CIYAM
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
|
|
January 29, 2016, 04:44:03 PM |
|
As you see - it is only you making such disrespectful links. Good luck with finding anyone to support you - I have already shown that you are a disrespectful asshole (so unlike you I am not going to reply with some stupid Wikipedia link about your psychological disorder).
|
|
|
|
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1006
Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952
|
|
January 29, 2016, 04:46:53 PM |
|
In that regard I'm with you. There is nothing truly democratic occurring on either side of this debate. Unfortunately, I don't think it is possible (and many will argue that democracy is bad for BTC anyway). We can only hope that when the dust settles the 'correct' side won, whichever that is, as we all have our biases.
The lying, manipulating & physically attacking (DDoS) side is never the right side. What i learned over the years is that you can easily find out who is honest and who is right only by watching the actions of the opponents, not the words. The side which is manipulating, lying, censoring and attacking verbally & physically is the dishonest & evil one with ulterior agenda 99% of the time. "By their fruit you will recognize them" - it said in an ancient wise book. EDIT: As you see - it is only you making such disrespectful links. It is not my link.Also: RESPECT MUST BE EARNED. Especially on the internet. I will not respect you only because you are (probably) older than me.
|
|
|
|
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1006
Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952
|
|
January 29, 2016, 04:51:01 PM |
|
Good luck with finding anyone to support you
I don't care if I am being supported. I am not the one needing support. have already shown You have shown nothing and you have said nothing. Not according to my calculations. 0 arguments. 15 (or so) rants about respect. That is not a discussion on your side. This is a farce.
|
|
|
|
CIYAM
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
|
|
January 29, 2016, 04:51:33 PM |
|
Also: RESPECT MUST BE EARNED. Especially on the internet.
And you have done absolutely zero to earn my respect (all you have done so far is to attack me and call me old). I see you are still ranting (now going on about the number of posts, etc.) Do you see me doing that? If you want to be taken seriously then why not stop with the personal attacks for a start?
|
|
|
|
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1006
Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952
|
|
January 29, 2016, 04:54:11 PM |
|
Also: RESPECT MUST BE EARNED. Especially on the internet.
And you have done absolutely zero to earn my respect (all you have done so far is to attack me and call me old). I see you are still ranting (now going on about the number of posts, etc.) Do you see me doing that? OK, I now assume with 85% probability that you are straying off-topic in order to avoid serious discussion about the issue. I will not respond to these kind of posts anymore.
|
|
|
|
tAP
|
|
January 29, 2016, 04:55:03 PM |
|
In that regard I'm with you. There is nothing truly democratic occurring on either side of this debate. Unfortunately, I don't think it is possible (and many will argue that democracy is bad for BTC anyway). We can only hope that when the dust settles the 'correct' side won, whichever that is, as we all have our biases.
The lying, manipulating & physically attacking (DDoS) side is never the right side. What i learned over the years is that you can easily find out who is honest and who is right only by watching the actions of the opponents, not the words. The side which is manipulating, lying, censoring and attacking verbally & physically is the dishonest & evil one with ulterior agenda 99% of the time. "By their fruit you will recognize them" - it said in an ancient wise book. EDIT: As you see - it is only you making such disrespectful links. It is not my link.Also: RESPECT MUST BE EARNED. Especially on the internet. I will not respect you only because you are (probably) older than me.Same team bro lol
|
"The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there."
LP Hartley
|
|
|
CIYAM
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
|
|
January 29, 2016, 04:56:14 PM |
|
Okay - can we just hit "reset" then?
(attacking other forum members is not really what I am interested in doing)
|
|
|
|
|
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1006
Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952
|
|
January 29, 2016, 04:57:01 PM |
|
Okay - can we just hit "reset" then? All my aggression towards you has been deactivated. Please proceed with the topic.
|
|
|
|
CIYAM
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
|
|
January 29, 2016, 04:58:03 PM |
|
So what is exactly the percentage of Core Devs that work for Blockstream?
