The bug could be found!!! run them both in same test envrionment

[jubalix]

The Bug Could be found if testing was done by having both 0.7.0, and 0.8.0 tested together in the test environment under suitable conditions, and watching the outputs with various bug catches, eg BlockFill.percent()


There should be a standardized set of test tools that extract information about critical parameters.

It is unchallenged that not all people will upgrade uniformally so why the 0.8.0 is not being tested with prior versions is a false argument, doomed to throw a bug out, and this has now been proven QED

I am somewhat disappointed 0.7.0 was not the test environs ( I assumed you were doing that) and more disappointed that currently a good percentage of "talented people" are claiming that this bug could not have been detected

It seems dev is concentraing on single points like upgrade this upgrade that, but not viewing BTC as the full system as it is
(and I suggest the full system maybe Crypto/BTC is about re-aragning human activity/social fabric...and that why is that to be very distibuted....not on a few asic miners and not through an exchange that can calim 80% of all bitcoin, though the latter is not such a problem)

When I write a collision engine for example I ratchet up/down various parameters to the absurd to see what will happen, and I use various checks to test faults, eg use conservation of momentum forums versus velocity/position/mass / momentum eqns


similar weighted methods could be used in almost any test environment

What you are doing by not doing this is BTC will tend to be the best possible test bed for something like LTC or maybe TRC latter using a closer system to BTC than LTC, or other Coin, as LTC/TRC will now not make this mistake!!!, but BTC stress-tested everything for them.

LTC/TRC are going to at least arbitrage in from BTC the security they gain BTC mistakes and from not being first


TL:DR
BTC is turning into a possible test system for LTC/TRC etc

[DeathAndTaxes]

You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team.  When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew.  Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing.  Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers.  Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?

[dree12]

This is not accurate.

There was, indeed, testing on the testnet with a full (1 MB) block. This was accepted by both the 0.7 and 0.8 versions. There is no concern here.

Slush's block should have produced the same valid block. However, the block was structured carefully as to expose a problem in 0.7 that was never discovered. Not only was this an extremely difficult problem to catch, but its finding would in fact not have been accelerated with a mixed testnet. The introduction of 0.8 into the equation would actually delay finding the bug, as it would mean less time spent testing edge cases on 0.7.

[justusranvier]

There was, indeed, testing on the testnet with a full (1 MB) block. This was accepted by both the 0.7 and 0.8 versions. There is no concern here.

Slush's block should have produced the same valid block. However, the block was structured carefully as to expose a problem in 0.7 that was never discovered.

So the problem was a pathological block, not simply a large block.

[jubalix]

You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team.  When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew.  Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing.  Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers.  Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?

I have done qa, and programed some time ago....but fair point to you.....

[jubalix]

There was, indeed, testing on the testnet with a full (1 MB) block. This was accepted by both the 0.7 and 0.8 versions. There is no concern here.

Slush's block should have produced the same valid block. However, the block was structured carefully as to expose a problem in 0.7 that was never discovered.

So the problem was a pathological block, not simply a large block.

Aha, seems we have flushed out a nuance in the problem!!!

[jubalix]

This is not accurate.

There was, indeed, testing on the testnet with a full (1 MB) block. This was accepted by both the 0.7 and 0.8 versions. There is no concern here.

Slush's block should have produced the same valid block. However, the block was structured carefully as to expose a problem in 0.7 that was never discovered. Not only was this an extremely difficult problem to catch, but its finding would in fact not have been accelerated with a mixed testnet. The introduction of 0.8 into the equation would actually delay finding the bug, as it would mean less time spent testing edge cases on 0.7.

[1] I don't quite buy you could not dial up the test parameters/code substrate variants to find this with both operating

[2] If I am wrong about [1] and I accept I may well be, then BTC is functioning as a testbed for TRC/LTC/Other coin (esp SHA), and that amount of value will be arbitraged out of BTC to OtherCoin

[gweedo]

You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team.  When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew.  Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing.  Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers.  Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?

Gavin is paid, I think this month his payment should be revoked for this bug getting thru.

[DeathAndTaxes]

You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team.  When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew.  Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing.  Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers.  Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?

Gavin is paid, I think this month his payment should be revoked for this bug getting thru.

Or not. 

[paraipan]

This is not accurate.

There was, indeed, testing on the testnet with a full (1 MB) block. This was accepted by both the 0.7 and 0.8 versions. There is no concern here.

