ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT

[adamstgBit]

All I want to know is if the core devs will allow miners to "vote" for the 2MB HF activation.

Definitely not. Miners do not decide hardforks, much less vote on them.

so much for "Luke is focused on fulfilling the promise"  

The HK roundtable included agreement on this point, that miners do not decide hardforks. It doesn't contradict it in any way.

Even if it wasn't part of the document, this inability of miners to decide hardforks is an aspect inherent in the nature of hardforks, not something I nor anyone else has decided.

so you're saying you think core will not/should not, add in the code required to allow miners to activate a HF with >75% hashing power.

Correct.

And even if we did, it would be futile, since neither devs nor miners can force users to adopt it.
It is literally technically impossible for miners to activate a HF period.

hashing power has a strong incentive to align itself with the will of the userbase.
your right miner cannot HF somthing the user base will not adopt
but IMO you're wrong in thinking the user base will not adopt a 2MB HF should if it achieve >75% hashing power and get activated.

it's really sad to hear you will not code in that 2MB HF.

[franky1]

so you're saying you think core will not/should not, add in the code required to allow miners to activate a HF with >75% hashing power.

Correct.

And even if we did, it would be futile, since neither devs nor miners can force users to adopt it.
It is literally technically impossible for miners to activate a HF period.

so core is saying that there would be no code release THIS YEAR to allow USERS to show they want 2mb.. to then slowly over months get to a certain saturation point of <insert a number %> that would then allow the pools to move forward..
is this whole round table stuff just smoke and mirrors and that no one(users or pools) will have any code that has 2mb as an option untill summer 2017..

if so.. what is so special about summer 2017.. why not have the code available sooner (this year) and then activate when a certain circumstance is reached.
why of why does it have to be based on seasons of a year, instead of how prepared and ready the community is by actually having the code in place ready.

code does not care or understand the word "SUMMER" so a technology should not be hindered based on seasons. and instead have code ready and prepared to activate when a certain network saturation level is reached.

if i see luke JR mention that the HF is dependent on a date or season. and code will only be released based on such season.. then that to me is just him delaying it for no logically or technical reason. but based on human decision.


here is a hint.. even with the 1mb rule.. pools didnt just jump to 1mb instantly.. even today some pools just want to make 0.2mb blocks. so pools can have the 2mb code existing in their program. but have preferential setting to only make <0.998mb blocks until they think the users nodes can handle it without mass rejection.

if a pool makes a big block to early it would get rejected and they would learn their lesson..
no one can predict which date on a calendar to move forward. and delaying the option or possibility purely because you cannot imagine a particular date on a calendar is also a futile mindset..

in short RELEASE THE CODE and then let users run it... then later pools can start making bigger blocks when and only when they deem the saturation point has been reached that their blocks wont get rejected/orphaned. without having to check a calendar to find out when spring turns into summer.

RELEASE THE CODE AND LET USERS GET PREPARED AND START THE BALL ROLLING TO ALLOW POOLS TO DECIDE WHEN THEY THINK THEIR BLOCKS ARE SAFE TO BE MADE BIGGER

by stopping users from having the code your just delaying any prospect of pools ever growing. RELEASE THE CODE AND GET THE BALL ROLLING

[adamstgBit]

[jbreher]

some of you XT/Classic supporters have become desparate in your attempts to keep the blocksize issue alive

While I am running BU, not XT nor Classic, I would like to point out that it is you who appears desperate, JJG. We are not desperate. For as long as Classic holds the market share that it does, Core cannot amass the 95% required for activation.

Can you imagine the crow eating required to reduce the activation threshold?

I mean, not like it can't be done. But such shame... such shame...

No, we're not desperate. We're quietly working toward the goal of large block adoption. Until the reality is in the past, it is merely an open question.

Cheers!

[Holliday]

in short RELEASE THE CODE and then let users run it... then later pools can start making bigger blocks when and only when they deem the saturation point has been reached that their blocks wont get rejected/orphaned. without having to check a calendar to find out when spring turns into summer.

RELEASE THE CODE AND LET USERS GET PREPARED AND START THE BALL ROLLING TO ALLOW POOLS TO DECIDE WHEN THEY THINK THEIR BLOCKS ARE SAFE TO BE MADE BIGGER

by stopping users from having the code your just delaying any prospect of pools ever growing. RELEASE THE CODE AND GET THE BALL ROLLING

Uhh... didn't Classic already "release the code"?

Isn't the point of this thread that no one is using it?

LOL?

