Bitcoin Forum
March 29, 2024, 08:10:13 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wondering out loud: Which should Chinese miners support - Core, Classic or another?  (Read 37943 times)
oakpacific
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 07:33:37 PM
 #221

No, network consensus, i.e., almost all the nodes on the network are ready to accept a new version of blocks.
Are we talking about clients, relays or miners ?

Anyone running a node that retrieves a full copy of blockchain, so all of them except SPV clients.

https://tlsnotary.org/ Fraud proofing decentralized fiat-Bitcoin trading.
1711699813
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711699813

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711699813
Reply with quote  #2

1711699813
Report to moderator
1711699813
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711699813

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711699813
Reply with quote  #2

1711699813
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1711699813
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711699813

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711699813
Reply with quote  #2

1711699813
Report to moderator
1711699813
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711699813

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711699813
Reply with quote  #2

1711699813
Report to moderator
1711699813
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711699813

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711699813
Reply with quote  #2

1711699813
Report to moderator
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 07:40:58 PM
 #222

No, network consensus, i.e., almost all the nodes on the network are ready to accept a new version of blocks.
Are we talking about clients, relays or miners ?
Everyone running a node that retrieves a full copy of blockchain, so all of them except SPV clients.
So relays it is.

I will tell you now how to reach hard-fork "consensus" using relays.

1. Make all relays (or let's assume 75% of relays) upgrade to the Bitcoin Classic
2. The old software that the relays are not using becomes irrelevant
3. Miners, seeing that they are mining using outdated software (and thus are/will be on the wrong chain) quickly upgrade their software to Bitcoin Classic, because otherwise they would lose all profits.
4. Big payment operators, seeing what is happening, also quickly upgrade their software to Bitcoin Classic
All happens within days, if not hours.

5. All the rest of the network (laggards) upgrades to Bitcoin Classic (this may take little longer time)

Boom ! Consensus reached, baby.

Also note that the money left on the old version aren't lost. Users just need to upgrade to use them.

oakpacific
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 07:43:26 PM
 #223

No, network consensus, i.e., almost all the nodes on the network are ready to accept a new version of blocks.
Are we talking about clients, relays or miners ?
Everyone running a node that retrieves a full copy of blockchain, so all of them except SPV clients.
So relays it is.

I will tell you now how to reach hard-fork "consensus" using relays.

1. Make all relays (or let's assume 75% of relays) upgrade to the Bitcoin Classic
2. The old software that the relays are not using becomes irrelevant
3. Miners, seeing that they are mining using outdated software (and thus are/will be on the wrong chain) quickly upgrade their software to Bitcoin Classic, because otherwise they would lose all profits.
4. Big payment operators, seeing what is happening, also quickly upgrade their software to Bitcoin Classic
All happens within days, if not hours.

5. All the rest of the network (laggards) upgrades to Bitcoin Classic (this may take little longer time)

Boom ! Consensus reached, baby.

Also note that the money left on the old version aren't lost. Users just need to upgrade to use them.

Nah, merchants using old full nodes, who would accept transactions on the old chain, would possibly get scammed through no fault of their own.

You cannot just fork and pray that the best will happen, in a security-critical system.

In the 2013 accidental fork, which lasted for 6 hours, someone managed to successfully double spend Okpay, this time an attacker would have months of time ahead to prepare for one.

https://tlsnotary.org/ Fraud proofing decentralized fiat-Bitcoin trading.
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 07:47:13 PM
 #224

No, network consensus, i.e., almost all the nodes on the network are ready to accept a new version of blocks.
Are we talking about clients, relays or miners ?
Everyone running a node that retrieves a full copy of blockchain, so all of them except SPV clients.
So relays it is.

I will tell you now how to reach hard-fork "consensus" using relays.

