Bitcoin Core vs. Bitcoin Classic

[shorena]

There is something I don't understand.

Bitcoin core is the name of the program used to validate transactions and mine coins no?
It means that if two programs like bitcoin core and bitcoin classic are launched, they're both creating coins and validating transactions no?

Doesn't it mean that each transaction is duplicated? And that we thus can spend each coin twice?

I probably misunderstood something though :/

if the majority of the nodes are not running classic, then clasic is simply an altcoin, that some miners are deciding to use

so no there is no double bitcoin ever

Ok. But what happens if majority of nodes run classic?
Will I just you know, lose my coins? If I don't expect the success of classic, bitcoin might just disappear and be replaced by... Bitcoin2?
And it may be an altcoin but it's an altcoin named bitcoin no? ^^

If the network splits you have coins on both networks. Depending on the split it might be possible that both networks survive in which case you would have the same amount of "classic btc" as you would have "core btc". This is only true if you actually hold the private keys. If you are using a service you will have whatever they decide you have.

[Laosai]

There is something I don't understand.

Bitcoin core is the name of the program used to validate transactions and mine coins no?
It means that if two programs like bitcoin core and bitcoin classic are launched, they're both creating coins and validating transactions no?

Doesn't it mean that each transaction is duplicated? And that we thus can spend each coin twice?

I probably misunderstood something though :/

if the majority of the nodes are not running classic, then clasic is simply an altcoin, that some miners are deciding to use

so no there is no double bitcoin ever

Ok. But what happens if majority of nodes run classic?
Will I just you know, lose my coins? If I don't expect the success of classic, bitcoin might just disappear and be replaced by... Bitcoin2?
And it may be an altcoin but it's an altcoin named bitcoin no? ^^

If the network splits you have coins on both networks. Depending on the split it might be possible that both networks survive in which case you would have the same amount of "classic btc" as you would have "core btc". This is only true if you actually hold the private keys. If you are using a service you will have whatever they decide you have.

Ok, thanks for your answers and your explanations.

I think I miss some technical/practical knowledge. I've the basics of "don't put money on online wallet" but I think I'm going to see how wallet like Electrum works. I've got absolutely no idea of what are the private keys ^^
Thanks again.

[shorena]

There is something I don't understand.

Bitcoin core is the name of the program used to validate transactions and mine coins no?
It means that if two programs like bitcoin core and bitcoin classic are launched, they're both creating coins and validating transactions no?

Doesn't it mean that each transaction is duplicated? And that we thus can spend each coin twice?

I probably misunderstood something though :/

if the majority of the nodes are not running classic, then clasic is simply an altcoin, that some miners are deciding to use

so no there is no double bitcoin ever

Ok. But what happens if majority of nodes run classic?
Will I just you know, lose my coins? If I don't expect the success of classic, bitcoin might just disappear and be replaced by... Bitcoin2?
And it may be an altcoin but it's an altcoin named bitcoin no? ^^

If the network splits you have coins on both networks. Depending on the split it might be possible that both networks survive in which case you would have the same amount of "classic btc" as you would have "core btc". This is only true if you actually hold the private keys. If you are using a service you will have whatever they decide you have.

Ok, thanks for your answers and your explanations.

I think I miss some technical/practical knowledge. I've the basics of "don't put money on online wallet" but I think I'm going to see how wallet like Electrum works. I've got absolutely no idea of what are the private keys ^^
Thanks again.

It might be a bit difficult for you in case of a split if you use electrum, because with electrum the question is which version the server you connect to runs. If you connect to a server runing core you have "core btc" if you connect to a server running classic you have "classic btc". Once you start moving the coins of each network around the balances for the same keys and wallet will be different for each network. You are however on the safe side even if no server has the version for the network you want as you can just export the private keys.

Goto the addresses tab, rightclick on an address and select "private key". It will ask for your password and show you the private key for that particular address. You could use that private key and import it into a wallet for your wanted network and you could use the coins. Be careful and dont show anyone the private key as it alone is enough to spend the coins on that address.

