Consensus Reached

[hv_]

Funny on the picture in OP is that there are only guys. No women at all. I guess some female ideas would be a good step forward.

I also was firstly searching for Yellen, but then noticed - other issue ...

[bankingbtc]

all i see is a PR release designed to try to keep the market calm as the whales try to pump the price on the back of the halving expectations of the hopeful. Psychological operations.

boy are poeple gonna be fucking pissed off if this turn out to be the case.

im kinda pissed off already, they said that they have reached "consensus" but all the things were just delayed once again, the problems were neither solved nor became anywhere closer to be solved

[Lauda]

all i see is a PR release designed to try to keep the market calm as the whales try to pump the price on the back of the halving expectations of the hopeful. Psychological operations.

No. Stop posting nonsense.

boy are poeple gonna be fucking pissed off if this turn out to be the case.

They are effectively are risking everything by an official statement. Just don't look at /r/btc right now, everyone is going 'rage mode' on Core.

im kinda pissed off already, they said that they have reached "consensus" but all the things were just delayed once again, the problems were neither solved nor became anywhere closer to be solved

Obviously you are not someone who is familiar with the underlying technology nor the development process. Unless you understand the complexity of the system, you need not complain about "delaying". Segwit is coming as planned and the HF grace period was expected.

[bankingbtc]

Obviously you are not someone who is familiar with the underlying technology nor the development process. Unless you understand the complexity of the system, you need not complain about "delaying".

i get your point, im not too familiar with it but does it really have to be delayed by that long? it has been delayed a couple of times now and im pretty sure that now there is a huge potential that it will not happen or that something else will interrupt this from happening

[Lauda]

i get your point, im not too familiar with it but does it really have to be delayed by that long? it has been delayed a couple of times now and im pretty sure that now there is a huge potential that it will not happen or that something else will interrupt this from happening

You are being told that it is being delayed constantly, but it is not. The events unfolded somewhere like this:
There was no consensus -> workshops were organized (to which Hearn refused to come) -> short term solution presented in December 2015 (workshop) -> consensus on solution (workshop) -> work began imminently. Then after the Classic nonsense appeared it "broke consensus" with their contentious HF.
Roundtable was organized (another workshop - waste of time and money) to officially reach consensus and to confirm what we initially knew: Segwit in April -> infrastructural improvements Q3/4 2016 & Q1/Q2 2017 -> HF Q3 2017.
Also keep in mind that both Gavin and Garzik were invited to this with all expenses paid, but they couldn't come because they're "busy" (if the source hasn't provided false information).

[European Central Bank]

This announcement ain't gonna stop the bitching or unite people. They've bought themselves an extra couple of years. I don't think a lot of people will wait that long and I don't think they'll be willing to listen to reason even if it is well thought out.

[Laosai]

im kinda pissed off already, they said that they have reached "consensus" but all the things were just delayed once again, the problems were neither solved nor became anywhere closer to be solved

Obviously you are not someone who is familiar with the underlying technology nor the development process. Unless you understand the complexity of the system, you need not complain about "delaying". Segwit is coming as planned and the HF grace period was expected.

If I understood correctly it's not really a delay but just the necessary time to develop and implement in a safe way what has been decided no?

[bitbitch]

the Treaty of Versailles worked well for a while and then the shit hit the fan.

[the_poet]

The Bitcoin Community is proving to be mature enough to reach consensus on such an important issue. Hope this will be the norm in the future when vital decisions need to be taken.

[AgentofCoin]

the Treaty of Versailles worked well for a while and then the shit hit the fan.

Some would argue that the shit hit the fan because of that treaty.

[Denker]

This announcement ain't gonna stop the bitching or unite people. They've bought themselves an extra couple of years. I don't think a lot of people will wait that long and I don't think they'll be willing to listen to reason even if it is well thought out.

Well everyone who is not satisfied with this is free to leave at any time.
No one is forcing anybody to stay.There are several other coins out there you can choose if you want.

[Laosai]

the Treaty of Versailles worked well for a while and then the shit hit the fan.

Some would argue that the shit hit the fan because of that treaty.

Some would argue that it has nothing to do with btc consensus...

[AgentofCoin]

the Treaty of Versailles worked well for a while and then the shit hit the fan.

Some would argue that the shit hit the fan because of that treaty.

Some would argue that it has nothing to do with btc consensus...

Some would argue that bitbitch was making a future Bitcoin/bitcoin prediction/comment based on a real world historical result.
Thus, my comment, would be in that context of future Bitcoin/bitcoin prediction/comment.

Sorry neither of us put any bitcoin signifiers in there for your approval and understanding.

[johnyj]

This is not a consensus, just a statement from FOMC meeting. And these miners seems never stick to their words: One day they support classic, another day they support blockstream, I guess next time they will have their own devs and support nobody

Blockstream obviously does not want to raise the block size, if they do, then they can do it today right now. So their plan is to first send LN into rail. But in order to make people use LN, they must limit the transaction on chain, so they will come up with another idea later, like 99% consensus HF.  But someone already raised legal issues about LN hubs, they are financial institution and must be regulated in US, and not allowed in China

So far nothing more interesting than the old style enterprise politics power grab, I hoped bitcoin can do better but obviously almost all the things that have lots of value ends up like this

[Laosai]

the Treaty of Versailles worked well for a while and then the shit hit the fan.

Some would argue that the shit hit the fan because of that treaty.

Some would argue that it has nothing to do with btc consensus...

Some would argue that bitbitch was making a future Bitcoin/bitcoin prediction/comment based on a real world historical result.
Thus, my comment, would be in that context of future Bitcoin/bitcoin prediction/comment.

Sorry neither of us put any bitcoin signifiers in there for your approval and understanding.

Sorry I should have quoted bitbitch not you ^^

[iCEBREAKER]

This hard-fork is expected to include features which are currently being discussed within technical communities, including an increase in the maximum effective block size, to more than 2 MB and less than 4 MB, and will only be adopted with a broad support across the entire Bitcoin community. -We will run a SegWit release in production by the time such a hard-fork is released in a version of Bitcoin Core.

does this line imply 2MB + segwit  or just segwit

its not clear

I'm taking it as a both 2MB + segwit.

Segwit right meow.

No more nonsense about contentious hard forks.

2mb eventually but Not Tonight Dear.

[ebliever]

I'm seeing Segwit in April and code for 2MB in June, but then no implementation of 2 MB blocks until July 2017. Is that right? Or is it a typo and should be 2016? 13 months seems a long while. Let's hope Segwit can fill the intervening void adequately.

[virtualdn]

So after this consenus we should expect a stronger bitcoin and a higher and more stable price?

[Quickseller]

They have to deliver Segwit in April and they have to propose a hard fork by July. If Core doesn't fulfill these conditions then they will lose their respect and trust.

They are delivering a HF proposal by July, and this does not mean that the HF will get implemented (even though the average block size will likely be near the effective maximum by then). It would not be difficult to effectively torpedo a maximum block size increase by putting something controversial in the HF.

This is the loophole. If core blockstream proposes a HF that includes controversial changes along with an increase in the maximum block size then such HF will not get adopted.

Not controversial features, fixes I'd say. Fixes that might be needed (e.g. Time-warp attack).

But if they wanted to, they could put controversial features in a HF, right?

[nakedbitcoins]

I'm not entirely sure consensus has been reached.