Bitcoin Forum
November 24, 2017, 07:36:34 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: I support "Bitcoin Classic" (2MB), if the activation threshold is over 95%  (Read 4459 times)
jonny1000
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 119



View Profile
January 16, 2016, 03:54:51 AM
 #1

A lower activation threshold like 75% can be considered an attack by those opposed to the move.  I think 95% is a high enough threshold which demonstrates overwhelming support and should therefore  not be considered an altcoin.
 
1511508994
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511508994

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511508994
Reply with quote  #2

1511508994
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
spiderbrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 836



View Profile
January 16, 2016, 04:51:39 AM
 #2

75% is higher than the majority needed to change the constitution in most parliamentary democracies. 

achow101
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


17kKQppUsngUiByDsce4JXoZEjjpvX9bpR


View Profile WWW
January 16, 2016, 05:38:32 AM
 #3

75% is higher than the majority needed to change the constitution in most parliamentary democracies. 
Bitcoin is not a democracy, it is a consensus based system, which means that everyone has to agree otherwise the changes will not work. Since there is no central authority like in governments, no one is there to enforce the majority decision.

          ▄█████▄
        ▄█████████▄
      ▄████▀   ▀████▄
    ▄████▀   ▄ ▄█▀████▄
  ▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▀████▄
▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▄   ▀████▄
█████   ███▀   ▄███   █████
▀████▄   ▀██▄▄███▀   ▄████▀
  ▀████▄   ▀███▀   ▄████▀
    ▀████▄       ▄████▀
      ▀████▄   ▄████▀
        ▀███  ████▀
          ▀█▄███▀
.
|
.
|
          ▄█████▄
        ▄█████████▄
      ▄████▀   ▀████▄
    ▄████▀   ▄ ▄█▀████▄
  ▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▀████▄
▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▄   ▀████▄
█████   ███▀   ▄███   █████
▀████▄   ▀██▄▄███▀   ▄████▀
  ▀████▄   ▀███▀   ▄████▀
    ▀████▄       ▄████▀
      ▀████▄   ▄████▀
        ▀███  ████▀
          ▀█▄███▀
unthy
HostFat
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2646


I support freedom of choice


View Profile WWW
January 16, 2016, 07:07:29 AM
 #4

75% is the majority of the miners, but miners will not move until they are sure that a very large majority of the network will support them.

The will never try create coins that no one will accept. The value of Bitcoin is given by the network (users, exchange, payment processor, etc ...)

NON DO ASSISTENZA PRIVATA - The Rock Trading (ref): A good exchange / gateway Ripple, with support for multisig, since 2007. 
https://bitcointa.lk: Bitcointalk backup if offline - Bitcoin Foundation Italia - Blog: http://theupwind.blogspot.it
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
January 16, 2016, 07:10:32 AM
 #5

75% is the majority of the miners, but miners will not move until they are sure that a very large majority of the network will support them.

The will never try create coins that no one will accept. The value of Bitcoin is given by the network (users, exchange, payment processor, etc ...)

Core will make the move to bigger blocks. They wont give up control this easily.

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
spiderbrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 836



View Profile
January 16, 2016, 08:19:39 AM
 #6

75% is the majority of the miners, but miners will not move until they are sure that a very large majority of the network will support them.

The will never try create coins that no one will accept. The value of Bitcoin is given by the network (users, exchange, payment processor, etc ...)

Core will make the move to bigger blocks. They wont give up control this easily.
They need to do it yesterday to restore market confidence.

Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834



View Profile
January 16, 2016, 11:17:28 AM
 #7

75% is the majority of the miners, but miners will not move until they are sure that a very large majority of the network will support them.

The will never try create coins that no one will accept. The value of Bitcoin is given by the network (users, exchange, payment processor, etc ...)

Core will make the move to bigger blocks. They wont give up control this easily.
They need to do it yesterday to restore market confidence.

No, they need to do it at exactly the speed that the technical challenge demands, lest serious mistakes could be made. And they're doing that already.