[gmaxwell]

bitcoinocracy has been spammed between every blockstream fanboy and affiliate imaginable.. thus not a fair indicator.

I'm afraid you're confused. Bitcoinocracy is a cryptographic opinion site-- it has its limitations (terrible privacy, etc.) but at least it is resistant to sybils.  Due to the privacy issues, the only places I've ever posted it has been in response to people claiming that no one opposes these recent hardfork proposals. The reality is that much of the promotion of classic is powered by sockpuppets, when you go to more sockpuppet resistant venues (like in person meetings or bitcoinocracy) you see far less to none at all of it.

[alani123]

bitcoinocracy has been spammed between every blockstream fanboy and affiliate imaginable.. thus not a fair indicator.

I'm afraid you're confused. Bitcoinocracy is a cryptographic opinion site-- it has its limitations (terrible privacy, etc.) but at least it is resistant to sybils.  Due to the privacy issues, the only places I've ever posted it has been in response to people claiming that no one opposes these recent hardfork proposals. The reality is that much of the promotion of classic is powered by sockpuppets, when you go to more sockpuppet resistant venues (like in person meetings or bitcoinocracy) you see far less to none at all of it.

Wouldn't citing the results of votes from here require partial trust to the creator/maintainer? It wouldn't be hard for them to hide certain votes from the public to manipulate total results would it?

[gijoes]

Wouldn't citing the results of votes from here require partial trust to the creator/maintainer? It wouldn't be hard for them to hide certain votes from the public to manipulate total results would it?

The point is, rigging the vote with multiple sock puppets is much easier when voting is done without any Proof-of-Stake. Bitcoinocracy attempts to use your BTC holdings as such proof of stake. I share privacy concerns about its use but I don't really see how it could be turned into a secret ballot. In any case, the voters voluntarily chose to express their opinions.

So far as I know, the source code for this site is on Github. Since it displays all signatures used to vote, anyone can see for himself that the opinions expressed are backed by real BTC that the voters have under their control. Yes, the owner of the site may choose to withhold some of the votes from showing up, but I don't see what could be possibly achieved by it? If I don't see my vote showing up, I'd immediately start complaining about it publicly, thus casting doubt on the site. No complaints like this appeared so far.

[Amph]

core is still winning, by a lot

there is basically no competition

that is out of context.

remember bitcoin-core <0.12 (0.11 and below) should be considered as 'undecided' as they have not upgraded since last year. and so should be in its own category.
trying to put them into the blockstream friendly category is misleading

yeah that's correct, i was assuming that who was running core now would have switched to the new core in the future, but that's the point, it's not a given...

[elizabethqueen]

Bitcoin Classic Nodes Surge Following Beta 2 Release: https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-classic-nodes-surge-following-beta-2-release/



Are you going to switch? (or may already have)

still not got it,what difference between bitcoin core and bitcoin classic?i think i gonna be switch,even i already have.

[gmaxwell]

Wouldn't citing the results of votes from here require partial trust to the creator/maintainer? It wouldn't be hard for them to hide certain votes from the public to manipulate total results would it?

If you note, the way I always refer to it is to just point to the huge amount of economic opposition to a particular hard fork. That isn't something that is vulnerable to hiding signatures.

But if someone notices their opinion being censored, they could just post their signature anywhere-- here, on facebook, send it via email-- whatever.. and anyone/everyone could try adding it and prove to themselves that the site was hiding views.  So it would be effectively impossible for the site to secretly hide views on a sustained basis.

but I don't really see how it could be turned into a secret ballot.

I know exactly how to turn it into one. But then we'd have the problem of institutions being able to secretly use customer funds with total impunity.

[franky1]

bitcoinocracy has been spammed between every blockstream fanboy and affiliate imaginable.. thus not a fair indicator.

