Satoshi Roundtable Thoughts - Gavin Andresen

[johnyj]

Decision making should not be done by programmers, because they don't know anything about market/economy/finance

That very much depends upon what kind of decisions we are talking about.

When the decisions for Bitcoin are to do with technical things (which so far they still should be until we really do have a "huge demand for coffees") then I think it is better to listen to the engineers than to those who run exchanges that are only interested in making profits and co-operating with governments to spy on people.

Every technical solution has an economy/financial outcome, there are many ways to solve one problem, the technical solution itself is the least concern, you can always hire thousands of programmers to realize an implementation, but everyone will see what you want to achieve. Currently we are witnessing devs killing bitcoin by turn it into a private company's network, but since bitcoin is used voluntarily, people will just leave or fork

Devs' inability to solve the current conflict inside community already proved their low IQ in social science

[CIYAM]

Devs' inability to solve the current conflict inside community already proved their low IQ in social science

Personally I think this characterisation is a "cheap shot" (but yes I know it is popular amongst those trying to attack the core devs).

I am not a "core dev" and actually none of the "core devs" even particularly like me - so the fact that you (and others) think that I am partisan just shows your own "low IQ".

(for some reason you just can't understand that I am not paid by anyone for my thoughts - and that is actually sadder than whatever rubbish you want to think about the core devs)

[adamstgBit]

Decision making should not be done by programmers, because they don't know anything about market/economy/finance

That very much depends upon what kind of decisions we are talking about.

When the decisions for Bitcoin are to do with technical things (which so far they still should be until we really do have a "huge demand for coffees") then I think it is better to listen to the engineers than to those who run exchanges that are only interested in making profits and co-operating with governments to spy on people.

Every technical solution has an economy/financial outcome, there are many ways to solve one problem, the technical solution itself is the least concern, you can always hire thousands of programmers to realize an implementation, but everyone will see what you want to achieve. Currently we are witnessing devs killing bitcoin by turn it into a private company's network, but since bitcoin is used voluntarily, people will just leave or fork

Devs' inability to solve the current conflict inside community already proved their low IQ in social science

A big problem with bitcoin is there is no "Project Manager". Devs hate project managers, because the project manager won't care about making the programmers life hard, or care if a particular solution will lend itself to "elegant code". all he cares about is the big picture.

In bitcoin the Dev's are also the project managers,  but they are programmers and know nothing of "market/economy/finance" so they can not formulate a good big picture, or overall vision of what this is all leading up to. often programmers are to focused on the individual details to realize how crazy the big picture they are painting is.

i'm going to repeat myself:

what is the point of keeping full node running cost low, if we are just going to turn around and ask end users to use lighting network??

[johnyj]

Devs' inability to solve the current conflict inside community already proved their low IQ in social science

Personally I think this characterisation is a "cheap shot" (but yes I know it is popular amongst those trying to attack the core devs).

I am not a "core dev" and actually none of the "core devs" even particularly like me - so the fact that you (and others) think that I am partisan just shows your own "low IQ".

(for some reason you just can't understand that I am not paid by anyone for my thoughts - and that is actually sadder than whatever rubbish you want to think about the core devs)

I say low IQ because there is an obvious answer to the problem and they failed to give the right answer: Don't think you are the god and make compromise to reach consensus with other actors

Gavin has demonstrated his ability to make compromise in negotiation with users (from 20MB to 8MB to 2MB), while the other devs do not make any compromise, they just play and delay and push in their own agenda continuously while ignoring user's request, isn't it enough clear that they are so stupid in social science?

[CIYAM]

Perhaps if you knew a bit more about Gavin and his history with the other devs you'd realise that no-one wants him as their leader now (but I guess you know nothing about that).

This is the unfortunate thing - you fail to understand the social science of what has happened in the project and yet want to put the one guy that no-one else wants back in charge (yes - Gavin is very clever at tricking people).

So you can keep on trying to push for Gavin but actually no-one wants Gavin (eventually he'll come to that conclusion himself but not until he has burned people such as Hearn and Garzik along the way along with trying his hardest to destroy the very project he once lead).

[CIYAM]

Gavin has become a cancer for Bitcoin.

It would be best if he would just remove himself entirely from the argument (but he won't and with support from people like you he isn't likely to give up any time soon).

[adamstgBit]

Gavin has become a cancer for Bitcoin.

It would be best if he would just remove himself entirely from the argument (but he won't and with support from people like you he isn't likely to give up any time soon).

we WILL

when Core refuses to implement 2MB blocks next year we will ALL fork off.

[CIYAM]

when Core refuses to implement 2MB blocks next year we will ALL fork off.

You know full well that SegWit gives you exactly the same as 2MB blocks (and will be done *this* year).

Yet you continue to say we need the 2MB blocks - why?

It is clear it is not for any logical reason - but probably for the same reason you have an ad-sig (you are paid and you haven't removed your ad-sig after I pointed it out either).

