Montreal scaling Bitcoin workshop recap.

[Lauda]

Hey guys, does anybody have any news from Montreal? Did anything interesting happen or been decided?

Please share this info here if you have any. I have been very busy this weekend so I couldn't watch the live broadcast or listen to it on the YouTube. I am very interested by this and can't find anything.

Thanks!

I've only managed to look at the livestream for a hour or so. I did not like the quality of it either, and occasionally there were some technical difficulties (no sound), which was not what I had expected. However, aside from that there were some great talks and some that we're not so great (with a controversial slide or two). The presentations were supposed to be not confrontational to the viewers, but okay.

The point of this workshop is (was) not for a decision to be found. It was rather more about presenting and discussing. Also, there is no concurrent problem and thus there is no need for a 'decision'. People will try to implement what they want. However, we've yet to see what the Core team is planning to do.

[Carlton Banks]

Brg444, I'm not sure I got to meet you! Did we meet?

We didn't and I'm sorry to say I had no interest in doing so.

Some might be oblivious to your character and your sly ways but I know better.

It just wouldn't be honest for me to pretend there could exist some cordiality between us and act like nothing. The "block the stream" trolling pretty much sealed the deal for me in that sense. You might've gotten a few laughs out of it but I thought that was of very bad taste.

I'm sorry I don't think we can be friends  

Well I'm sorry to hear that. Best of luck to you in your future.

I really wish you two would have met and found some common ground. Here we have two people who were front row, in person, live action at the workshop that this thread is about, and instead of hearing your stories of who you met, what you saw, and if you think it was a productive with respect to the block size debate at large, we have to endure a bickering back and forth about hurt egos.  

Well, I think it has something more to do with Peter R being a skilled and serial manipulator of basic facts, in order to bring about a corporate takeover of the Bitcoin network.

I don't like him either, for those reasons.

BTW, can't help but be reminded of bitcointalk user Elwar's description of how to avoid potential espionage agents at public meetups.... Peter R seems very keen to put names to faces and also appears to be unusually athletic for a computer science geek....

[coinplus]

Bitcoin NG is more exciting. I look forward of implementing it in live bitcoin network. Then, bitcoin transactions would be roughly 60 times faster than currently what we have. This means from my understanding there is no need of block size change. Do not know what our community vote for.

[Mickeyb]

Hey guys, does anybody have any news from Montreal? Did anything interesting happen or been decided?

Please share this info here if you have any. I have been very busy this weekend so I couldn't watch the live broadcast or listen to it on the YouTube. I am very interested by this and can't find anything.

Thanks!

I've only managed to look at the livestream for a hour or so. I did not like the quality of it either, and occasionally there were some technical difficulties (no sound), which was not what I had expected. However, aside from that there were some great talks and some that we're not so great (with a controversial slide or two). The presentations were supposed to be not confrontational to the viewers, but okay.

The point of this workshop is (was) not for a decision to be found. It was rather more about presenting and discussing. Also, there is no concurrent problem and thus there is no need for a 'decision'. People will try to implement what they want. However, we've yet to see what the Core team is planning to do.

Yes, I've been watching the whole morning. I got the same feeling, many, many interesting things but like they know why did they come, more to discuss than to bring important decisions. Everybody are also very calm, looks to me that they are not pushed by time to bring a final decision.

I mean after all, they are probably right. The best is to think through stuff very throughly and not bring any fast decisions, the blocks are even now semi full. This doesn't meant that this can't change very fast. I think that the Hong Kong conference will be much different than this one. This conference will probably bring much more action.