1. Make all relays (or let's assume 75% of relays) upgrade to the Bitcoin Classic
2. The old software that the relays are not using becomes irrelevant
3. Miners, seeing that they are mining using outdated software (and thus are/will be on the wrong chain) quickly upgrade their software to Bitcoin Classic, because otherwise they would lose all profits.
4. Big payment operators, seeing what is happening, also quickly upgrade their software to Bitcoin Classic
All happens within days, if not hours.

5. All the rest of the network (laggards) upgrades to Bitcoin Classic (this may take little longer time)

Boom ! Consensus reached, baby.

Also note that the money left on the old version aren't lost. Users just need to upgrade to use them.

Nah, merchants using old full nodes, who would accept transactions on the old chain, would possibly get scammed through no fault of their own.

You cannot just fork and pray that the best will happen, in a security-critical system.
Exactly.

This is why there is a 2-week (or a month - was it ?) "grace period". So, after number of Bitcoin Classic nodes reach 75% it gives few weeks time to everybody to upgrade.

Yes, of course - there will be some problems, perhaps even some people will get scammed. But I don't think it will be much.

All payments processors will surely upgrade in time, so it will be only single rare cases of users that do person-to-person transactions (but scamming this way would only work if the scammer knew that the person has old version of software).

Such scam will not be easy to pull.

ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 07:48:57 PM
 #225

In the 2013 accidental fork, which lasted for 6 hours, someone managed to successfully double spend Okpay, this time an attacker would have months of time ahead to prepare for one.
But now everybody will have a lot of time to prepare for such scams.

Also payment processors have insurance, so not so big problem really.

oakpacific
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 07:51:38 PM
 #226

No, network consensus, i.e., almost all the nodes on the network are ready to accept a new version of blocks.
Are we talking about clients, relays or miners ?
Everyone running a node that retrieves a full copy of blockchain, so all of them except SPV clients.
So relays it is.

I will tell you now how to reach hard-fork "consensus" using relays.

1. Make all relays (or let's assume 75% of relays) upgrade to the Bitcoin Classic
2. The old software that the relays are not using becomes irrelevant
3. Miners, seeing that they are mining using outdated software (and thus are/will be on the wrong chain) quickly upgrade their software to Bitcoin Classic, because otherwise they would lose all profits.
4. Big payment operators, seeing what is happening, also quickly upgrade their software to Bitcoin Classic
All happens within days, if not hours.

5. All the rest of the network (laggards) upgrades to Bitcoin Classic (this may take little longer time)

Boom ! Consensus reached, baby.

Also note that the money left on the old version aren't lost. Users just need to upgrade to use them.

Nah, merchants using old full nodes, who would accept transactions on the old chain, would possibly get scammed through no fault of their own.

You cannot just fork and pray that the best will happen, in a security-critical system.
Exactly.

This is why there is a 2-week (or a month - was it ?) "grace period". So, after number of Bitcoin Classic nodes reach 75% it gives few weeks time to everybody to upgrade.

Yes, of course - there will be some problems, perhaps even some people will get scammed. But I don't think it will be much.

All payments processors will surely upgrade in time, so it will be only single rare cases of users that do person-to-person transactions (but scamming this way would only work if the scammer knew that the person has old version of software).

Such scam will not be easy to pull.

Again, we cannot just speculate and pray.

Also, I think the important point is: let's just not say if your 'grace period' is too short, what if you see 5% of nodes hanging out there and have not upgraded? 15%, 25%? What if they still haven't upgraded after the fork because, well their admins could just go on vacation or something? What would happen to all the SPV clients connecting to them? Are you going to back down in this hypothetical situation?

