Analysis and list of top big blocks shills (XT #REKT ignorers)

[BitUsher]

This bolded bit is an odd thing to say. Some really bright folks think we can have both.

Bitcoin Classic Is just BIP102 without Segwit , and would be a more interesting choice if it really did include both. As of right now Core + Segwit appears to be the better option. Perhaps another implementation is needed to differentiate itself enough.

One day this war has to end.  

To me it doesn't have to be a civil war... If we look at the specific proposals from a technical perspective and remove the politicas and characters we can make a decision with better clarity and without much contention.

I would likely choose to support Bitcoin Classic if it was BIP 102 + Segwit and attracted some more devs. As it stands right now , it simply is a less impressive proposal. When the technical merits are discussed and compared all I hear is vague allusions to the complexity and danger to segwit , when anyone who has really studied the changes in code and what has been tested knows that it really isn't that dangerous and in some aspects less dangerous being a soft-fork.

What would impress me is if Core and Classic made a commitment to work together and defined certain specific proposals.
If I understand Garzik's largest contention is that a sudden change in the economic model with a fee market event is dangerous and we need to study the economic effects first. I am sympathetic to Garzik's position but honestly don't assume that a fee market event is necessarily a bad thing to approach at the moment.

 I am certainly open to any ideas or proposals as to ways we can simulate this beforehand and am willing to contribute towards this effort. Part of me is doubtful that this can be done and thinks that perhaps it needs to be tested live eventually but I am open to suggestions.

[1715015196]

1715015196

[1715015196]

1715015196

[1715015196]

1715015196

[Lauda]

2 MB is possible obviously, but it is redundant in comparison to SegWit. As things stand now, the deployment time for either option is going to be similar (even if Classic takes off). 2 MB blocks do not bring anything with them, SegWit brings a lot of benefits (and the increase in capacity is just a bonus).

This bolded bit is an odd thing to say. Some really bright folks think we can have both.

Some other bright folks know that both would result in a 'effective' block size of 4 MB which is not deemed as safe yet.

One day this war has to end. 

There would be no war if people weren't selfish and following their own agenda

[keepdoing]

There would be no war if people weren't selfish and following their own agenda
[/quote]
Well, we agree on something finally.  So... when are you lot going to stop DDOSing, Spreading FUD, Lying, Manipulating, and following a whiny & childish scorched earth policy of trying to destroy Bitcoin if you can't control it?

?

[jonald_fyookball]

What would impress me is if Core and Classic made a commitment to work together and defined certain specific proposals. 

Why even say something like that...Obviously the whole reasons classic exists is that certain people
have proven they refuse to work together.

[hdbuck]

There would be no war if people weren't selfish and following their own agenda

Well, we agree on something finally.  So... when are you lot going to stop DDOSing, Spreading FUD, Lying, Manipulating, and following a whiny & childish scorched earth policy of trying to destroy Bitcoin if you can't control it?

?

Nobody can control bitcoin.
Only forkers want to destroy bitcoin... by forking it.

[franky1]

What would impress me is if Core and Classic made a commitment to work together and defined certain specific proposals.  

Why even say something like that...Obviously the whole reasons classic exists is that certain people
have proven they refuse to work together.

they way i see it.. full nodes just need to follow a few basic rules.. which all nodes should follow.
which the consensus is that all implementations are agreeing to 2mb as the newest golden rule for all nodes to follow.

after that each implementation can put in their own little features (that dont cause forks) and do their own thing

its like telling banks that they have to
1. use an ISO standard bank note
2. audit their transaction
3. dont allow people to magic up new money outside of the mint


then give all the banks the freedom to allow contracts, loan agreements, escrows, multi-sign trusts, etc.. stuff that can be done locally without affecting the world

[fisheater22]

There would be no war if people weren't selfish and following their own agenda

You mean "when people start to ignore (their perceived) rational self-interest"?

[Zarathustra]

There would be no war if people weren't selfish and following their own agenda

Well, we agree on something finally.  So... when are you lot going to stop DDOSing, Spreading FUD, Lying, Manipulating, and following a whiny & childish scorched earth policy of trying to destroy Bitcoin if you can't control it?

?

Nobody can control bitcoin.
Only forkers want to destroy bitcoin... by forking it.

By a non-consensual 'soft' fork.

[hdbuck]

There would be no war if people weren't selfish and following their own agenda

Well, we agree on something finally.  So... when are you lot going to stop DDOSing, Spreading FUD, Lying, Manipulating, and following a whiny & childish scorched earth policy of trying to destroy Bitcoin if you can't control it?

?

Nobody can control bitcoin.
Only forkers want to destroy bitcoin... by forking it.

By a non-consensual 'soft' fork.

A fork is a fork you dummy. IDGAF whether it is blockstream softfork or classic hardfork. It will fail. Long live Bitcoin. The one a only.

[keepdoing]

Long live Bitcoin. The one a only.

I agree.  After the successful Classic Hard Fork, it will be nice once Blockstream/Core has been kicked to the curb, we've returned to the Original Vision of Satoshi; and restored sound governance to Bitcoin, and then there will just be..... Bitcoin.