[valiz]

some of you XT/Classic supporters have become desparate in your attempts to keep the blocksize issue alive

While I am running BU, not XT nor Classic, I would like to point out that it is you who appears desperate, JJG. We are not desperate. For as long as Classic holds the market share that it does, Core cannot amass the 95% required for activation.

Can you imagine the crow eating required to reduce the activation threshold?

I mean, not like it can't be done. But such shame... such shame...

No, we're not desperate. We're quietly working toward the goal of large block adoption. Until the reality is in the past, it is merely an open question.

Cheers!

Market share? 

By running nodes and mining, even if you are BU/Classic shills, you are helping bitcoin. I am happy that you are trying to prevent changes to the protocol. No hard forks gives stability and resiliency. Thank you!

You are desperate because you keep on shouting your nonsense on this sensorshipped forum. You are not "quietly working"   

[jbreher]

By running nodes and mining, even if you are BU/Classic shills, you are helping bitcoin.

Yep, and the first time that a block greater than 1MB gets built upon, and another atop that, and another, and ..., I will continue securing the integrity of the chain. You?

[adamstgBit]

in short RELEASE THE CODE and then let users run it... then later pools can start making bigger blocks when and only when they deem the saturation point has been reached that their blocks wont get rejected/orphaned. without having to check a calendar to find out when spring turns into summer.

RELEASE THE CODE AND LET USERS GET PREPARED AND START THE BALL ROLLING TO ALLOW POOLS TO DECIDE WHEN THEY THINK THEIR BLOCKS ARE SAFE TO BE MADE BIGGER

by stopping users from having the code your just delaying any prospect of pools ever growing. RELEASE THE CODE AND GET THE BALL ROLLING

Uhh... didn't Classic already "release the code"?

Isn't the point of this thread that no one is using it?

LOL?

but Classic represents a change in government. miners are willing to avoid this by making an agreement with core, in that core will eventually( in 2017) support a block size incress to 2MB
core seems to have 0 intent on making good on their agreement
and are trying to BS their way out of the agreement.
saying things like " TECHNICALLY we didnt agree to anything     "

[franky1]

Uhh... didn't Classic already "release the code"?

Isn't the point of this thread that no one is using it?

LOL?

this thread is actually about avoiding the hard fork. and by trying to ensure core doesnt release code.. and to scare people away from implementations that included the 2mb rule..
without core releasing the code at the same time as classic. then it was obvious that things wont move forward, so people got bored of waiting for core to join in..

but Classic represents a change in government. miners are willing to avoid this by making an agreement with core, in that core will eventually( in 2017) support a block size incress to 2MB
core seems to have 0 intent on making good on their agreement
and are trying to BS their way out of the agreement.
saying things like " TECHNICALLY we didnt agree to anything    "

if you sweep away the smoke and mirrors.. if core released the code along side classic.. then there would be no "change in government" but instead an open choice to use any of the many different code bases that would all have the 2mb rule...
meaning no government at all..

but the smoke and mirrors is to say that classic wanted to be government. purely to scare people away from it. and now blockstream(core) wont release the code because they think they are government and its their highway or no way. (the whole bait and switch)

if only core was to just release the 2mb code already and then other implementations would too. then the ball would already be rolling and we can actually start talking about when the pools should adapt too, but only when the pools feel its safe to do so because they dont want their blocks rejected after all..

refusing to release code to make USERS ready, just because blockstream(core) thinks that the pools will lose blocks.. is obsurd. the pools wont even try making bigger blocks unless they seen that users were ready.. so atleast let the users be ready!

[Lauda]

Uhh... didn't Classic already "release the code"?

It did.

Isn't the point of this thread that no one is using it?

Correct. The point of it is that nobody in their right mind would run it.

Yep, and the first time that a block greater than 1MB gets built upon, and another atop that, and another, and ..., I will continue securing the integrity of the chain. You?

Are you referring to blocks greater than 1 MB in Core, or a controversial HF?

saying things like " TECHNICALLY we didnt agree to anything     "

Core has agreed to nothing. You can't blame the open-source project for your lack of comprehension.

[Carlton Banks]

2MB2MB2MB lobbyists:

How long do you guys need? It's been over 12 months since Gavin started this war of words, and you're still running on words. 18 months maybe? Do you need 2 years?

[YarkoL]

I don't even know why I'm responding here.  People's minds are clearly made up, and people's lines are clearly drawn.

At this point it is certainly futile, but still appreciated.

If not for anything else, just as reminder what a sane human expression
looks like.

How did it come to be like this?