I don't think we should wilfully allow someone to lose money through none of their own fault, not even one, but from my experience I cannot convince Classic supporters to accept that, but I guess, we can at least agree, that not everyone opposing to the hard fork has an evil agenda, they could just legitimately have moral concerns?

https://tlsnotary.org/ Fraud proofing decentralized fiat-Bitcoin trading.
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 07:59:38 PM
 #227

Also, I think the important point is: let's just not say if your 'grace period' is too short, what if you see 5% of nodes hanging out there and have not upgraded? 15%, 25%? What if they still haven't upgraded after the fork because, well their admins could just go on vacation or something? What would happen to all the SPV clients connecting to them? Are you going to back down in this hypothetical situation?
If they won't upgrade, the new clients will not even sync with the old relays, because blocks will be seen as invalid by the clients.
If we are talking about SPV clients, which don't see any blocks, then their money will also not be lost. They will regain the control of their money once all of them (relay/processor + client) upgrade. The money will not be lost in (almost ?) any case.

Also, generally when running business it is your goddamn job to make sure that everything is ok. If you don't know that, you should not even start a business.

The grace period is actually much much longer, because the whole situation will be widely known at least few months before that happens. So companies actually have months to change, not weeks.

Well, I think that covers it.

oakpacific
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 08:04:11 PM
Last edit: January 29, 2016, 08:18:06 PM by oakpacific
 #228

Also, I think the important point is: let's just not say if your 'grace period' is too short, what if you see 5% of nodes hanging out there and have not upgraded? 15%, 25%? What if they still haven't upgraded after the fork because, well their admins could just go on vacation or something? What would happen to all the SPV clients connecting to them? Are you going to back down in this hypothetical situation?
If they won't upgrade, the new clients will not even sync with the old relays, because blocks will be seen as invalid by the clients.
If we are talking about SPV clients, which don't see any blocks, then their money will also not be lost. They will regain the control of their money once all of them (relay/processor + client) upgrade. The money will not be lost in (almost ?) any case.

Also, generally when running business it is your goddamn job to make sure that everything is ok. If you don't know that, you should not even start a business.

The grace period is actually much much longer, because the whole situation will be widely known at least few months before that happens. So companies actually have months to change, not weeks.


Not really just business, say, you are buying bitcoins yourself. In fact, in which case, the smaller the hashrate remains on the old chain, the more dangerous it became for those left behind. The coins would not be lost, they would just have been already spent on the new chain, because old nodes cannot recognize the larger blocks, they would not see that.

Quote
Also, generally when running business it is your goddamn job to make sure that everything is ok. If you don't know that, you should not even start a business.

A merchant using USD certainly should not be expected to keep up with Fed's monetary policy, waiting for x confirmations is as much due diligence as should be expected from him, when using Bitcoin.

Quote
The grace period is actually much much longer, because the whole situation will be widely known at least few months before that happens. So companies actually have months to change, not weeks.
Assuming the information is equally accessible to all corners of the world, this economy is way larger than we think.

But anyway, I know I am not going to convince you, I am just saying not all anti-Classic people have evil agendas, that's all.

https://tlsnotary.org/ Fraud proofing decentralized fiat-Bitcoin trading.
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 08:16:17 PM
 #229

Not really just business, say, you are buying bitcoins yourself. In fact, in which case, the smaller the hashrate remains on the old chain, the more dangerous it became for those left behind.
Well it is not really dangerous. Your money will not be lost.
The worst thing that could happen is you get but scammed but - as I said - it is not so easy a scam to pull.

Quote
Also, generally when running business it is your goddamn job to make sure that everything is ok. If you don't know that, you should not even start a business.
A merchant using USD certainly should not be expected to keep up with Fed's monetary policy, waiting for x confirmations is as much due diligence as should be expected from him.
Well yeah, but what kind of comparison is this ? USD is not a new, dynamically developing technology.
I am sure that after 50 years Bitcoin will also stabilize and become the "boring, old Bitcoin" that everybody knows. But not now, not today.

Quote
The grace period is actually much much longer, because the whole situation will be widely known at least few months before that happens. So companies actually have months to change, not weeks.
Assuming the information is equally accessible to all corners of the world, this economy is way larger than we think.
Well sorry, but if some merchant on the other end of the world is many months behind what is happening in Bitcoin world, then that is seriously his problem.
The technological landscape & Bitcoin landscape are moving & changing extremely fast. You have to keep up just to stay alive. That is kind of normal.