I'm afraid you're confused. Bitcoinocracy is a cryptographic opinion site-- it has its limitations (terrible privacy, etc.) but at least it is resistant to sybils.  Due to the privacy issues, the only places I've ever posted it has been in response to people claiming that no one opposes these recent hardfork proposals. The reality is that much of the promotion of classic is powered by sockpuppets, when you go to more sockpuppet resistant venues (like in person meetings or bitcoinocracy) you see far less to none at all of it.

lol blockstream have sockpuppets too..
icebreaker, lauda, carlton. are not blockstream coders but obvious shills.

lol and i you say bitcoinocracy cannot be attacked by sybil?
so 1 person with 5 addresses cant sign 5 different keys.. riiiiiiiiiigggghhhhtttt..

also the link has been spammed to mainly the blockstream fanboys so lets say only 1% of the general population wants to reveal funding.. if the link has been passed to lets say 5000 blockstreamers but only 1000 non-blockstreamers.. then just by more people seeing the link would get a biased 50:10 result.
then we could have an exchange that has several large wallets sign several addresses.. thus causing a change in results.

the fnnier thing is that even though bitcoinocracy is not fool proof. even things like the peer node crawler websites are biased too.. claiming that even versions of under 0.12 (where people have not upgraded in months) are clumped together in the category that is supposedly in favour of blockstream.

what would be more sensible is to have v0.11 and below put into a separate category defined as "undecided"

[pawel7777]

core is still winning, by a lot



there is basically no competition

But is this chart really representative? Say if you're in favour of increasing cap to 2mb, you could just change the code in your core client by replacing "1" with "2" in MAX_BLOCK_SIZE line and recompile. I reckon it would be still shown as Core client. Am I right?

[gijoes]

bitcoinocracy has been spammed between every blockstream fanboy and affiliate imaginable.. thus not a fair indicator.

I'm afraid you're confused. Bitcoinocracy is a cryptographic opinion site-- it has its limitations (terrible privacy, etc.) but at least it is resistant to sybils.  Due to the privacy issues, the only places I've ever posted it has been in response to people claiming that no one opposes these recent hardfork proposals. The reality is that much of the promotion of classic is powered by sockpuppets, when you go to more sockpuppet resistant venues (like in person meetings or bitcoinocracy) you see far less to none at all of it.

lol blockstream have sockpuppets too..
icebreaker, lauda, carlton. are not blockstream coders but obvious shills.

lol and i you say bitcoinocracy cannot be attacked by sybil?
so 1 person with 5 addresses cant sign 5 different keys.. riiiiiiiiiigggghhhhtttt..

also the link has been spammed to mainly the blockstream fanboys so lets say only 1% of the general population wants to reveal funding.. if the link has been passed to lets say 5000 blockstreamers but only 1000 non-blockstreamers.. then just by more people seeing the link would get a biased 50:10 result.
then we could have an exchange that has several large wallets sign several addresses.. thus causing a change in results.

the fnnier thing is that even though bitcoinocracy is not fool proof. even things like the peer node crawler websites are biased too.. claiming that even versions of under 0.12 (where people have not upgraded in months) are clumped together in the category that is supposedly in favour of blockstream.

what would be more sensible is to have v0.11 and below put into a separate category defined as "undecided"

It's no wonder (the very rare non-sockpuppet) bloatblockers are such blithering idiots that they don't even understand what is being discussed. I mean, they fell for such ridiculous propaganda as "OMG! The sky is falling Jan 2016, so we need to bloat blocks to 20MB right away!" And when the sky didn't fall as predicted, did they learn ANYTHING? No sir, they beelined for the next bait fed to them. Oh, humanity.

[iCEBREAKER]

It's no wonder (the very rare non-sockpuppet) bloatblockers are such blithering idiots that they don't even understand what is being discussed. I mean, they fell for such ridiculous propaganda as "OMG! The sky is falling Jan 2016, so we need to bloat blocks to 20MB right away!" And when the sky didn't fall as predicted, did they learn ANYTHING? No sir, they beelined for the next bait fed to them. Oh, humanity.

Can confirm ^^that's exactly what happened.

I was there.  I saw it all go down.