(I guess this should be the key issue here)
|
|
|
|
johnyj
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1988
Merit: 1012
Beyond Imagination
|
|
January 29, 2016, 04:58:27 PM |
|
Overall, there seems to be a sense of helplessness. Some reflected on why the Chinese had so little say in the matter and some urge that the Chinese should form their own core development team and create their own fork. Hi Eric, What do you think about the Classic implementation? What does chinese miners think about it? Many Chinese Bitcoiners - not only miners, but also exchanges and wallet services, originally supported Classic for its support of 2MB block size, but after meeting Jeff Garzik in Beijing, many backtracked because they didn't believe that the team behind is capable or there is a roadmap. This is true, because there should not be a road map at all without first have widely reached consensus, and you should not blindly accept proposals without your own judgement, and you should also participate in making a road map I think the communication between all the participants is very important, especially the core devs, they must constantly broadcast their proposed change with human understandable bulletin to increase understanding. They should not start to implement any change without a design specification which is approved by major consensus, otherwise it will be wasted time and resource working on a solution that no miners will use
|
|
|
|
tAP
|
|
January 29, 2016, 05:00:50 PM |
|
So what is exactly the percentage of Core Devs that work for Blockstream?
(I guess this should be the key issue here)
While I agree that it certainly is an issue (and a HUGE issue - conflict of interest), the real issue here, in my opinion, is at it's most basic: Whether or not we should adopt a 2MB block size increase ASAP, or not - and good, logical reasons to support each side. I suppose I'll start. I support a 2MB block size increase because first, the 1MB limit was simply a temporary measure put in to stop spam attacks. Gavin addresses this issue (increasing block size while keeping spam attacks down) by retaining the SAME amount of signatures allowed per block, but expanding the block size itself. Also, keeping it at a 1MB limit is consistently creating a backlog of transactions that are not processed in a timely manner. Multiple times I have included recommended CORE CLIENT fees (even higher) and found myself waiting multiple hours. This is not good for adoption as, if you can't use the service, you won't use the service. Just a few to start us off.
|
"The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there."
LP Hartley
|
|
|
oakpacific
|
|
January 29, 2016, 05:04:58 PM |
|
So what is exactly the percentage of Core Devs that work for Blockstream?
(I guess this should be the key issue here)
While I agree that it certainly is an issue (and a HUGE issue - conflict of interest), the real issue here, in my opinion, is at it's most basic: Whether or not we should adopt a 2MB block size increase ASAP, or not - and good, logical reasons to support each side. I think what would be the correct thing to do is: let the network decides. I.e., you put out you 2MB-supporting client, wait for everyone to convert, and if you have almost everyone on board before you deadline, activate it, otherwise, call off the plan, as of now, Wang Chun's proposal in bitcoin-core-dev channel, which seems to be liked by Matt Corallo, is closest to that. One of my biggest problems with Bitcoin Classic is they want to go full throttle ahead as long as they have 75% of miners support, no matter what.
|
|
|
|
CIYAM
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
|
|
January 29, 2016, 05:06:15 PM |
|
Whether or not we should adopt a 2MB block size increase ASAP, or not - and good, logical reasons to support each side.
I see zero logical reason to do that. No-one is using Bitcoin for normal txs and that isn't going to change this year or next year. A small group of people are trying to "take over the project" by pushing about this need for everyone to be able to use Bitcoin to buy "coffee". The fact is that even if you increased the block size to 1GB it won't compete with VISA (it would still be 100x times slower).
|
|
|
|
CIYAM
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
|
|
January 29, 2016, 05:08:42 PM |
|
If you just can't understand the basic things and think that Bitcoin will somehow compete with VISA if it is increased to 2MB or 20MB then I think you need to either get some extra education or just stop posting nonsense.
|
|
|
|
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1006
Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952
|
|
January 29, 2016, 05:10:24 PM |
|
So what is exactly the percentage of Core Devs that work for Blockstream?
