrade, and use the new-teck, and wait for the others to follow suit. You have to wait until ALMOST ALL OF US have upgraded before you can even START using the new features..   

I think 'decades' would be a closer approximation to how long the roll-out would take.. And then of course, you've got those of us who think IPv6 is, to be frank, bollox, and that they should have gone for IPv8 - (you know what I mean, 6 digits isn't enough, they should have gone for 8 and be done with it..)

BOOM!.. WAR!!..  (again..)

..

As for protocols that should have long since been superseded but just keep on ticking.. how about SMTP / POP3 ? Jesus, I bet their inventors never dreamed they would last this long.. But here they stand.

You can't STOP an attempted Hard Fork.. I know.. that's the beauty of it.. and if someone came up with the perfect system, anonymous, fast, global, etc etc, (..looking at you #GMAX..) of course they'll try to push it on Bitcoin, and good luck, but I think the GOAL should be NOT TO HARD FORK.

EVER.

[turvarya]

Ahm ...
You are aware of IPv6 aren't you? So, yes, a Protocol can also change.
That't the beauty about software: It can adapt to new problems and sometimes you have to make radical changes for that.
Taking that away from Bitcoin doesn't make a lot of sense.

Ahm.. Yeeess..

But thanks, you bring up a nice point that I shall now throw back at ya'..   

How long has IPv6 been rolling out ? Years.. ?

Now imagine that you couldn't even use it unless 75% of the ENTIRE internet has upgraded to it..

Because that's how Bitcoin works, you can't just have some people upgrade, and use the new-teck, and wait for the others to follow suit. You have to wait until ALMOST ALL OF US have upgraded before you can even START using the new features..   

I think 'decades' would be a closer approximation to how long the roll-out would take.. And then of course, you've got those of us who think IPv6 is, to be frank, bollox, and that they should have gone for IPv8 - (you know what I mean, 6 digits isn't enough, they should have gone for 8 and be done with it..)

BOOM!.. WAR!!..  (again..)

..

As for protocols that should have long since been superseded but just keep on ticking.. how about SMTP / POP3 ? Jesus, I bet their inventors never dreamed they would last this long.. But here they stand.

You can't STOP an attempted Hard Fork.. I know.. that's the beauty of it.. and if someone came up with the perfect system, anonymous, fast, global, etc etc, (..looking at you #GMAX..) of course they'll try to push it on Bitcoin, and good luck, but I think the GOAL should be NOT TO HARD FORK.

EVER.

I still don't see, that we could really avoid having hardforks. I am also not sure, if the examples you brought up, are really that good. A quick look at Wikipedia tells me following:

Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) is an Internet standard for electronic mail (email) transmission. First defined by RFC 821  in 1982, it was last updated in 2008 with the Extended SMTP additions by RFC 5321  - which is the protocol in widespread use today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_Mail_Transfer_Protocol

But you are right, that it takes time to get that change pushed to every user and it doesn't get better the more users we have. That's why I just don't get, that "just wait, till we hit the wall, before doing anything about it"-attitude, a lot of people have. Bitcoin just isn't that nerdfest anymore, where all the user read the forums all the times. We are so lucky, that we know about this problem, long before it becomes a real problem.
I am pretty sure, there will be other problems in the future, where we will not be that lucky.