Vires in numeris
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
expert
Offline Offline

Activity: 2856


View Profile
January 16, 2016, 07:35:29 PM
 #8

There's no difference between an activation threshold of 75% (or 51%) and 95% because pro-fork miners can just start rejecting blocks from anti-fork miners to increase the percentage. Miner voting is a stupid concept for hardforks -- it's the economy that matters in a hardfork, not miners.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
Wheatclove
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 623


View Profile
January 16, 2016, 07:53:24 PM
 #9

75% is the majority of the miners, but miners will not move until they are sure that a very large majority of the network will support them.

The will never try create coins that no one will accept. The value of Bitcoin is given by the network (users, exchange, payment processor, etc ...)

Core will make the move to bigger blocks. They wont give up control this easily.

It's already on their roadmap
https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-core/capacity-increases-faq
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


[LOL2X]


View Profile WWW
January 16, 2016, 08:28:56 PM
 #10

75% is higher than the majority needed to change the constitution in most parliamentary democracies. 

You think that matters in a consensus-critical distributed ledger?

That's adorable!   Smiley


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
January 16, 2016, 09:22:52 PM
 #11

75% is the majority of the miners, but miners will not move until they are sure that a very large majority of the network will support them.

The will never try create coins that no one will accept. The value of Bitcoin is given by the network (users, exchange, payment processor, etc ...)

Core will make the move to bigger blocks. They wont give up control this easily.

It's already on their roadmap
https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-core/capacity-increases-faq


That's better blocks, not bigger ones. Eventually the economy will need both and if Core doesn't provide it the market will force their hand. It will be a steady stream of fork attempts until they do.

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
expert
Offline Offline

Activity: 2856


View Profile
January 16, 2016, 10:14:01 PM
 #12

That's better blocks, not bigger ones.

No, it's both. The Core roadmap calls for maintaining the 1 MB "normal-blocks" for now, but then adding 3 MB "witness-blocks" (sent alongside normal blocks) where much of the data from normal blocks can go. It does roughly double transaction capacity, it's backward-compatible, and it'll be ready in only ~4 months. The Core devs are following Satoshi's footsteps by significantly prioritizing backward-compatibility: Satoshi never did a hardfork, and when he did the backward-incompatible version checksum change, he scheduled it two years in advance.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
January 16, 2016, 10:21:32 PM
 #13

That's better blocks, not bigger ones.

No, it's both. The Core roadmap calls for maintaining the 1 MB "normal-blocks" for now, but then adding 3 MB "witness-blocks" (sent alongside normal blocks) where much of the data from normal blocks can go. It does roughly double transaction capacity, it's backward-compatible, and it'll be ready in only ~4 months. The Core devs are following Satoshi's footsteps by significantly prioritizing backward-compatibility: Satoshi never did a hardfork, and when he did the backward-incompatible version checksum change, he scheduled it two years in advance.

Ya but...

But the 1MB cap was a temporary measure to stop spam attacks. Satoshi was optimistic about future tech.

Isn't it?

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
mudiko
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322


View Profile
January 16, 2016, 10:31:28 PM
 #14

That's better blocks, not bigger ones.

No, it's both. The Core roadmap calls for maintaining the 1 MB "normal-blocks" for now, but then adding 3 MB "witness-blocks" (sent alongside normal blocks) where much of the data from normal blocks can go. It does roughly double transaction capacity, it's backward-compatible, and it'll be ready in only ~4 months. The Core devs are following Satoshi's footsteps by significantly prioritizing backward-compatibility: Satoshi never did a hardfork, and when he did the backward-incompatible version checksum change, he scheduled it two years in advance.

What is core team planning about RBF
Erkallys
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


Sprectre - 5M$ sold just in pre-sale !


View Profile
January 16, 2016, 11:55:56 PM
 #15

What is actually the percentage needed for this secession democratic-fork to happen ? If this is 50%, I agree with you that it is no enough. Even 75% could be considered not enough in most of the situations.