[johnyj]

Basically nothing new here, the ideas like NG has been discussed long time ago without any major breakthrough, because any split of the block and broadcasting will have security risk

I think the progress on those kind of meetings are much slower than forum, where all kinds of ideas can be exchanged and discussed in real time

I recently read Peter R's paper on supply and demand model without block size limit, I think he has done quite some research in writing that paper. And I want to point out that for each different miner on the network, he's view of supply and demand is not the same as another guy with a totally different set of hardware and network infrastructure

For example, a large group of chinese miners on very slow connections might choose to mine extremely small blocks to reduce their orphan rate. However since they command majority of the hash power, the whole network capacity will be limited by their choice, even others on high speed connections consider that mining larger block is profitable. So it is very difficult to get a supply demand picture for the whole network when the nodes have vastly different infrastructure. Notice that those slow connection area typically have the lowest electricity/labor cost

The supply and demand model works when every participants are following their best economy interest. However, if there are some actors intentionally causing problem for the network because they have some other interest beyond the bitcoin economy, for example banks who want to cripple the bitcoin network to reduce competition, then the security is the first priority. The latest spam attack simulated such a possibility. In fact banks can cripple bitcoin network if they want, but it is just too small to raise any concern for them right now

[knight22]

Brg444, I'm not sure I got to meet you! Did we meet?

We didn't and I'm sorry to say I had no interest in doing so.

Some might be oblivious to your character and your sly ways but I know better.

It just wouldn't be honest for me to pretend there could exist some cordiality between us and act like nothing. The "block the stream" trolling pretty much sealed the deal for me in that sense. You might've gotten a few laughs out of it but I thought that was of very bad taste.

I'm sorry I don't think we can be friends  

Well I'm sorry to hear that. Best of luck to you in your future.

I really wish you two would have met and found some common ground. Here we have two people who were front row, in person, live action at the workshop that this thread is about, and instead of hearing your stories of who you met, what you saw, and if you think it was a productive with respect to the block size debate at large, we have to endure a bickering back and forth about hurt egos.  

Well, I think it has something more to do with Peter R being a skilled and serial manipulator of basic facts, in order to bring about a corporate free market takeover of the Bitcoin network.

I don't like him either, for those reasons.

BTW, can't help but be reminded of bitcointalk user Elwar's description of how to avoid potential espionage agents at public meetups.... Peter R seems very keen to put names to faces and also appears to be unusually athletic for a computer science geek....

[img]-snip-[img]

FTFY

[Carlton Banks]

Well, I think it has something more to do with Peter R being a skilled and serial manipulator of basic facts, in order to bring about a corporate free market takeover of the Bitcoin network.

I don't like him either, for those reasons.

BTW, can't help but be reminded of bitcointalk user Elwar's description of how to avoid potential espionage agents at public meetups.... Peter R seems very keen to put names to faces and also appears to be unusually athletic for a computer science geek....

[img]-snip-[img]

FTFY

Lol at Mr. "Money as Debt", who just so happens to be shilling BIP101 for Goldman Sachs. But free market though, right?  


Said it before: you are a disgusting individual. Disgusting.

[poncom]

Hey guys, does anybody have any news from Montreal? Did anything interesting happen or been decided?

Please share this info here if you have any. I have been very busy this weekend so I couldn't watch the live broadcast or listen to it on the YouTube. I am very interested by this and can't find anything.

Thanks!

I've only managed to look at the livestream for a hour or so. I did not like the quality of it either, and occasionally there were some technical difficulties (no sound), which was not what I had expected. However, aside from that there were some great talks and some that we're not so great (with a controversial slide or two). The presentations were supposed to be not confrontational to the viewers, but okay.

The point of this workshop is (was) not for a decision to be found. It was rather more about presenting and discussing. Also, there is no concurrent problem and thus there is no need for a 'decision'. People will try to implement what they want. However, we've yet to see what the Core team is planning to do.

There was a guy called Mr Microphone who did a stand up comedy routine where he pretended his microphone was intermittently faulty. The intermittent lack of sound on the livestream made the conference technicians appear unprofessional at best, and Mr Microphone style comedic at worst. As most people choose to view the livestream rather than attend the conference the technical difficulties give the conference itself a bad appearance.

[Kprawn]

The discussion was a bit one sided in my opinion... there were no real engagement... just a little bit of.. "Listen this is what we working on, and why we would be going in that

direction. I would have wanted to see a real active 2 sided debate on the matter, stating the pro's and con's and in the end, a decision made about the matter.

Some of the stuff that was discussed was very informative though.  {Peter / security} 

[knight22]

Well, I think it has something more to do with Peter R being a skilled and serial manipulator of basic facts, in order to bring about a corporate free market takeover of the Bitcoin network.