Perhaps this is just what happens when you have a male-only "community"
filled with individuals already sure of their intellectual brilliance, and reinforce their belief by giving them
financial rewards. Add to the mix anarcho-libertarian philosophy of selfishness and the fact that
most of the communication is with unknowns via text on screen, and this is the cake you get.

[marcus_of_augustus]

I don't even know why I'm responding here.  People's minds are clearly made up, and people's lines are clearly drawn.

At this point it is certainly futile, but still appreciated.

If not for anything else, just as reminder what a sane human expression
looks like.

How did it come to be like this?

Perhaps this is just what happens when you have a male-only "community"
filled with individuals already sure of their intellectual brilliance, and reinforce their belief by giving them
financial rewards. Add to the mix anarcho-libertarian philosophy of selfishness and the fact that
most of the communication is with unknowns via text on screen, and this is the cake you get.

Why so sure of yourself?

Are you some kind of anarcho-libertarian ego-tripping male hopped up on his own intellectual brilliance re-inforced by financial rewards?

[franky1]

2MB2MB2MB lobbyists:

How long do you guys need? It's been over 12 months since Gavin started this war of words, and you're still running on words. 18 months maybe? Do you need 2 years?

says carlton. the 5.7mb lobbyist

[Fatman3001]

The naivety in Core/Blockstream is remarkable.

When the hammer comes down, Core is going to get smacked.

Did you really think chinese and russian businessmen would settle for glass beads?

This is turning into a Core #REKT thread.

[forevernoob]

Why are you big blockers still in Bitcoin?
I thought the majority of "big blockers" now regard Bitcoin as a failed experiment and willing to let go of it and move on to alt coins like Ethereum?
What does Bitcoin provide that Ethereum doesn't?

I regard Bitcoin as the gold of crypto and the fact that it has stayed resilient against recent attacks from corporations and governments proves that it's still "the gold of crypto".
But that's not the opinion of a "big blocker"...

[franky1]

Why are you big blockers still in Bitcoin?
I thought the majority of "big blockers" now regard Bitcoin as a failed experiment and willing to let go of it and move on to alt coins like Ethereum?
What does Bitcoin provide that Ethereum doesn't?

I regard Bitcoin as the gold of crypto and the fact that it has stayed resilient against recent attacks from corporations and governments proves that it's still "the gold of crypto".
But that's not the opinion of a "big blocker"...

fully agree with you.. them bigblockers who love blockstream and want 5.7mb blocks. have lost faith in bitcoin.
they complain it cant scale
they say the only solution is to move to different layers and sidechains(altcoins).
they argue and say anything that is part of the open community is bad because they only want one business to destroy bitcoin now.

if they really want to have blockstream control. maybe they should just move over to "liquid" and play with them altcoins, pretending its bitcoin but faster..

they really need to just admit that they want to bloat bitcoin so their favorite altcoin can take the bitcoin fame..

[YarkoL]

Are you some kind of anarcho-libertarian ego-tripping male hopped up on his own intellectual brilliance re-inforced by financial rewards?

Pretty much, except that I'm piss poor.

[hv_]

Why are you big blockers still in Bitcoin?
I thought the majority of "big blockers" now regard Bitcoin as a failed experiment and willing to let go of it and move on to alt coins like Ethereum?
What does Bitcoin provide that Ethereum doesn't?

I regard Bitcoin as the gold of crypto and the fact that it has stayed resilient against recent attacks from corporations and governments proves that it's still "the gold of crypto".
But that's not the opinion of a "big blocker"...

Still here for rescue and try to get back ALL into the boat + helping to start THINK BIG !

(hope this bRAKEs the ICE a bit  where other in charge fail)

[hdbuck]

Why are you big blockers still in Bitcoin?
I thought the majority of "big blockers" now regard Bitcoin as a failed experiment and willing to let go of it and move on to alt coins like Ethereum?
What does Bitcoin provide that Ethereum doesn't?

I regard Bitcoin as the gold of crypto and the fact that it has stayed resilient against recent attacks from corporations and governments proves that it's still "the gold of crypto".
But that's not the opinion of a "big blocker"...

fully agree with you.. them bigblockers who love blockstream and want 5.7mb blocks. have lost faith in bitcoin.
they complain it cant scale
they say the only solution is to move to different layers and sidechains(altcoins).
they argue and say anything that is part of the open community is bad because they only want one business to destroy bitcoin now.

if they really want to have blockstream control. maybe they should just move over to "liquid" and play with them altcoins, pretending its bitcoin but faster..

they really need to just admit that they want to bloat bitcoin so their favorite altcoin can take the bitcoin fame..

this is so fucked up. man you need to get yourself checked for psychological disorders.