You should ask for better reasons from your masters about what to post as I am making you look ridiculous (and I doubt it is the porn ad-sig people that actually are your masters).

[adamstgBit]

when Core refuses to implement 2MB blocks next year we will ALL fork off.

You know full well that SegWit gives you exactly the same as 2MB blocks (and will be done *this* year).

Yet you continue to say we need the 2MB blocks - why?

It is clear it is not for any logical reason - but probably for the same reason you have an ad-sig (you are paid).

ahahaha, I can't wait for Segwit to be a complete disaster that does not increase effective blocksize more then 10%
and then watch as core says " this is normal because code is complex " and " we dont need 2MB blocks because lighting is simple"

Look i HOPE segwit actually provides 1.75x increase, and i'm reluctantly backing it because it seems to be the fastest way of getting a blocksize increase in a way we can all agree on. ( even tho to me it seems to be the riskier path )

but if i had my way, miners would have taken control 6 months ago when we saw >60% mining power vote for BIP100 or BIP101 or some voted for SOME form of block increas.

to me its not about right and wrong, i really want to see the will of the majority dissolve the will of the minority with >51% hashing power.

once i see this happen, i consider bitcoin a success.

i mean this IS the mechanism by which bitcoin was meant to evolve. watching it happen live would be mind blowing.

watching core / classic devs throw out retarded arguments back and forth in a futile attempt to reach consensus is not as fulfilling

[Bit_Happy]

If you want to be taken seriously then get rid of the ad-sig you have.

What do you think about using ad-sigs to support Bitcoin Dev?
A healthy % of the "pay" could go to programmers salaries. 

[Carlton Banks]

Decision making should not be done by programmers, because they don't know anything about market/economy/finance

The programmer's only ability is to translate human ideas into machine language, they are just translators, nothing more. The world is not run by translators. Their idea of artificially cap the transaction capacity and squeeze the users into their prepared out of date 3rd party solutions like alt-coin (side chain) and prepaid card (LN) is of ultimate stupidity

Okay then jonny, you use some economist developed coin.

I'll use the one designed (and coded) by computer scientists for all 7 years of it's life. It's called Bitcoin. Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

[ctlaltdefeat]

Gavin has become a cancer for Bitcoin.

It would be best if he would just remove himself entirely from the argument (but he won't and with support from people like you he isn't likely to give up any time soon).

yes i'm agree,i'm sure many peoples agree with this,Gavin Andersen is one of many people who dissapointed on bitcoin,and than he doing something dirty to comment and give not good opinion about bitcoin,yes he like a cancer for bitcoin.

[johnyj]

Decision making should not be done by programmers, because they don't know anything about market/economy/finance

The programmer's only ability is to translate human ideas into machine language, they are just translators, nothing more. The world is not run by translators. Their idea of artificially cap the transaction capacity and squeeze the users into their prepared out of date 3rd party solutions like alt-coin (side chain) and prepaid card (LN) is of ultimate stupidity

Okay then jonny, you use some economist developed coin.

I'll use the one designed (and coded) by computer scientists for all 7 years of it's life. It's called Bitcoin. Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Bitcoin's idea is not created by computer scientists, and Satoshi was known to be not fluent in programming, that's the reason it shines. Those so called computer scientists ruined it because they lack of the basic economy and financial knowledge, fortunately I have managed thousands of such guys and I am not so impressed by any of their tricks

[CIYAM]

...and Satoshi was known to be not fluent in programming...

Huh?

Where do you get that from - his style was certainly not that of a professional software engineer (more akin to that of either a home hacker or an academic perhaps) but he was certainly quite fluent in C++ (and I've never heard of an economist that writes C++).

[hv_]

Yes - but as with Nike, if you stay on your nice couch & relax - you never start the important training (hope you agree here ) - so - do it , pls.

Really - that is just pathetic.

Rather than slogans and stupidity I prefer considered engineering (it is obvious why you support an alt coin).

And - btw - I don't develop Bitcoin so you should be telling others to "do it" rather than myself (although I'm pretty sure they'll be even less interested in your suggestions).

Morning.  

No I do not support Monero,  (that must be popped into your brain as you mined an empty block there), but that single concept.

I support a proper industrial dev & deploy process where hard forks needs to be done  w/o panicing due to a really minor change ( say 1MB -> 1.2 MB).
And this is the best example I know to really start that training now (!), not when it's too late (typical human error ).

[CIYAM]

And this is the best example I know to really start that training now (!), not when it's too late (typical human error ).

Your patronising tone doesn't really help your lost cause but go ahead and see if Gavin will start telling everyone that they need to do some serious hard-fork "training" (perhaps you can help him to organise a "keep fit for hard-fork" exercise regimen).

[hv_]

And this is the best example I know to really start that training now (!), not when it's too late (typical human error ).

Your patronising tone doesn't really help your lost cause but go ahead and see if Gavin will start telling everyone that they need to do some serious hard-fork "training" (perhaps you can help him to organise a "keep fit for hard-fork" exercise regimen).