Quote
But anyway, I know I am not going to convince you,
To convince me, you need stronger arguments. The ones you have given are not super-strong and absolute.

Well, you could be correct to some extent. What you say may even be true and might happen, but the probability of that happening is rather low.

I am just saying not all anti-Classic people have evil agendas, that's all.
Nowehere I said that you have a hidden agenda.

Lately I am becoming better and better at detecting bullshit. I don't see any bullshit in what you are saying. Just average arguments.

tomothy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 258
Merit: 250


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 08:18:04 PM
 #230

There have been some recent developments regarding 2mb and Blockstream. I missed the Blockstream information and wanted to include that in the thread as it is something miners should consider. The more interesting read was concerning what would happen in the event of a fork, at least according to g.anderson.

http://gavinandresen.ninja/minority-branches

I found the abovementioned link an interesting read.


https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/releases/tag/classic-0.11.2.b1




https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/42nx74/unmasking_the_blockstream_business_plan/



I think it would be helpful to understand whether liquid, sidechains, associated code created by blockstream is something under open source license or not. I think this could help understand profit motivation behind various actions. I have difficulty seeing them as the demonic monsters people paint them out to be but recognize their are to many red flags to completely disregard.
funkenstein
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1066
Merit: 1049


Khazad ai-menu!


View Profile WWW
January 29, 2016, 08:19:26 PM
 #231

1)  If you are a miner, it doesn't matter what language you speak, what food you eat, nor what set of assholes claim to own you and extort you.  

2)  Run whatever code you like.  Don't just git clone some trendy name, you will get burned.  Check changes yourself - no "updates", or you will get burned.  Choose params you like in terms of what TX go into the block.  

3)  Charge people extra to give you their TX directly and put them in the block.  This is the way things are going eventually as TX relaying appears unreliable and unrewarding.  

4)  Pay no attention to "version header codes" or other silliness.  Algorithmic behavior is not represented by anything other than the behavior itself.  Put whatever you like in the open bits of the header.  

5) Thank you for securing the network!  

"Give me control over a coin's checkpoints and I care not who mines its blocks."
http://vtscc.org  http://woodcoin.info
sturle
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1437
Merit: 1002

https://bitmynt.no


View Profile WWW
January 29, 2016, 08:19:39 PM
 #232

Not more?  Consensus is certainly at 1 MB then.  As I suspected.  To break the rules of the blockchain, e.g. by increasing the blocksize, increasing the money supply or inflation rate, etc, 10% is not enough.  Neither is 51% or 75% or even 90%.  You need 100% consensus.
100% consensus is most probably unachievable because of the ability of a single powerful miner to destroy consensus.
I assume we are talking about miner consesus, right ?
No, miners don't matter.  If a miner break consensus, users and merchants won't accept their blocks.  They will just make themselves irrelevant, mining worthless coins.

1. But that is not really important. The last time hard fork happened (because of network malfunction), the network upgraded, resolved itself & reached "consensus" in around 6 hours. So miner consensus can happen almost instantly. Nobody wants to be on the losing side of the fork - that is pretty obvious.
Nobody wants to have software with critical bugs.  It is quite easy to achieve consensus about that.  I remember the one back in 2010 when someone discovered they could make 184 billion BTC for themselves in the coinbase transaction due to an integer overflow bug.  That one was resolved quickly as well.  In both cases the hard fork was caused by an unintentional bug.  Bitcoin is still i beta.

2. Lately "consensus" means whatever Adam Back wants it to mean. Check out these links:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/434spq/adam_back_on_twitter_understand_bitcoin_social/
https://twitter.com/adam3us/status/692756252418576384
Quote from: adam3us
.@jnxpn understand #bitcoin social contract: majority MUST NOT be able to override minority. that is how political money fails. #consensus
Irrelevant.  My dictionary still have the same defintition of consensus as it always had.

