"Bitcoin Classic" is a classic attempt at a hostile takeover

[QuestionAuthority]

i rewrote the whole lot into a different language.. thank you very much..
and yes it does download the blockchain
and yes it does relay transactions
and yes it does check and validate transactions
and yes it follows the rules.. but allows me to change the block limit to 2mb as i think thats what everyone will agree to once the drama settles... and i can do that without having to download someone elses .exe or having to chose a bandcamp religion to follow

So it passes every regression test that is in the Bitcoin repository then?

Please provide your github link and proof so that I (and others) can check it.

That should be the end of this conversation. lol

[franky1]

To be more clear in regards to the whole "Bitcoin is a protocol" point it needs to be pointed out that Bitcoin is actually not a protocol but a software implementation of a protocol (the protocol has never been published in fact).

actually.. bitcoin-core.exe is just an implementation.. bitcoin is not just an implementation

what makes "bitcoin" different from "litecoin" is the rules that define them as different things..
bitcoin i admit is more than just a protocol. because it it not just a set of defined rules.
bitcoin is also an asset ledger
bitcoin is also a payment network

but bitcoin-core.exe is just one version of many versions that all can happily talk to "bitcoin" without accidently talking to another altcoin or accidently creating their own coin..

[CIYAM]

Please provide your github link and proof so that I (and others) can check it.

That should be the end of this conversation. lol

You would think so - but still he continues to spout nonsense.

[CIYAM]

Hey @franky1 - SHOW US YOUR CODE!

(what - you don't have any?)

There are probably some herbal remedies available to help with "code disclosing dysfunction".

[Balthazar]

in case classic classic wins and gavin would act as a benevolent dictator it would just lead to another fork which fixes it.

That's too difficult to understand. They've forgot why they needed a blockchain in the first place.

what is your problem with a bitcoin fork?
i think its the best way to decide blockchain related questions.

The problem is well known and quite simple, any member of totalitarian society is afraid of free vote. Actually, I think that such attacks against Gavin are no better than Gavin's attacks against Luke-Jr and BIP17 were. Maybe he deserved this, but who are we to judge him unconditionally?

I don't support this so-called "Bitcoin classic", this idea seems completely idiotic for me. But this is just an opinion and such issues should be resolved by vote. DDoS attacks, ad hominem statements or whatever similar tactics are no better than assassination of opposition figures in the real life. This kind of behaviour is childish and unconstructive.

[CIYAM]

I don't support this so-called "Bitcoin classic", this idea seems completely idiotic for me. But this is just an opinion and such issues should be resolved by vote. DDoS attacks, ad hominem statements or whatever similar tactics are no better than assassination of opposition figures in the real life. This kind of behaviour is childish and unconstructive.

The problem is - how do we vote?

The only decentralised method that exists today (that can't be easily Sybil attacked) is Bitcoin - but if we are not going to use Bitcoin to vote about Bitcoin then I think we have an unsolvable problem.

[CuntChocula]

I don't support this so-called "Bitcoin classic", this idea seems completely idiotic for me. But this is just an opinion and such issues should be resolved by vote. DDoS attacks, ad hominem statements or whatever similar tactics are no better than assassination of opposition figures in the real life. This kind of behaviour is childish and unconstructive.

The problem is - how do we vote?

With hashpower? If that's not to your liking, you can vote with your wallet & sell

[CIYAM]

In the meantime we are still waiting for @franky1 to give us the link to his github repo of his own implementation of Bitcoin in another (not even mentioned because I guess it is so secret) computer language.

While we are waiting for @franky1 to enlighten us all with his amazing source code I'll give a typical example of a "used car salesman's speech".

Q. Can your car take me from A to B?
A. Of course - it is a car after all!

Q. Does your car work with fuel X or Y?
A. It works with fuel just like any other car.

Q. Do you have any insurance for me if your car fails?
A. Why would it fail - it is a "car" after all?

[QuestionAuthority]

For business decisions, people always vote with their feet. If they stop using it that's a No vote.

I really don't understand all the noise about blocksize when we aren't even at capacity yet and don't appear to be breaking any growth speed records. The market cap has been at $6.5b or less for years. When will this massive leap occur everyone seems to think is going to happen? I want to start saving up to buy more coin.

[BitUsher]

I don't support this so-called "Bitcoin classic", this idea seems completely idiotic for me. But this is just an opinion and such issues should be resolved by vote. DDoS attacks, ad hominem statements or whatever similar tactics are no better than assassination of opposition figures in the real life. This kind of behaviour is childish and unconstructive.

The problem is that how do we vote?

The only decentralised method that exists today is actually Bitcoin - but if we are not going to use Bitcoin to vote about Bitcoin then I think we have a problem.

Yes, you are correct. I'm always open to reading a whitepaper of some other decentralized and anonymous voting method resistant to sybil attacks but using consider.it to determine the consensus rules is indeed foolish.

The vote is the longest valid PoW chain , and is ultimately decided by 51% of the full nodes(not the miners). 75% or 95% of the mined blocks within the last 1k blocks is simply an indirect way of approximating node support for a fork. These are arbitrary numbers. Selecting too low of a number indicates you feel it is fine to ostracize the minority, picking an extremely high percentage indicates that you believe that you must have almost complete economic consensus before creating a hard fork and breaking consensus rules.  