.SPECTRE.                ▄▄███▄▄
            ▄▄███▀▀▀▀▀███▄▄
▄▄      ▄▄███▀▀ ▄▄███▄▄ ▀▀███▄▄      ▄▄
████▄▄  ▀▀▀ ▄▄███████████▄▄ ▀▀▀  ▄▄████
  ▀▀████▄    ▀▀█████████▀▀    ▄████▀▀
 ██▄▄ ▀██ █▄▄    ▀▀▀▀▀    ▄▄█ ██▀ ▄▄██
 ▀▀███ ██ █████▄       ▄█████ ██ ███▀▀
      ██ ███████▄   ▄███████ ██
       ██ ████████   ████████ ██
       ██▄▄ ▀▀████   ████▀▀ ▄▄██
        ▀▀███▄▄ ▀▀   ▀▀ ▄▄███▀▀
            ▀▀███▄▄▄▄▄███▀▀
                ▀▀███▀▀
             │
     │      ███
     │      ███
    │     ███
███  │     ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███     │
███ ███     │
    │
 
▬▬     WHITEPAPER    ▬▬
FACEBOOK     TELEGRAM
TWITTER     SLACK     MEDIUM
.
PRE-SALE.
PUBLIC SALE.
achow101
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


17kKQppUsngUiByDsce4JXoZEjjpvX9bpR


View Profile WWW
January 16, 2016, 11:58:50 PM
 #16

What is actually the percentage needed for this secession democratic-fork to happen ? If this is 50%, I agree with you that it is no enough. Even 75% could be considered not enough in most of the situations.
I think it will be 75%, although as of now, no changes have been made to the fork so this cannot be known until they actually commit the changes.

          ▄█████▄
        ▄█████████▄
      ▄████▀   ▀████▄
    ▄████▀   ▄ ▄█▀████▄
  ▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▀████▄
▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▄   ▀████▄
█████   ███▀   ▄███   █████
▀████▄   ▀██▄▄███▀   ▄████▀
  ▀████▄   ▀███▀   ▄████▀
    ▀████▄       ▄████▀
      ▀████▄   ▄████▀
        ▀███  ████▀
          ▀█▄███▀
.
|
.
|
          ▄█████▄
        ▄█████████▄
      ▄████▀   ▀████▄
    ▄████▀   ▄ ▄█▀████▄
  ▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▀████▄
▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▄   ▀████▄
█████   ███▀   ▄███   █████
▀████▄   ▀██▄▄███▀   ▄████▀
  ▀████▄   ▀███▀   ▄████▀
    ▀████▄       ▄████▀
      ▀████▄   ▄████▀
        ▀███  ████▀
          ▀█▄███▀
unthy
Erkallys
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


Sprectre - 5M$ sold just in pre-sale !


View Profile
January 17, 2016, 12:12:36 AM
 #17

What is actually the percentage needed for this secession democratic-fork to happen ? If this is 50%, I agree with you that it is no enough. Even 75% could be considered not enough in most of the situations.
I think it will be 75%, although as of now, no changes have been made to the fork so this cannot be known until they actually commit the changes.

So the secession leaders will organise elections and decide the actual minimum of votes that they need to be elected, and that they're sure to have ? It doesn't look like Satoshi would have intented it. However, if they decide to put the minimum threshold at 75%, I'm pretty sure that they will lose.

.SPECTRE.                ▄▄███▄▄
            ▄▄███▀▀▀▀▀███▄▄
▄▄      ▄▄███▀▀ ▄▄███▄▄ ▀▀███▄▄      ▄▄
████▄▄  ▀▀▀ ▄▄███████████▄▄ ▀▀▀  ▄▄████
  ▀▀████▄    ▀▀█████████▀▀    ▄████▀▀
 ██▄▄ ▀██ █▄▄    ▀▀▀▀▀    ▄▄█ ██▀ ▄▄██
 ▀▀███ ██ █████▄       ▄█████ ██ ███▀▀
      ██ ███████▄   ▄███████ ██
       ██ ████████   ████████ ██
       ██▄▄ ▀▀████   ████▀▀ ▄▄██
        ▀▀███▄▄ ▀▀   ▀▀ ▄▄███▀▀
            ▀▀███▄▄▄▄▄███▀▀
                ▀▀███▀▀
             │
     │      ███
     │      ███
    │     ███
███  │     ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███     │
███ ███     │
    │
 
▬▬     WHITEPAPER    ▬▬
FACEBOOK     TELEGRAM
TWITTER     SLACK     MEDIUM
.
PRE-SALE.
PUBLIC SALE.
cr1776
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722


View Profile
January 17, 2016, 12:48:33 AM
 #18

What is actually the percentage needed for this secession democratic-fork to happen ? If this is 50%, I agree with you that it is no enough. Even 75% could be considered not enough in most of the situations.
I think it will be 75%, although as of now, no changes have been made to the fork so this cannot be known until they actually commit the changes.