Bitcoin -> New Bitcoin (Sucky tasting Blockstream/Core Version) -> Bitcoin Classic -> Bitcoin

ahhh, the circle of life!

[Lauda]

This should be left in this thread:

[Bergmann_Christoph]

This should be left in this thread:

I agree! This is a perfect example why we need to fork: Adam back thinks, btc fails because miner stopp believing whar adam back thinks that is logic and illogic

[jonald_fyookball]

Why should we give one iota of credence to what Adam Back says?  
He's the cofounder of Blockstream and therefore has a huge bias.

Besides, his statement is nothing but rhetoric.
(Whose to say what's political and whats illogical)

[Bergmann_Christoph]

He is not even an active contributor to core code. I did never understand why he pretents he's a speaker for core.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

He is not even an active contributor to core code. I did never understand why he pretents he's a speaker for core.

meh, he is trying to put out fires all over the place. They are way over schedule with their LN plans ( as in nothing works yet) and I'd say gregory maxwell probably got the blame for that - hence why we dont hear from him. I'd say if he cant convince his backers on Monday morning that he has a workable plan to counter Classic he could be in real trouble. His rather weak effort to misrepresent the f2pool announcement makes me think he is out of ideas.

He is really clutching at straws - he is even quoting that half baked Cohen article on Hearne, as if its credible.

[hdbuck]

He is not even an active contributor to core code. I did never understand why he pretents he's a speaker for core.

Sure, Go Peter R classic bitcoin! Such code, much gifs.

[Peter R]

This should be left in this thread:

Indeed.  Bitcoin is supposed to be governed by the code people freely choose to run.  If a company like Blockstream can co-opt Core, force the adoption of "illogical" features that the user do not want, and prevent the community from migrating to a new repo, then that would demonstrate a failure of Bitcoin.  

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

This should be left in this thread:

Indeed.  Bitcoin is supposed to be governed by the code people freely choose to run.  If a company like Blockstream can co-opt Core, force the adoption of "illogical" features that the user do not want, and prevent the community from migrating to a new repo, then that would demonstrate a failure of Bitcoin.  

As a developer for Bitcoin Classic, and co-Chief Architect along with jstolfi, you should have input into the message stored in the Classic "genesis block" that will be produced in a few months.

Will it be your avatar signature, or your post signature?

[iCEBREAKER]

He [Dr. Adam Back] is not even an active contributor to core code. I did never understand why he pretents he's a speaker for core.

meh, he is trying to put out fires all over the place. They are way over schedule with their LN plans ( as in nothing works yet) and I'd say gregory maxwell probably got the blame for that - hence why we dont hear from him. I'd say if he cant convince his backers on Monday morning that he has a workable plan to counter Classic he could be in real trouble. His rather weak effort to misrepresent the f2pool announcement makes me think he is out of ideas.

He is really clutching at straws - he is even quoting that half baked Cohen article on Hearne, as if its credible.

Bram "BitTorrent" Cohen lost more cypherpunk cred by being late to the Bitcoin party than the entire TumorBlock mob will ever have.  His roast of Hearn@gnome.zurich.ch helped ensure that shitlord's credibility is completely and permanently blown.

Adam Back is three moves ahead of the Tooministas and will force you all to concede, just like he made Hearn flip the board and storm off in an (exceptionally whiny) Epic Rage Quit.

Nobody except politicized pro-governance coup/contentious hard fork advocates favor 2MB TumorBlocks over Dr. Backamoto's 1MB tx  + 2MB witness blocks.  The rest of the world wisely seeks to avoid catastrophic consensus failure, while you relish the cheesy Hollywood TV Trope narrative of a cathartic moment that cleanses Bitcoin of its filthy Blockstream infection.

The more strenuously you push for "doesn't need much testing" TumorBlocks with none of the advantages of well-tested segwit (tx malleability fix, etc), the more foolish and desperate you look to those outside your manufactured-dissent-afflicted Reddit Army.

The cherry on top is the political pressure from the most malcontented reflexively anti-Blockstream to modify _Classic such that it intentionally breaks RBF, CLTV, Lightning, sidechains, and segwit.

Those innovations, which are being painted as undesirable, are starting a food fight in the _Classic bikeshed that will never end.

The logical outcome is that the anti-Blockstream haters take over _Classic, while the less rabid more reasonable Toomincoiners fork off into _Classic++ or _Classic Ultra or whatever the hell Brian Armstrong's vision for Bitcoin_Classic Pro software-as-a-$3000/month-service is.

_Classic is already #REKT by internal contradictions (EG Justus R type liberatarians vs jackboot-licking SJWs).  If it manages to avoid being stillborn, it will quickly succumb to birth defects.

[JorgeStolfi]

As a developer for Bitcoin Classic, and co-Chief Architect along with jstolfi, you should have input into the message stored in the Classic "genesis block" that will be produced in a few months.

Oops, thanks for reminding me.  The Toomims tasked me with doing something momentous that will be the headline of /The Times/ on the launch date.  Maybe start a war, find Elvis, or commandeer a UFO to abduct the Pope from a nudist beach and demand ransom in bitcoin.

Only that it will not be a Genesis block, of course, but a Nativity block.