(I guess this should be the key issue here)
Correct. Proceeding with developer list. Please note the metric used (number of commits) is far from perfect: #1 laanwj1, 205 commits #2 sipa 640 commits#3 gavinandresen 484 commits #4 theuni 330 commits #5 TheBlueMatt 288 commits#6 jonasschnelli 223 commits #7 luke-jr 199 commits#8 gmaxwell 133 commits#9 fanquake 117 commits #10 MarcoFalke 112 commits #11 jtimon 106 commits #12 petertodd 91 commits #13 cozz 70 commits #14 sdaftuar 65 commits #15 morcos 55 commits EDIT: This is a better one, tought not done by me:
|
|
|
|
CIYAM
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
|
|
January 29, 2016, 05:11:58 PM |
|
So what is exactly the percentage of Core Devs that work for Blockstream?
(I guess this should be the key issue here)
Correct. Proceeding with developer list. Please note the metric used (number of commits) is far from perfect: #1 laanwj1, 205 commits #2 sipa 640 commits#3 gavinandresen 484 commits #4 theuni 330 commits #5 TheBlueMatt 288 commits#6 jonasschnelli 223 commits #7 luke-jr 199 commits#8 gmaxwell 133 commits#9 fanquake 117 commits #10 MarcoFalke 112 commits #11 jtimon 106 commits #12 petertodd 91 commits #13 cozz 70 commits #14 sdaftuar 65 commits #15 morcos 55 commits That does not show who works for Blockstream - so is there another post I am waiting for from you?
|
|
|
|
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1006
Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952
|
|
January 29, 2016, 05:13:04 PM |
|
So what is exactly the percentage of Core Devs that work for Blockstream?
(I guess this should be the key issue here)
Correct. Proceeding with developer list. Please note the metric used (number of commits) is far from perfect: #1 laanwj1, 205 commits #2 sipa 640 commits#3 gavinandresen 484 commits #4 theuni 330 commits #5 TheBlueMatt 288 commits#6 jonasschnelli 223 commits #7 luke-jr 199 commits#8 gmaxwell 133 commits#9 fanquake 117 commits #10 MarcoFalke 112 commits #11 jtimon 106 commits #12 petertodd 91 commits #13 cozz 70 commits #14 sdaftuar 65 commits #15 morcos 55 commits That does not show who works for Blockstream - so is there another post I am waiting for from you? Sorry, my mistake - the bold ones are from Blockstream. Better version from reddit (pasted above): https://i.imgur.com/jM6oxr3.png
|
|
|
|
tAP
|
|
January 29, 2016, 05:13:18 PM |
|
If you just can't understand the basic things and think that Bitcoin will somehow compete with VISA if it is increased to 2MB or 20MB then I think you need to either get some extra education or just stop posting nonsense.
You have to be a troll. There is no other explanation. We literally just talked about being done with personal attacks, and once I bring up a good point, there you go again. Incorrigible. Not ONCE did I mention Visa.
|
"The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there."
LP Hartley
|
|
|
canth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1001
|
|
January 29, 2016, 05:13:27 PM |
|
Then, I guess, perhaps we could agree that, hard fork the network with the support of just 6 pool operators, and one month "grace period", while completely disregarding the response of the network of full nodes at the time, like what the Bitcoin Classic people are very clear about what they are trying to do, is very undemocratic and should not be supported?
If the pool operators were the only ones interested in >1MB blocks then this would fail since most users and merchants would reject their larger blocks. this is not the case however...these companies are supporting it too: Coinbase OKCoin Bitstamp Blockchain.info (Peter Smith) Xapo Bitcoin.com Foldapp Bread Wallet Snapcard.io Cubits Vaultoro Coinify Bitso Bitnet BitOasis Lamassu BlockCypher BitQuick.co itBit BitAccess Coinfinity Chronos Crypto
|
|
|
|
|