Slush's block should have produced the same valid block. However, the block was structured carefully as to expose a problem in 0.7 that was never discovered. Not only was this an extremely difficult problem to catch, but its finding would in fact not have been accelerated with a mixed testnet. The introduction of 0.8 into the equation would actually delay finding the bug, as it would mean less time spent testing edge cases on 0.7.

Source?

[jubalix]

You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team.  When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew.  Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing.  Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers.  Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?

I have done qa, and programed some time ago....but fair point to you.....

also I am doing something by asking these questions I have just extracted a nuance/detail of the problem that may not have been previously expressed...with as much clarity....I am meta programing/debuging...the meat space wetware, to throw out greater detail on the nature of the bug

with
questionGetFrom.BrainOfDevTeam()


Sighhhhh

There was, indeed, testing on the testnet with a full (1 MB) block. This was accepted by both the 0.7 and 0.8 versions. There is no concern here.

Slush's block should have produced the same valid block. However, the block was structured carefully as to expose a problem in 0.7 that was never discovered.

So the problem was a pathological block, not simply a large block.

Aha, seems we have flushed out a nuance in the problem!!!

[gyverlb]

So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them.

He why don't you go medieval and fetch the pitchforks instead. Removing bread from the mouth of a man (and his family if he has one to support) isn't fun enough, you should definitely eviscerate him...

[jubalix]

You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team.  When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew.  Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing.  Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers.  Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?

Gavin is paid, I think this month his payment should be revoked for this bug getting thru.

Or not. 

So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them.

Hmm....I think the idea of a distributed anything is that it garners enough people who through self interest (ie bieng invested in the crypto) stand the best possible chance of fixing it

having one person to blame....may demonstrate a weakness in a distributed system

Gavin's pay and terms are just part of a debugging routine instituted by the larger [free] market,

the blame if it is to be leveled is at us all to....

I posit that the allocation of blame to a individual, is myopic/archaic, but convenient idea to the lenses of our mind to focus on....broaden you mind-scape and appreciate the interwoven nature of systems and outcomes.

Eg  A Car is an expression of pheno type of the genome of human DNA, but to look at human DNA you would not see this readily.

[gyverlb]

What about the bread out of my mouth? Time is money.

At most 4 hours mining wasted by the second bug impacting the blockchain in 4+ years is a problem for you? I fear there isn't many places where you can earn your bread without such risks...

[Severian]

Gavin is paid, I think this month his payment should be revoked for this bug getting thru.

There wouldn't still be a Bitcoin but for the many months he put into it unpaid. Lighten up. If you can't take the hit, you shouldn't be in the game.

[gweedo]

Gavin is paid, I think this month his payment should be revoked for this bug getting thru.

There wouldn't still be a Bitcoin but for the many months he put into it unpaid. Lighten up. If you can't take the hit, you shouldn't be in the game.

I can take the hit, it is when a bug that could have been easily found is making the entire network take a hit. Ok but now he is getting paid, so terms are different if he wasn't getting paid, I sit here and read the FUD at the beginning, but he is getting paid.

[eb3full]

I can take the hit, it is when a bug that could have been easily found is making the entire network take a hit.

You're just speculating that it was an easy-to-find bug. Bugs happen. They've happened before and caused hard-forks. This is experimental software, and that has been reiterated by the developers over and over, especially lately now that the price has skyrocketed again.

If you don't like it, don't send money to the Bitcoin Foundation. Send it to your own 3rd party source auditing group that can find these "easily found" bugs. Otherwise, seriously, stop embarrassing yourself over something which will correct itself.

It's your fault you invested in experimental software and can't handle occasional issues.

[jubalix]

So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them.

He why don't you go medieval and fetch the pitchforks instead. Removing bread from the mouth of a man (and his family if he has one to support) isn't fun enough, you should definitely eviscerate him...

What about the bread out of my mouth? Time is money.

What do you do for a living gweedo? If you make a mistake, do they withhold your paycheck?

I humbly suggest my point is somewhat cast further than this, see Gavin paid or not may argue that you need 10 gavins to do his job, and perhaps he is right...or wrong, consider there is more than one paid person at Visa or Bank X.

the best system (IMHO) is where we are all bound in to contribute to the extend we get the return (that cannot be taken from us by parasitical forces...cough *tax* cough)

I don't disagree with your points on Gavin per se (assuming evidence backs yo up), maybe he did not perform to par, I don't know ,

Perhaps I could Ask what would you see as better solution?

would this solution  (likely) averted what just happened?