So basically now he claims that consensus is what minority (Blockstream) wants. He has lost it and is completely mad with power.
I don't see how what you think someone else claim is relevant at all here.  (Read again – what he wrote is not what you think he claims.)

Bitcoin is built on some hard rules which cannot change unless all users agree to the change.  As long as some (or in this case most) users don't agree to change the rules, it is impossible.  You can only add new more restrictive rules, not change or remove existing rules.  People who cannot live with the rules as they are, have to use something else.  There are plenty of altcoins to choose from, and it shouldn't be a problem to anyone.

Last time I remember, Bitcoin was all about what majority wants. When minority wants to change rules of the game then it is called a HARD FORK and they go their separate way.
I can never remember bitcoin beeing about what a majority wants.  Bitcoin wasn't designed that way.  Can I run a campaign to make 100 BTC extra for UNICEF?  Just 100 BTC?  That's not much, and I'm sure it will help a lot of children.  I will probably get at least as as many supporters as those who want to change the maximum block size rule.  Perhaps make it 1000 BTC.  Or even more.  It is a good cause.

The only change a majority can do, is to impose new rules, i.e. stricter rules which will be imposed on new blocks.  Blocks adhering to the new rule will still be valid to old nodes, but blocks may have to confirm to an extra rule to be accepted by upgraded nodes.  This is called a soft fork.  Soft forks are typically activated only after 95% of the hashpower enforce the new rules.  Otherwise false confirmations may show up to old nodes whenever an old node mine a block.

Sjå https://bitmynt.no for veksling av bitcoin mot norske kroner.  Trygt, billig, raskt og enkelt sidan 2010.
I buy with EUR and other currencies at a fair market price when you want to sell.  See http://bitmynt.no/eurprice.pl
Warning: "Bitcoin" XT, Classic, Unlimited and the likes are scams. Don't use them, and don't listen to their shills.
oakpacific
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 08:23:56 PM
 #233

Not really just business, say, you are buying bitcoins yourself. In fact, in which case, the smaller the hashrate remains on the old chain, the more dangerous it became for those left behind.
Well it is not really dangerous. Your money will not be lost.
The worst thing that could happen is you get but scammed but - as I said - it is not so easy a scam to pull.

I edited my original post, sorry.

Now let's say, the scammer sent a payment to someone, which gets confirmed on the new chain, but the old nodes cannot see the larger blocks, so to them the coins do not move at all, either because the new transaction is included in the 'extra space' part of a 2mb block so it is not included in the old chain due to size limit, or because, well, the only miner left in the world that still mines the old chain is the attacker himself. Now the attacker could take as much time as there is in the world, in theory, to wait for, or mine a new block on the old chain, that includes his transaction which spends these same bitcoins already spent on the main chain, then the buyer/merchant will give him fiats/goods for bitcoins that do not exist on the chain 'at large', because he sees the transaction paying him being confirmed on a block relayed by the old node he connects to,  and he still wouldn't get these coins after upgrading. Makes sense?

https://tlsnotary.org/ Fraud proofing decentralized fiat-Bitcoin trading.
sturle
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1437
Merit: 1002

https://bitmynt.no


View Profile WWW
January 29, 2016, 08:29:43 PM
 #234

Also, I think the important point is: let's just not say if your 'grace period' is too short, what if you see 5% of nodes hanging out there and have not upgraded? 15%, 25%? What if they still haven't upgraded after the fork because, well their admins could just go on vacation or something? What would happen to all the SPV clients connecting to them? Are you going to back down in this hypothetical situation?
If they won't upgrade, the new clients will not even sync with the old relays, because blocks will be seen as invalid by the clients.
If we are talking about SPV clients, which don't see any blocks, then their money will also not be lost. They will regain the control of their money once all of them (relay/processor + client) upgrade. The money will not be lost in (almost ?) any case.
For SPV clients it is more problematic, actually.  They need to talk to a full node to get information about new transactions and blocks.  Sometimes they will contact a real bitcoin node, other times an altcoin node pretending to be bitcoin.  They will send their transaction to whatever chain the node they are talking to is using.  The transaction may be valid in one chain, and invalid in the other.  The user have no way of knowing.