I don't like him either, for those reasons.

BTW, can't help but be reminded of bitcointalk user Elwar's description of how to avoid potential espionage agents at public meetups.... Peter R seems very keen to put names to faces and also appears to be unusually athletic for a computer science geek....

[img]-snip-[img]

FTFY

Lol at Mr. "Money as Debt", who just so happens to be shilling BIP101 for Goldman Sachs. But free market though, right?  


Said it before: you are a disgusting individual. Disgusting.

Small blocks are for Goldman Sachs exclusive settlement system and is the perfect system to keep fractional debt base money. Thank you sir for demonstrating that you actually have no clue of what you are talking about.

Will you run a node for them?

[Carlton Banks]

Well, I think it has something more to do with Peter R being a skilled and serial manipulator of basic facts, in order to bring about a corporate free market takeover of the Bitcoin network.

I don't like him either, for those reasons.

BTW, can't help but be reminded of bitcointalk user Elwar's description of how to avoid potential espionage agents at public meetups.... Peter R seems very keen to put names to faces and also appears to be unusually athletic for a computer science geek....

[img]-snip-[img]

FTFY

Lol at Mr. "Money as Debt", who just so happens to be shilling BIP101 for Goldman Sachs. But free market though, right?  


Said it before: you are a disgusting individual. Disgusting.

Small blocks are for Goldman Sachs exclusive settlement system and is the perfect system to keep fractional debt base money. Thank you sir for demonstrating that you actually have no clue of what you are talking about.

Will you run a node for them?

Except that Goldman Sachs literally are backing BIP101, so you're at least a massive hypocrite. But I find it hard to believe you're that stupid, you've demonstrated otherwise, and so you can only be a shill for Goldman Sachs themselves, really.

Confirmed disgusting manipulative shill, in other words. Sociopath on behalf of those that wish to increase their dominance. The total opposite of the image you present for yourself. Be gone.

[adamstgBit]

Well, I think it has something more to do with Peter R being a skilled and serial manipulator of basic facts, in order to bring about a corporate free market takeover of the Bitcoin network.

I don't like him either, for those reasons.

BTW, can't help but be reminded of bitcointalk user Elwar's description of how to avoid potential espionage agents at public meetups.... Peter R seems very keen to put names to faces and also appears to be unusually athletic for a computer science geek....

[img]-snip-[img]

FTFY

Lol at Mr. "Money as Debt", who just so happens to be shilling BIP101 for Goldman Sachs. But free market though, right?  


Said it before: you are a disgusting individual. Disgusting.

Small blocks are for Goldman Sachs exclusive settlement system and is the perfect system to keep fractional debt base money. Thank you sir for demonstrating that you actually have no clue of what you are talking about.

Will you run a node for them?

Except that Goldman Sachs literally are backing BIP101, so you're at least a massive hypocrite. But I find it hard to believe you're that stupid, you've demonstrated otherwise, and so you can only be a shill for Goldman Sachs themselves, really.

Confirmed disgusting manipulative shill, in other words. Sociopath on behalf of those that wish to increase their dominance. The total opposite of the image you present for yourself. Be gone.

lol really, they have hashing power mining BIP101 blocks? or do they just publicly state that it want BIP101?

[knight22]

Well, I think it has something more to do with Peter R being a skilled and serial manipulator of basic facts, in order to bring about a corporate free market takeover of the Bitcoin network.

I don't like him either, for those reasons.

BTW, can't help but be reminded of bitcointalk user Elwar's description of how to avoid potential espionage agents at public meetups.... Peter R seems very keen to put names to faces and also appears to be unusually athletic for a computer science geek....

[img]-snip-[img]

FTFY

Lol at Mr. "Money as Debt", who just so happens to be shilling BIP101 for Goldman Sachs. But free market though, right?  


Said it before: you are a disgusting individual. Disgusting.

Small blocks are for Goldman Sachs exclusive settlement system and is the perfect system to keep fractional debt base money. Thank you sir for demonstrating that you actually have no clue of what you are talking about.

Will you run a node for them?