To be honest bitcoin is my job, so maybe you hobbyist aren't affected but it hits hard for me to be down for a couple hours.

You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team.  When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew.  Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing.  Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers.  Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?

Gavin is paid, I think this month his payment should be revoked for this bug getting thru.

Or not. 

So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them.

Hmm....I think the idea of a distributed anything is that it garners enough people who through self interest (ie bieng invested in the crypto) stand the best possible chance of fixing it

having one person to blame....may demonstrate a weakness in a distributed system

Gavin's pay and terms are just part of a debugging routine instituted by the larger [free] market,

the blame if it is to be leveled is at us all to....

I posit that the allocation of blame to a individual, is myopic/archaic, but convenient idea to the lenses of our mind to focus on....broaden you mind-scape and appreciate the interwoven nature of systems and outcomes.

Eg  A Car is an expression of pheno type of the genome of human DNA, but to look at human DNA you would not see this readily.

No Gavin whined about getting paid, now he is getting paid. The blame needs to fall on his shoulders cause this is his job, otherwise I would like to know what he is getting paid for? This doesn't demonstrate any weakness in that part, I could go and look thru the github blame and lay it on that person shoulders, but what good would that do. Gavin is lead developer and someone needs to step up and take responsibility for why people are losing money. Also I brought up when the foundation started paying him why they started paying him, everyone again sat and called me a troll cause I said paying Gavin cause he is and I quote "indispensable", that is also another reason why I am blaming him. Sorry to break to you, but this distributed protocol is controlled by one guy, and a foundation of businesses.

[gyverlb]

What about the bread out of my mouth? Time is money.

At most 4 hours mining wasted by the second bug impacting the blockchain in 4+ years is a problem for you? I fear there isn't many places where you can earn your bread without such risks...

Wait a second you just said that I am medieval

No I didn't, but given that you just proved you couldn't read properly and that illiteracy was high in medieval times, I may be inclined to think so now.

 for asking the foundation to not pay 1 payment of Gavin's and when I said this has lost me money, then it is a risk. Well aren't we just playing both sides of the fence. So Gavin didn't test bitcoin it is a risk... Please your argument is invalid bitcoin is a risk, but the software shouldn't be the risky part, especially when it comes from the lead developer, and has been "tested".

You know what, think whatever you want. If you want to be a jerk, fine by me. I'll fetch the popcorn and see how it pans out for you.

[jubalix]

So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them.

He why don't you go medieval and fetch the pitchforks instead. Removing bread from the mouth of a man (and his family if he has one to support) isn't fun enough, you should definitely eviscerate him...

What about the bread out of my mouth? Time is money.

What do you do for a living gweedo? If you make a mistake, do they withhold your paycheck?

To be honest bitcoin is my job, so maybe you hobbyist aren't affected but it hits hard for me to be down for a couple hours.

You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team.  When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew.  Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing.  Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers.  Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?

Gavin is paid, I think this month his payment should be revoked for this bug getting thru.

Or not. 

So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them.

Hmm....I think the idea of a distributed anything is that it garners enough people who through self interest (ie bieng invested in the crypto) stand the best possible chance of fixing it

having one person to blame....may demonstrate a weakness in a distributed system

Gavin's pay and terms are just part of a debugging routine instituted by the larger [free] market,

the blame if it is to be leveled is at us all to....

I posit that the allocation of blame to a individual, is myopic/archaic, but convenient idea to the lenses of our mind to focus on....broaden you mind-scape and appreciate the interwoven nature of systems and outcomes.

Eg  A Car is an expression of pheno type of the genome of human DNA, but to look at human DNA you would not see this readily.

No Gavin whined about getting paid, now he is getting paid. The blame needs to fall on his shoulders cause this is his job, otherwise I would like to know what he is getting paid for? This doesn't demonstrate any weakness in that part, I could go and look thru the github blame and lay it on that person shoulders, but what good would that do. Gavin is lead developer and someone needs to step up and take responsibility for why people are losing money. Also I brought up when the foundation started paying him why they started paying him, everyone again sat and called me a troll cause I said paying Gavin cause he is and I quote "indispensable", that is also another reason why I am blaming him. Sorry to break to you, but this distributed protocol is controlled by one guy, and a foundation of businesses.

I Also add you are not forced to use this protocol, you may go to others or start you own...

see my points supra on LTC/TRC Othercoin

The cryptocoin paradigm is here to stay...but which instantiation(s) [of it] will be successful for which time frame is up in the air.