This is a problem for soft forks as well.  For soft forks we know the miners have upgraded, but the user of an SPV client have no idea if the full node he connect to is upgraded or not.  If it isn't, a transaction which is invalid according to the new rules may be presented to the SPV wallet as valid (but unconfirmed).

Sjå https://bitmynt.no for veksling av bitcoin mot norske kroner.  Trygt, billig, raskt og enkelt sidan 2010.
I buy with EUR and other currencies at a fair market price when you want to sell.  See http://bitmynt.no/eurprice.pl
Warning: "Bitcoin" XT, Classic, Unlimited and the likes are scams. Don't use them, and don't listen to their shills.
oakpacific
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 08:32:24 PM
 #235

Also, I think the important point is: let's just not say if your 'grace period' is too short, what if you see 5% of nodes hanging out there and have not upgraded? 15%, 25%? What if they still haven't upgraded after the fork because, well their admins could just go on vacation or something? What would happen to all the SPV clients connecting to them? Are you going to back down in this hypothetical situation?
If they won't upgrade, the new clients will not even sync with the old relays, because blocks will be seen as invalid by the clients.
If we are talking about SPV clients, which don't see any blocks, then their money will also not be lost. They will regain the control of their money once all of them (relay/processor + client) upgrade. The money will not be lost in (almost ?) any case.


This is a problem for soft forks as well.  For soft forks we know the miners have upgraded, but the user of an SPV client have no idea if the full node he connect to is upgraded or not.  If it isn't, a transaction which is invalid according to the new rules may be presented to the SPV wallet as valid (but unconfirmed).

That's why they are not the same problem....but I am sure you know that.

https://tlsnotary.org/ Fraud proofing decentralized fiat-Bitcoin trading.
siameze
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064
Merit: 1000



View Profile
January 29, 2016, 08:40:13 PM
 #236

Go back whining on reddit, or vote on consider.it.

Bitcoin's sound money and security attributes comes first.

Gmax explanation is thoughtful, Core devs does not have the power, nor the will, to force contentious hardfork and break bitcoin's consensus rule.

That is all, there is nothing you or anyone can do about it.

Sorry your head got brainwashed by the full of shit socialist mainstreameries.
I will not even waste my time discussing here with you.

People like you will be made obsolete when the hard fork comes. And it will come as soon as the networks starts really congesting.

This platform completely sucks for discussion anyway, this is why I don't even come here anymore. Also, this forum is censored - the same as /r/bitcoin - by the small block supporters of which gmaxwell himself is.
Oh, and by the way, he also condones the censorship.


Just an average redditor, wailing and stamping their feet with typical, toddler-esque demands that reflect their principle concept of reality. "CENSORSHIP! is their battle cry, when there are literally hundreds of mediums on the internet to get your voice heard.

People like you make reddit just look stupid.