[mercistheman]

Should be an interesting event once the fork in the road presents itself... I still can't decide... Would like to see a poll of how many support moving to classic etc.
For those that are not in favor of block increase what is your plan for growth?

[owm123]

Bitcoin Classic Nodes Surge Following Beta 2 Release: https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-classic-nodes-surge-following-beta-2-release/



Are you going to switch? (or may already have)

I already did switch, and am running Classic node. Simply because I dont like what Blockstream is doing, or even the possibility of them developing Core to satisfy their corporate investors.

[aizzaku]

i think only some of people from whole bitcoin users know sufficiently about the issue of block size and willing to study and decide upon it. Others, some new, some who dont care since they are doing the tx like usual, arent bothered. That is the reason for this right.. i mean the huge difference.

or maybe they just dont want to and keep pulling the rubber till it breaks

[johnyj]

i think only some a few people from whole bitcoin users know sufficiently about the issue of block size and willing to study and decide upon it. Others, some new, some who dont care since they are doing the tx like usual, arent bothered. That is the reason for this right.. i mean the huge difference.

or maybe they just dont want to and keep pulling the rubber till it breaks

Corrected that for you 

But those a few is enough to decide everything. Someone said, like FOMC meeting, basically 12 people in bitcoin ecosystem decide where it goes, sadly but true, at least for now

[madjules007]

i think only some a few people from whole bitcoin users know sufficiently about the issue of block size and willing to study and decide upon it. Others, some new, some who dont care since they are doing the tx like usual, arent bothered. That is the reason for this right.. i mean the huge difference.

or maybe they just dont want to and keep pulling the rubber till it breaks

Corrected that for you 

But those a few is enough to decide everything. Someone said, like FOMC meeting, basically 12 people in bitcoin ecosystem decide where it goes, sadly but true, at least for now

I think a lot of users (nodes) and miners do not talk on this forum or reddit, or venues like that. But they are aware of what is going on and know exactly what to do in the case of another contentious hard fork threat like XT. Nodes will be spoofed, pools will be DDOS'd, and Classic's incompetence will be showcased for the community.

Gavin/Classic's plan of depending on convincing centralized pool operators, while pretending that a majority of nodes would ever switch to Classic.... it's adorable, really. But Classic supporters will find, like XT supporters before them, that it's all for the LOLz. A bad joke, but a joke nonetheless.

[aizzaku]

i think only some a few people from whole bitcoin users know sufficiently about the issue of block size and willing to study and decide upon it. Others, some new, some who dont care since they are doing the tx like usual, arent bothered. That is the reason for this right.. i mean the huge difference.

or maybe they just dont want to and keep pulling the rubber till it breaks

Corrected that for you 

But those a few is enough to decide everything. Someone said, like FOMC meeting, basically 12 people in bitcoin ecosystem decide where it goes, sadly but true, at least for now

Say what -.- 12 people. i didnt know about the FOMC meeting.. can u link me to it please. thankyou

I think a lot of users (nodes) and miners do not talk on this forum or reddit, or venues like that. But they are aware of what is going on and know exactly what to do in the case of another contentious hard fork threat like XT. Nodes will be spoofed, pools will be DDOS'd, and Classic's incompetence will be showcased for the community.

Gavin/Classic's plan of depending on convincing centralized pool operators, while pretending that a majority of nodes would ever switch to Classic.... it's adorable, really. But Classic supporters will find, like XT supporters before them, that it's all for the LOLz. A bad joke, but a joke nonetheless.

That is some way you have put it -.- but like u say they are aware of these things then they should put up their views somewhere or other.. where are these people? go with the flow ?

[Amph]

core is still winning, by a lot



there is basically no competition

But is this chart really representative? Say if you're in favour of increasing cap to 2mb, you could just change the code in your core client by replacing "1" with "2" in MAX_BLOCK_SIZE line and recompile. I reckon it would be still shown as Core client. Am I right?

yeah, but if it was that simple and thus not requiring an hard fork, why they are not following this way instead? there is somethign else behind