ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT

[Lauda]

in short Core didnt make any technical reasons to get miners to side with the roadmap, and just wanted people to sign it.
lol.. love it when the core team cant even use logic or technical knowledge to add substance. and instead wants signatures on paper, which is the mindset of corporations (who love contracts/agreements)

in short 1MB holding strong.
hardforking bitcoin impossibru.

In short, even without Bitmain there is currently zero chance of activating Classic. In other words, Classic is DOA.

[/b]Even after being corrected you seem impervious to reading and taking in new information regardless of that new information being a solution that is available now which directly addresses the capacity you so demand.

He does this all the time. Have you not noticed it before?

[BitUsher]

[/b]Even after being corrected you seem impervious to reading and taking in new information regardless of that new information being a solution that is available now which directly addresses the capacity you so demand.

He does this all the time. Have you not noticed it before?

Yes, I have noticed it coming from a bunch of classic supporters.(Clarify -Not All, Gavin, Jeff, Ver all appear reasonable) . I don't want to appear paranoid , but it does give a bit of credence to the potential of some Agent provocateurs with old accounts attempting to subvert and disrupt our ecosystem.

I believe their are many genuine bitcoin advocates who support Classic(including some prominent anarchists like Ver and Janssens so this isn't about Statists vs Anarchists), and that the trolls and agent provocateurs aren't just representing the classic side but multiple groups for various reasons. One likely reason is to subvert our ecosystem. Here is a good video giving you an overview on how states subvert organizations they oppose - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fQoGMtE0EY

I do think that it is possible that States are still ignoring and simply watching our ecosystem from the sidelines as they have already admitted towards...who knows? The beauty of subversion is that it is extremely difficult to avoid or identify and those that claim that it is happening are accused of being paranoid. The good thing is that we can avoid its effects by increasing education and trying not to automatically assume ill will , and sticking to the facts as best we can to avoid it if it is happening.

P.S... No I am not insinuating Franky is an Agent  provocateur ... there is no way for me to know what motivates his resistance to having a rational discussion and addressing the facts.

[Zarathustra]

in short Core didnt make any technical reasons to get miners to side with the roadmap, and just wanted people to sign it.
lol.. love it when the core team cant even use logic or technical knowledge to add substance. and instead wants signatures on paper, which is the mindset of corporations (who love contracts/agreements)

in short 1MB holding strong.
hardforking bitcoin impossibru.

In short, even without Bitmain there is currently zero chance of activating Classic. In other words, Classic is DOA.

Yes, currently. But your DBF-destroy by fee/segwit softfork junk code will never ever be activated before a capacity hardfork upgrade.

[BitUsher]

Except, that's exactly what you're suggesting.

No, what I suggest is that such an occurrence is a very likely possibility to be occurring at this time in our ecosystem and determining who is a troll, agent provocateur , or simply misinformed or ignorant individual is next to impossible. Thus informing the wider community of these commonly used tactics and what the appropriate response should be regarding them to reduce their impact. --- None of which includes banning speech or censoring.

[iCEBREAKER]

Yes, stupidity still holding strong the last few weeks, while the altcoin market cap surprisingly doubled.

You mean the pump & dump that lost 20% overnight 

20%+ correction is to be expected after a 100%+ rally such as the one ETH just had.

And a good % of what ETH has lost seems to be going into Monero.

But Zarassthrusta is wrong to call ETH and XMR "altcoins."

They are not alternate implementations of Bitcoin; they don't use the same code or serve the same functions.

ETH and XMR are more accurately described as "compcoins" because they are complements (not alternatives) to Bitcoin's socioeconomic consensus.

XMR and ETH are, respectively, the next two steps in the logical progression of crypto-evolution.

1.  Bitcoin (e-cash with radical transparency and protocol-level fungibility)
2.  Monero (e-cash with optional radical opacity and socioeconomic-level fungibility)
3.  Ethereum (world computer that coordinates the new economy and governing structures facilitated by 1 and 2)
4. 
5.  Cryptopia

That's been the plan all along.  It's thrilling to see it happening in my lifetime, especially since the flying car and Mars colony initiatives were subverted/diverted into the traditional warfare and welfare capital sinks (ie money pits).

[watashi-kokoto]

With pruning we have now we can run full nodes in a vast majority of use scenarios.

Classic is not going to offer 0.12 anytime soon.

[watashi-kokoto]

It's clear that Classic is nothing but a failed experiment at this point. The web page states that they wish to hard fork Bitcoin, yet they have no idea and staff to pull this off.

Let's show down the cards and resolve this issue once and for all.

[johnyj]

Again asking for millions of upgrades within 28 days is irresponsible at best.

We have only 6000+ full nodes, where does that millions number come from? It is almost guaranteed that if 100 most important nodes upgraded, 99% of the bitcoin users will be fine. In fact if you reduce that number to 20 most important nodes, I think still over 95% of users will not be affected

1. It is not guaranteed and you are a fool to state such.
2. What is a "important node"?
3. So according to you every merchant and user that doesn't upgrade is irrelevant? 

What's this gorilla math based on? WTF is an important node?

This is what happens when you have to resort to nonsense. They've run out of decent arguments.

If you don't understand what is an important node, then you have wasted most of your time here, I'd rather leave you in dark age  

[Lauda]

If you don't understand what is an important node, then you have wasted most of your time here, I'd rather leave you in dark age  

Nobody needs to waste their time with made up concepts and such claims. You are willing to, not only sacrifice security, but also decentralization for the sake of this "upgrade".

