Competing nodes - List of BTC implementations in competition for the Blockchain

[HostFat]

Fairly certain that bitcore: https://bitcore.io/ is a full node software as well.

I added and then removed Bitcore.

“Bitcore has bitcoind built right in, so joining the peer-to-peer network is simple.”

Bitcore is a full bitcoin node — your apps run directly on the peer-to-peer network. By binding directly into bitcoind's source code, Bitcore's API is 20x faster than connecting to a separate bitcoin node, and orders of magnitude faster than a centralized API.

So it is exactly a Bitcoin Core daemon, same code, same rules.

[HostFat]

Added two implementations

Haskoin (new implementation in Haskell)
Code: https://github.com/haskoin/haskoin

Libbitcoin (new implementation in C++)
Site: https://libbitcoin.org
Code: https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin


I'll give you updates about new versions of all these listed implementations.

[HostFat]

Three new releases:

Bitcoin Classic v0.11.2
https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/releases/tag/v0.11.2.cl1

Bitcoin XT v0.11E
https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/releases/tag/v0.11E

Libbitcoin v2.11.0
https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin/releases/tag/v2.11.0

[Lauda]

Bitcoin XT v0.11E
https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/releases/tag/v0.11E

Who are these people that are still working on XT? I mean, do you know their names (I can see the commits myself)? Looks like they enjoy wasting their free time.

[HostFat]

Who are these people that are still working on XT? I mean, do you know their names (I can see the commits myself)? Looks like they enjoy wasting their free time.

With a little look on issues/pr I see these names:
https://github.com/dagurval
https://github.com/dgenr8
https://github.com/MarcoFalke

Maybe there are others, time and incentives can be subjective.

Anyway, they can still take other code from other forks as Classic, Core or Unlimited.

[canth]

Bitcoin XT v0.11E
https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/releases/tag/v0.11E

Who are these people that are still working on XT? I mean, do you know their names (I can see the commits myself)? Looks like they enjoy wasting their free time.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bitcoin-xt/FCdTN1oKbkY

Bitcoin XT Release 0.11.0E has been tagged.  Binaries are not yet available.

This release includes a bunch of work that was done before Mike Hearn moved on.  In particular, Dagur Johannsson has finished the block download acceleration that Mike started.
Thin blocks fast block downloading, enabled by default
Supports and votes for 2MB hard fork (identical to Classic).  BIP101 reverted.
Switch to secp256k1 custom bitcoin ECC library
Random mempool eviction reverted, low-fee txes evicted when mempool full
Mempool expiration at 72 hours (identical to Core)
Configurable user-agent comment
Display coinjoins better in GUI wallet
LevelDB anti-corruption fix (Windows platforms)
Gracefully handle migration from obfuscated (Core v0.12) chainstate
Thin blocks is simply block download acceleration.  It works without requiring changes to your peers' software.  You will become a source of faster blocks and contribute to faster confirmation times for the bitcoin network, so keep an eye on your upload bandwith usage.

Any future that Bitcoin XT has beyond this release depends totally on your interest and contributions.

[7788bitcoin]

It seems like people come and go and left behind works for different versions...

However, this is almost the "once in a life time" moment when we witness the evolution of bitcoin and the blockchain technology itself in real life implementation.

[HostFat]

Bitcoin Core v0.12.0
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v0.12.0
https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.12.0/

[HostFat]

BitcoinUnlimited v0.12.0 - HF
Experimental BU Client Release - Focus on Main-chain Scaling​
https://bitco.in/forum/threads/announcing-bitcoinunlimited-v0-12-0-experimental-release.909/
https://github.com/BitcoinUnlimited/BitcoinUnlimited/tree/0.12bu
http://www.bitcoinunlimited.info/download

[Jet Cash]

The site NodeCounter.com shows some of the options and their growth.

That count increase for Classic seems to be counter-intuitive given that Core 0.12.0 has just been released, also the classic users in my (small) peer list seem to have dropped out. It leads me to believe that the stats are being manipulated to try to force a destructive change onto Bitcoin.

[HostFat]

@Jet Cash

This site checks the number of nodes by counting many as only one per IP address
http://coin.dance/nodes

[HostFat]

Bitcoinj v0.13.5
https://github.com/bitcoinj/bitcoinj/releases/tag/v0.13.5
https://bitcoinj.github.io/release-notes

[HostFat]

Bitcoin Classic v0.12.0
https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/releases/tag/v0.12.0cl1

[shorena]

Bitcoin Classic v0.12.0
https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/releases/tag/v0.12.0cl1

Any idea why they didnt enable the chainstate obfuscation? AFAIK its only used to avoid false positives from anti virus software.

[HostFat]

@shorena
Maybe they thought that could be a problem from retro compatibility with older versions, but it is still be possible to enable it.

EDIT
From Tom Zander on Slack

its an awful idea to make everyones chainstate unreadable by older or competing software while this only happens on Windows (not exactly the most used server platform) and then only on machines that have a crappy virus killer (which practically no servers do have).

[shorena]

@shorena
Maybe they thought that could be a problem from retro compatibility with older versions, but it is still be possible to enable it.

EDIT
From Tom Zander on Slack

its an awful idea to make everyones chainstate unreadable by older or competing software while this only happens on Windows (not exactly the most used server platform) and then only on machines that have a crappy virus killer (which practically no servers do have).

Makes sense, but the problem is not limited to windows only. There is at least one[1] linux scanner that also detects virus signatures in the chainstate folder. I suspect that it will be a problem for all OS in the future.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1388201.0

[HostFat]

Is the problem on Bitcoin or in this single linux scanner?
How much bigger is the problem now?
How much does it cost to fix it on possible disadvantages?

However, it isn't a removed feature, it is just disabled by default.
If someone will need it, he will be able to enable it again whenever he wants.

Disabled or enabled it doesn't change the experience of the other users/nodes of the network.

[shorena]

Is the problem on Bitcoin or in this single linux scanner?
How much bigger is the problem now?
How much does it cost to fix it on possible disadvantages?

No, I dont think its a significant problem now. It might become more pressing in the future. I doubt windows will stay the prominent OS, thus new viruses will emerge for Linux and MacOS and more snake oil will be sold to users to protect them.

However, it isn't a removed feature, it is just disabled by default.
If someone will need it, he will be able to enable it again whenever he wants.

Disabled or enabled it doesn't change the experience of the other users/nodes of the network.

I dont disagree with you. I just missed the downsides when I read the patch notes.

[scryptic]

So I am curious now to what will happen when serious amounts of hashpower start splitting consensus.
I see pools are supporting this in a 'voting style' like slush making pools for each to let the miner vote with their hashpower.


So my question is will this create giant forks and if so, how will it be determined which one is "Bitcoin" and which ones are not?
So far its quite puzzling to me. Thanks.

[HostFat]

So my question is will this create giant forks and if so, how will it be determined which one is "Bitcoin" and which ones are not?
So far its quite puzzling to me. Thanks.

With Classic possible fork, it could happen 28 days after 750/1000 blocks signed as BIP102.
I said it "could" because miners aren't forced to make bigger blocks, anyway after these 28 days Classic nodes will start accepting bigger blocks.

Bitcoin then (after the possible fork) will be the chain with more work.