Maybe this was Gavin's biggest failure to not setup such a industrial style process, but who wants to blame him for that?

Yes - I'd like to do so, but I'm out of industrial software dev about 10 years now  and would mess it up as well...

EDIT: BTW: I do lots of software testing right now, and UAT testing often is not possible, so you really need to do tests in the production to see proper effects.

[Carlton Banks]

Decision making should not be done by programmers, because they don't know anything about market/economy/finance

The programmer's only ability is to translate human ideas into machine language, they are just translators, nothing more. The world is not run by translators. Their idea of artificially cap the transaction capacity and squeeze the users into their prepared out of date 3rd party solutions like alt-coin (side chain) and prepaid card (LN) is of ultimate stupidity

Okay then jonny, you use some economist developed coin.

I'll use the one designed (and coded) by computer scientists for all 7 years of it's life. It's called Bitcoin. Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Bitcoin's idea is not created by computer scientists, and Satoshi was known to be not fluent in programming, that's the reason it shines. Those so called computer scientists ruined it because they lack of the basic economy and financial knowledge, fortunately I have managed thousands of such guys and I am not so impressed by any of their tricks

Yeah, that's fascinating Jonny. Use their coin, please. It's called "fiat currency". This is Bitcoin.

[franky1]

Decision making should not be done by programmers, because they don't know anything about market/economy/finance

The programmer's only ability is to translate human ideas into machine language, they are just translators, nothing more. The world is not run by translators. Their idea of artificially cap the transaction capacity and squeeze the users into their prepared out of date 3rd party solutions like alt-coin (side chain) and prepaid card (LN) is of ultimate stupidity

Okay then jonny, you use some economist developed coin.

I'll use the one designed (and coded) by computer scientists for all 7 years of it's life. It's called Bitcoin. Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Bitcoin's idea is not created by computer scientists, and Satoshi was known to be not fluent in programming, that's the reason it shines. Those so called computer scientists ruined it because they lack of the basic economy and financial knowledge, fortunately I have managed thousands of such guys and I am not so impressed by any of their tricks

Yeah, that's fascinating Jonny. Use their coin, please. It's called "fiat currency". This is Bitcoin.

if you dont want a fiat coin carlton, then why are you defending a corporation (blockstream) who are trying to change the vision of bitcoin away from the 2009-2013 ideals. and are trying to implement economics, such as greed and increased fee's. while trying to use those same economics to move people away from bitcoin and onto less secure centralised networks like liquid, LN and sidechains.

if your mindset was truly about a decentralized currency with no authority, i find it strange that you are on your knees praying to the overlord blockstream rather than accepting the different mindset of atleast 100 individual programmers.

MANY programmers veered away from blockstreams roadmap in a decentralised manner, making things like btcd and other implementations. purely because letting one centralized company own the keys to the code and decisions is dangerous. yet i found it real funny that you would disregard, insult and FUDstorm anyone that wanted decentralized code, and instead raise the doomsday scenario of contention by defending the one central party that would cause contention.

you need to reassess what bitcoin means to you because outside of your little blockstream box, you will actually find more then 100 programmers who do not want to give control over to blockstream.

but im guessing you are going to play the ignorance card and waffle on how blockstream has no control. waffle on that if they did have control you would support them because they know best. and waffle on some more pretending your still for decentralization while weirdly trying to defend blockstream in the same reply.

goodluck with that.

[btcusury]

Honestly after reading few articles of those published by some of the attendees, from the looks of it, were heading to more centralized path if it continues this way and since 95% of miners votes are needed for this to go through (hope I understood it correctly) then it's going to complicate a bit since that's too high. I'm starting to worry though a bit since there seem to be no consensus on the matter (til now) since it looks like two groups that one looking for centralized system with more fee's and the other is after decentralized with less fee.

Core= aiming for several layers on top of a decentralized base to scale safe and properly and offer millions of users the possibilty of micropayments which will be incredible cheap and fast via LN and other implementations.Having the incredible huge majority of best skilled developers knowing and improving the network.

classic= 2 devs and a bunch of power greedy individuals and scammers who think just increasing blocksize again and again and again is the cure for everything.

Exactly! How foolish these people mindlessly supporting Classic are... They seem far too foolish to be true....



@CIYAM, do yourself a favor and click that nice little link below franky1's username that says 'Ignore'. You won't regret it!

How foolish these people mindlessly supporting Core are... They seem far too foolish to be true...

/facepalm

Blockstream seized power and are now artificially reducing blocksize to eventually force everyone onto their sidechains, Liquid/LN for their profit, and *we're* the mindless ones? Man, you are outta your mind.

Gavin screwed up, he never shoulda gave up power in the first place and let these vultures in.

You're in this for the wrong reasons. You think everyone is out for profit, just like you are, so you project baseless assumptions onto the motivations of others (with zero evidence). Some of us see the bigger picture and are interested in bettering the world. Gavin obviously does not. You have no technical understanding whatsoever, so you just rely on Gavin to support your self-serving position.