                     ▀▀█████████▀████████████████▄
                        ████▄      ▄████████████████
                     ▄██████▀  ▄  ███████████████████
                  ▄█████████▄████▄███████████████████
                ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀████████
                                               ▀▀███▀
    ▄█▀█       ▄▀  ▄▀▀█  ▄▀   █████████████████▄ ██▀         ▄▀█
   ▄█ ▄▀      ▀█▀ █▀ █▀ ▀█▀  ███████████████████ █▀ ▀▀      ▄▀▄▀
  ▄█    ▄███  █     █   █   ████████████████████  ▄█     ▄▀▀██▀ ▄███
███▄▄▄  █▄▄▄ █▄▄ ▄▄▀   █▄▄ ██████████████████▀▀   █▄▄ ▄▄ █▄▄█▄▄▄█▄▄▄
                           ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                            ▀▀█████████████▄
                                █████████████▄
                                  █████████████▄
                                    ▀███████▀▀▀▀▀
                                      ▀████▀
                                        ▀█▀
LetItRideINNOVATIVE ▬▬▬
DICE GAME
                        ▄███████████▄
                       ██  ██████████▄
                     ▄█████████████  ██▄
            ▄▄▀█▄▄▄▄▄████████████████████▄
        ▄▄█▀   ███████████  █████  ████  █
    ▄██████ ▄▄███████████████████████████▀
 ▄▀▀ ██████████████████████████  ████  █
█  ▄███████████▀▀▀█████████████████████
██████████████    ████████▀▀██████  █▀
██████████████▄▄▄██████████   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
███▀ ▀██████████████████████
██    ███████████████████████
██▄▄██████████████████████████
██████████████▀   ██████████
  █████████████   ▄██████▀▀
     ▀▀██████████████▀▀
         ▀▀██████▀▀
PROVABLY
F A I R
▄█████████████▀ ▄█
██            ▄█▀
██          ▄██ ▄█
██ ▄█▄    ▄███  ██
██ ▀███▄ ▄███   ██
██  ▀███████    ██
██    █████     ██
██     ███      ██
██      ▀       ██
██              ██
▀████████████████▀
BUY  BACK
PLANS
[BTC]
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 08:48:54 PM
 #237

No, miners don't matter.  If a miner break consensus, users and merchants won't accept their blocks.  They will just make themselves irrelevant, mining worthless coins.
Nobody wants to have software with critical bugs.  It is quite easy to achieve consensus about that.  I remember the one back in 2010 when someone discovered they could make 184 billion BTC for themselves in the coinbase transaction due to an integer overflow bug.  That one was resolved quickly as well.  In both cases the hard fork was caused by an unintentional bug.  Bitcoin is still i beta.
Nobody also wants to be on the minority branch. Gavin just did a great piece about what would happen if the network split 80/20.
Check it out:
http://gavinandresen.ninja/minority-branches (TL;DR: Nothing would really happen)


2. Lately "consensus" means whatever Adam Back wants it to mean. Check out these links:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/434spq/adam_back_on_twitter_understand_bitcoin_social/
https://twitter.com/adam3us/status/692756252418576384
Quote from: adam3us
.@jnxpn understand #bitcoin social contract: majority MUST NOT be able to override minority. that is how political money fails. #consensus
Irrelevant.  My dictionary still have the same defintition of consensus as it always had.
Let's get on the same page. What actually is your definition of consensus ?

So basically now he claims that consensus is what minority (Blockstream) wants. He has lost it and is completely mad with power.
I don't see how what you think someone else claim is relevant at all here.  (Read again – what he wrote is not what you think he claims.)
Nope, I read it again - with context and I still think my argument stands.
Please explain your point further because I don't understand what you think I am misunderstanding.

Bitcoin is built on some hard rules which cannot change unless all users agree to the change.  As long as some (or in this case most) users don't agree to change the rules, it is impossible.  You can only add new more restrictive rules, not change or remove existing rules.  People who cannot live with the rules as they are, have to use something else.  There are plenty of altcoins to choose from, and it shouldn't be a problem to anyone.
Wait a minute... what exactly is your point ?
Are you trying to say that if 100% users don't agree to change, then the change cannot happen ? Am I getting this right ?

Last time I remember, Bitcoin was all about what majority wants. When minority wants to change rules of the game then it is called a HARD FORK and they go their separate way.
I can never remember bitcoin beeing about what a majority wants.  Bitcoin wasn't designed that way.  Can I run a campaign to make 100 BTC extra for UNICEF?  Just 100 BTC?  That's not much, and I'm sure it will help a lot of children.  I will probably get at least as as many supporters as those who want to change the maximum block size rule.  Perhaps make it 1000 BTC.  Or even more.  It is a good cause.
You can do anything and you can even fork Bitcoin in any way you want.
If you can convince the majority of the network that your fork is the best and that giving 1000 BTC to poor children is the right choice and network will install your client then by all means - your client will be considered the "true" Bitcoin, and the previous client will be made obsolete and nobody will use it.
However the probability you could pull something like this is almost equal to zero.