[RealBitcoin]

If you don't understand what is an important node, then you have wasted most of your time here, I'd rather leave you in dark age 

Nobody needs to waste their time with made up concepts and such claims. You are willing to, not only sacrifice security, but also decentralization for the sake of this "upgrade".

"Those who sacrifice security for temporary 'feel good', deserve neither!"

[watashi-kokoto]

Apparently, Classic supporters have mined a block 398364

A big block supporter mining a 101.5 kB block with just 208 transactions, what a shame.

Blaming urgent capacity increase, one would expect them to mine a full 1mb block.

[Lauda]

Blaming urgent capacity increase, one would expect them to mine a full 1mb block.

But they told me that 20 MB is "urgent".

Nobody needs to waste their time with made up concepts and such claims. You are willing to, not only sacrifice security, but also decentralization for the sake of this "upgrade".

"Those who sacrifice security for temporary 'feel good', deserve neither!"

Exactly.

[xqus]

Here it is: https://live.blockcypher.com/btc/block/000000000000000006e35d6675fb0fec767a5f3b346261a5160f6e2a8d258070/
Also: https://coin.dance/blocks

Se the last 1000 block chart.

[bargainbin]

Apparently, Classic supporters have mined a block 398364

A big block supporter mining a 101.5 kB block with just 208 transactions, what a shame.

Blaming urgent capacity increase, one would expect them to mine a full 1mb block.

Someone told you that 2MB limit will make all blocks 2MB? Let me cut out that lying tongue!

Blaming urgent capacity increase, one would expect them to mine a full 1mb block.

But they told me that 20 MB is "urgent".
...

Think of it as an extra traffic lane on a bridge. Sometimes there's no traffic, and the bridge is empty.

But if it gets jammed occasionally (it does), and you're hoping that developers will build up the other side, don't hold your breath: no one will build up an area accessible only by a rickety oxcart bridge.

[watashi-kokoto]

Someone told you that 2MB limit will make all blocks 2MB? Let me cut out that lying tongue!

Nobody told me anything. The spammers will fill any block size and this is a fact.

Think of it as an extra traffic lane on a bridge. Sometimes there's no traffic, and the bridge is empty.

But if it gets jammed occasionally (it does), and you're hoping that developers will build up the other side, don't hold your breath: no one will build up an area accessible only by a rickety oxcart bridge.

Spammers are making 1mb blocks full. What do you think they will do with 2MB or 20MB blocks?

[franky1]

here we go again, core fan boys talking of 20mb doomsday because they lost the 2mb doomsday debate. lol

and wait.. spammers will fill blocks up?? um noooo
miners control how full the blocks get not users spamming

 and miners wont rush to 2mb right from the start. they would instead dip their toe in the water at 1.001mb, but not at the 75% trigger, not after the 28day grace period. but after the setting is set and then FURTHER hashpower and nodes are added to the mix to ensure a higher chance that their attempts wont get orphaned.. im estimating even when the setting is activated at 75%.. they will wait until over 90% before they move forward,

[bargainbin]

Someone told you that 2MB limit will make all blocks 2MB? Let me cut out that lying tongue!

Nobody told me anything. The spammers will fill any block size and this is a fact.

And yet... even 1MB blocks are not getting filled up? How is this possible?

Think of it as an extra traffic lane on a bridge. Sometimes there's no traffic, and the bridge is empty.
But if it gets jammed occasionally (it does), and you're hoping that developers will build up the other side, don't hold your breath: no one will build up an area accessible only by a rickety oxcart bridge.

Spammers are making 1mb blocks full. What do you think they will do with 2MB or 20MB blocks?

They are? And yet the blocks are not full? Explain this shit
And what, exactly, would motivate these spammers? Don't miners have the option of ignoring transactions, for any and all reasons?

[watashi-kokoto]

And yet... even 1MB blocks are not getting filled up? How is this possible?

Last 4 blocks are full. 398392 is only not full because it got mined just 3 minutes after the previous.

Anyway full blocks don't prove anything. It just means there is spam again. Any user can pay higher fee than spammer and get confirmed instantly.

They are? And yet the blocks are not full? Explain this shit
And what, exactly, would motivate these spammers?

I think they simply do not like Bitcoin or want to cause confusion in the community. What is your opinion?

Don't miners have the option of ignoring transactions, for any and all reasons?

Why would they? That's censorship.

[franky1]

And what, exactly, would motivate these spammers?

agreed and the laughable part.. if a 1mb block was 2000 tx with a 4cent fee ($80 cost per 10 minutes)
then if miners were actually allowing full 2mb, instead of starting off gently at 1.001mb... then a 2mb full block would cost $160.. obviously.

thus bigger blocks cost spammers more.

Don't miners have the option of ignoring transactions, for any and all reasons?

exactly, if miners dont like a transaction it will just sit in the mempool and eventally get dropped as it doesnt fit miners preferential rules.


 

[franky1]

Don't miners have the option of ignoring transactions, for any and all reasons?

Why would they? That's censorship.

they ignore 0 fee transactions already. they can easily ignore someone trying to send a single transaction of 1mb, just by leaving it in the mempool until it gets dropped

do you think miners are going to risk adding 1 transaction to a block that has more processing time then 2000 normal transactions. just for the sake of $2-$80 in fee's, risking the 25btc reward... or ignore the one tx and process other transactions for a less risky 25btc