Except that Goldman Sachs literally are backing BIP101, so you're at least a massive hypocrite. But I find it hard to believe you're that stupid, you've demonstrated otherwise, and so you can only be a shill for Goldman Sachs themselves, really.

Confirmed disgusting manipulative shill, in other words. Sociopath on behalf of those that wish to increase their dominance. The total opposite of the image you present for yourself. Be gone.

Give me a break. Goldman Sachs don’t give a damn about bitcoin. I dare you to find a quote from a Goldman CEO supporting your claim.

[Carlton Banks]

Give me a break. Goldman Sachs don’t give a damn about bitcoin. I dare you to find a quote from a Goldman CEO supporting your claim.

Not giving up on your manipulative tactics, no?

How about the multiple rounds of investment that Goldman Sachs have put into, well what do you know, the companies that support BIP101? The same scaling proposal you've been advocating so strongly for? Hello?

[knight22]

Give me a break. Goldman Sachs don’t give a damn about bitcoin. I dare you to find a quote from a Goldman CEO supporting your claim.

Not giving up on your manipulative tactics, no?

How about the multiple rounds of investment that Goldman Sachs have put into, well what do you know, the companies that support BIP101? The same scaling proposal you've been advocating so strongly for? Hello?

It doesn't mean anything on their stance on BIP101 and they probably have no clue what it is. Do you know how much money is in the investment portfolio of a bank? This small investment is completely meaningless. They did it as an hedge of a potentially disruptive technology. Do you think they are part of any decision making of all their investments? No and they don’t have time to do so. They just invested in a bitcoin company than needs scaling like any other bitcoin company. 

[Carlton Banks]

Sounds like you know some pretty intimate details, any more?

Interesting how they didn't actually hedge their bets by investing in Blockstream also, any info for us about that, knight22?

[jonald_fyookball]

Sounds like you know some pretty intimate details, any more?

Interesting how they didn't actually hedge their bets by investing in Blockstream also, any info for us about that, knight22?

You've lost it dude.

You used to post such intelligent stuff.

[TransaDox]

I was extremely invigorated by the talks. I was pleasantly surprised that many of my concerns were not only voiced but actively being discussed although was somewhat frustrated that the more obvious existing solutions to some concerns were not being considered. (Is Anysource, Multicast UDP being talked about?)

 I particularly resonated with Eric Lombrozo's talk which, to me, was pretty much the précis of all the issues of Bitcoin and encompassed all the the subjects of the two days. I think many people are very heavily focused on their narrow domain passion and it needs people to sometimes pop their head up, look around and also back to see where we've been.

It was also a confirmation for me because after the two days of listening to some great talks, my conviction that pretty much all the ills of Bitcoin start and end with the miners' human component in a system originally designed to not be reliant on human rationalities; is stronger than ever.

[Carlton Banks]

Sounds like you know some pretty intimate details, any more?

Interesting how they didn't actually hedge their bets by investing in Blockstream also, any info for us about that, knight22?

You've lost it dude.

You used to post such intelligent stuff.

Another head of the hydra speaks, and it's the same disgraceful conduct that can now be relied upon; I call you creatures out for what you are, and all you can do is point your finger and cast aspersions.  

I invite you all warmly, you, Peter R and knight22 and the rest of the cronies, to leave this community and the deceptions you are peddling. You will always be remembered in exactly the way I have exposed you. And you will all have to live with it.

[knight22]

Sounds like you know some pretty intimate details, any more?

Interesting how they didn't actually hedge their bets by investing in Blockstream also, any info for us about that, knight22?

Bank managers have very little understanding on the technical functioning of bitcoin and where this technology is heading. The fact that they didn’t invest in Blockstream only demonstrate that (thank God). Very few have hedge their bets with some bitcoin comapny but no more. Of course they have little interest of deeper understanding because we all know this technology can render their very lucrative business model into an almost obsolete one. However, keeping small blocks is a great way to push users into potential proprietary off-chain systems controlled by banks which can be used for fractional reserve, cooking books and all the great things they love doing. On the other hand allowing people to directly use the blockchain is a bigger threat to their business model.