The only change a majority can do, is to impose new rules, i.e. stricter rules which will be imposed on new blocks.  Blocks adhering to the new rule will still be valid to old nodes, but blocks may have to confirm to an extra rule to be accepted by upgraded nodes.  This is called a soft fork.  Soft forks are typically activated only after 95% of the hashpower enforce the new rules.  Otherwise false confirmations may show up to old nodes whenever an old node mine a block.
This is basically completely wrong and has no basis in anything. I don't think you understand what a soft fork and hard fork is.
Here is a pretty good explanation:
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/30817/what-is-a-soft-fork

In short, I would say that hard forks are the ones that split the network in 2 separate ones - old and new - and make a "clean cut", while soft forks "pretend" to all old clients that nothing has changed, so the old clients can keep working (but important: the old clients are not working 100% correctly while not knowing that anything happened).
So basically, hard fork is kind of more open and honest way of doing changes, while soft-fork is more of a "sneaky" way that makes a change and pretends that nothing has happened to the network.

I think I explained it right.

ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 08:55:57 PM
 #238

New archived thread backup (in case of censorship):
https://archive.is/eYLZr

EDIT:
Well, that's enough for me today.
Goodnight everybody.

nomnomnom
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 313
Merit: 250



View Profile
January 29, 2016, 09:38:03 PM
 #239

Hey Smiley

I think the plan behind bip101 was that the average internet connection will likely keep getting faster with time, even today some people have 1Gbit fiber connection at home, others are probably watching 4k netflix right now.
Average internet connectivity improvements only give about 30% per year optimistically. BIP 101 was far more aggressive than that.

And while some minority of the world has 1 Gbit available, requiring it would be saying nobody else can use Bitcoin.
I'm only slightly rural and I can't get better than 5/0.5 Mbps yet.

Congrats you have an average internet connection: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Internet_connection_speeds
So it could be worse, but it is likely to get better with time. A short time ago I was stuck on 1/0.2 Mbps which was shared by 4 people, that was not fun.
Now it is hybrid DSL/LTE, I was very sceptical but it works pretty well Smiley

Maybe the values should have been chosen lower with bip101, but something like it which keeps growing makes a lot of sense to me.


For some, it is that Bitcoin will continue to function as a payment network for individual users rather than a settlement network where only large transactions can be processed cost-efficiently.

I would like to know why that is perceived to be an issue (especially in China when you have payment networks that work instantly with almost no fees already)?

(such as Alipay, QQ, etc.)


I think this kind of thinking is very dangerous, not everyone has access to those payment systems, they also can confiscate funds or let you jump trough hoops like identity verifications.
For me Bitcoin is a currency-commodity so it should be able to flow around nicely. It should not scale to visa levels right now imho, but also not the total opposite, it is something in between.

From the bitfury roundtable it seems Gavin is more worried about the shortterm, while I am more worried about the longterm. Seg-wit will probably work, but it needs a clear plan how
further increases happen. And I read multiple times that a HF need atleast a year runup time etc, so it needs to have a plan right now. (TBH my opinion is that this should have been fixed years ago, I can't imagine this will get easier if userbase keeps growing)

There are thousands of altcoins just waiting to pick up, some of them have bigger or dynamic blocksizes, as a BTC holder it would be sad if (more) value flows into them...
Andre#
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 29, 2016, 09:45:22 PM
 #240


Why is it that you want to keep putting "words into my mouth" which I don't do to you?

A basic standard of respect is not doing that.

So I am simply going to not respond to you now as you can't even manage a basic level of respect (you have to shove words into my mouth to make your points).


Why are you guys still talking to this clown? I'm puzzled.  Huh
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!