As theymos said above though, 51% is enough since pro-fork miners could just reject blocks from anti-fork miners making the percentage go above any arbitrary percentage quite quickly.  For a hard fork just miner voting is not sufficient.

Long term, the number of bitcoin hard forks will need to be kept to a minimum - kind of like a "hard fork" for smtp/ftp/dns/'tcp/ip' etc are exceedingly rare - because this type of political turmoil is a huge risk factor for bitcoin, not to mention the risk that a critical bug is introduced.  Things like hard forks to enable sidechains with opcodes such as OP_SIDECHAINPROOFVERIFY, will enable a lot of experimentation without needing hard forks going forward.  Perhaps re-enabling select other opcodes.

Stability of bitcoin at the protocol level is extremely important due to the risks involved in changing it both technically and politically.  If it was still 2008, changes would be much easier but a huge ecosystem and value gives no room for errors.  It is like upgrading the engines on an airliner while in the air.

:-)


Erkallys
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


Sprectre - 5M$ sold just in pre-sale !


View Profile
January 17, 2016, 01:02:20 AM
 #19

What is actually the percentage needed for this secession democratic-fork to happen ? If this is 50%, I agree with you that it is no enough. Even 75% could be considered not enough in most of the situations.
I think it will be 75%, although as of now, no changes have been made to the fork so this cannot be known until they actually commit the changes.

As theymos said above though, 51% is enough since pro-fork miners could just reject blocks from anti-fork miners making the percentage go above any arbitrary percentage quite quickly.  For a hard fork just miner voting is not sufficient.

Long term, the number of bitcoin hard forks will need to be kept to a minimum - kind of like a "hard fork" for smtp/ftp/dns/'tcp/ip' etc are exceedingly rare - because this type of political turmoil is a huge risk factor for bitcoin, not to mention the risk that a critical bug is introduced.  Things like hard forks to enable sidechains with opcodes such as OP_SIDECHAINPROOFVERIFY, will enable a lot of experimentation without needing hard forks going forward.  Perhaps re-enabling select other opcodes.

Stability of bitcoin at the protocol level is extremely important due to the risks involved in changing it both technically and politically.  If it was still 2008, changes would be much easier but a huge ecosystem and value gives no room for errors.  It is like upgrading the engines on an airliner while in the air.

:-)




So basically we're in a critical situation, since with AntPool, KnC Miner, Avalon Miner and much more, we may already have the 51% required for the secession ?

.SPECTRE.                ▄▄███▄▄
            ▄▄███▀▀▀▀▀███▄▄
▄▄      ▄▄███▀▀ ▄▄███▄▄ ▀▀███▄▄      ▄▄
████▄▄  ▀▀▀ ▄▄███████████▄▄ ▀▀▀  ▄▄████
  ▀▀████▄    ▀▀█████████▀▀    ▄████▀▀
 ██▄▄ ▀██ █▄▄    ▀▀▀▀▀    ▄▄█ ██▀ ▄▄██
 ▀▀███ ██ █████▄       ▄█████ ██ ███▀▀
      ██ ███████▄   ▄███████ ██
       ██ ████████   ████████ ██
       ██▄▄ ▀▀████   ████▀▀ ▄▄██
        ▀▀███▄▄ ▀▀   ▀▀ ▄▄███▀▀
            ▀▀███▄▄▄▄▄███▀▀
                ▀▀███▀▀
             │
     │      ███
     │      ███
    │     ███
███  │     ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███     │
███ ███     │
    │
 
▬▬     WHITEPAPER    ▬▬
FACEBOOK     TELEGRAM
TWITTER     SLACK     MEDIUM
.
PRE-SALE.
PUBLIC SALE.
spiderbrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 836



View Profile
January 17, 2016, 01:52:47 AM
 #20

75% is higher than the majority needed to change the constitution in most parliamentary democracies. 

You think that matters in a consensus-critical distributed ledger?

That's adorable!   Smiley

No, I was just making an example about how groups of humans function together. Or not, as in this case.

Pages: [1] 2 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!