[CuntChocula]

For business decisions, people always vote with their feet. If they stop using it that's a No vote.

I really don't understand all the noise about blocksize when we aren't even at capacity yet and don't appear to be breaking any growth speed records. The market cap has been at $6.5b or less for years. When will this massive leap occur everyone seems to think is going to happen? I want to start saving up to buy more coin.

Because no one wants to invest in a payment network unable to process more than 2.7 tps?

[CIYAM]

Because no one wants to invest in a payment network unable to process more than 2.7 tps?

Bitcoin is not a payment network (compared to say VISA) - and perhaps this was actually Satoshi's biggest mistake.

It *is* a settlement network already - so I think that is actually something of huge importance that keeps being missed.

Maybe it will be a realistic payment network down the track - but payment networks at the moment require almost instant txs and they need to be reversible (not something that Bitcoin can do).

A big part of the problem seems to be "Satoshi worship" - so the fact that he made a mistake or two just isn't acceptable to those caught up in this phenomena.

[CuntChocula]

Because no one wants to invest in a payment network unable to process more than 2.7 tps?

Bitcoin is not a payment network - and perhaps this was actually Satoshi's biggest mistake.

Maybe it will be a realistic payment network down the track - but payment networks at the moment require almost instant txs and they need to be reversible (not something that Bitcoin can do).

If not a viable payment network, people lose interest. That's what the VC money went into, that's what investors (who bought coins) were banking on. Take away the "Trustless Cash" expectations, and Bitcoin becomes a castrated stud, as useful as Beanie Babies.
*Nothing to do with Satoshi worship.

[jonald_fyookball]

Because no one wants to invest in a payment network unable to process more than 2.7 tps?

Bitcoin is not a payment network (compared to say VISA) - and perhaps this was actually Satoshi's biggest mistake.

Maybe it will be a realistic payment network down the track - but payment networks at the moment require almost instant txs and they need to be reversible (not something that Bitcoin can do).

A big part of the problem seems to be "Satoshi worship" - so the fact that he made a mistake or two just isn't acceptable to those caught up in this phenomena.

Not everyone agrees with you CIYAM.  I'm not going to reiterate the counterarguments to this as they've been
stated a million times, but lets just agree that a lot of this debate falls into deciding what Bitcoin is and should be.
The economic majority will ultimately decide if consensus can't be reached.

btw, you are calling "Satoshi worshipping"... I'm sure there is some of that going on, but also a fair amount of "core team" worshipping.

[CIYAM]

If not a viable payment network, people lose interest. That's what the VC money went into, that's what investors (who bought coins) were banking on. Take away the "Trustless Cash" expectations, and Bitcoin becomes a castrated stud, as useful as Beanie Babies.

Well - for anyone that sends money from one country to another Bitcoin is a miracle.

So people like you obviously don't have any experience with this problem therefore don't get why Bitcoin is actually very popular without being a payment network equivalent to VISA.

[johnyj]

In the end, it is still miners decide, since they hold hash power, and most of the miners also hold lots of bitcoins, both are essential to kill a competing chain. A competing chain will not survive if the security of the network and the value of the coin are both at risk

[CIYAM]

The economic majority will ultimately decide if consensus can't be reached.

No - the math will decide (assuming we don't cower).

[CuntChocula]

If not a viable payment network, people lose interest. That's what the VC money went into, that's what investors (who bought coins) were banking on. Take away the "Trustless Cash" expectations, and Bitcoin becomes a castrated stud, as useful as Beanie Babies.

Well - for anyone that sends money from one country to another Bitcoin is a miracle.

So people like you obviously don't have any experience with this problem therefore don't get why Bitcoin is actually very popular without being a payment network equivalent to VISA.

It may or may not surprise you to know that, like myself, most people rarely send money from country to country.
It may further surprise you to learn that sending binary data constitutes a negligible part of the cost of remittance payments. The costs are on the ground, in meatspace and bricks and mortar.

Many remittance startups learned that Bitcoin is, indeed, an *expensive* way to send money abroad.

>the math will decide (assuming we don't cower).

What does that even mean?

[franky1]

unlike your religion of blockstream church.. my implementation is for me and me alone. as i dont want to trust other people to make code for me.

i am pissed off with the drama of which religious band camp people should follow like sheep..

so i dont have a github as im not trying to start my own religion..

i will just leave you with a little sample that makes sense. as the variables i use else where would not make sense to you. and you would then ust clame hogwash


so, tell me

why do you think the religious church of the blockstream collective are the only ones that can make an implementation that works?
i thought ou were more open minded and that you would also prefer people to not blindly follow one source but be innovated enough to make their own (as long as it still meets the requirements to handshake and talk to the same network of nodes.

so ill ask you again
why is it impossible for others to make their own implementations that all work with the same chain??

again.. as you posted me questions on 3 posts
why is it impossible for others to make their own implementations that all work with the same chain??

[CIYAM]

It may or may not surprise you to know that, like myself, most people rarely send money from country to country.

Which is strange when you follow that up with this:

It may further surprise you to learn that sending binary data constitutes a negligible part of the cost of remittance payments. The costs are on the ground, in meatspace and bricks and mortar.

So you never do remittance yet seem to think you know all about it?

Strange - I actually *use Bitcoin for remittance* so unlike you I know what I am talking about.