Return of Satoshi

[Pap0u]

With Bitcoin facing pending problems of scaling and malleability, developers are facing issues as whether to soft or hard fork Bitcoin. Are Bitcoins issues solveable by the current developers and community or must we pray for the founding father to return and help us as the only hope?

[Pro Gamers]

With Bitcoin facing pending problems of scaling and malleability, developers are facing issues as whether to soft or hard fork Bitcoin. Are Bitcoins issues solve able by the current developers and community or must we pray for the founding father to return and solve our issues?

Its so nice if satoshi back here and share knowledge to the community of bitcoin. But for my opinion this community is growing and we atre facing many changes, it means we should stand alone to the best of our ability for this community and do not depend to the founder for long.

[deisik]

With Bitcoin facing pending problems of scaling and malleability, developers are facing issues as whether to soft or hard fork Bitcoin. Are Bitcoins issues solveable by the current developers and community or must we pray for the founding father to return and help us as the only hope?

And what would he do? In the first place, he shouldn't have left the Bitcoin development at all. Linus Torvalds is still there heading the development of Linux (being a "benevolent dictator" as he calls himself), and there is hardly a possibility of anything being close enough to what is now happening to Bitcoin...

If Satoshi showed up now, his appearance would only exacerbate the discord and disagreement reigning in the community at the moment

[Cuhua-hua]

It is something a good friend. However I do not know what to do, because all the things that exist in the identity of satoshi not known by everyone and it will be very difficult to find. It probably could have been done, but I'm not sure that satoshi can help. Because maybe he had forgotten against the secret code to enter into the system the bitcoin or maybe he cannot solve the problems that occur. I hope that this can be resolved by either

[Pap0u]

Bitcoin will realistically go to only two places; all the way down or all the way up. I am not sure what breakthrough will happen but Satoshi being the founder and understanding the principles clearly better than anyone might really be the only answer.

[sbtctalk]

If Satoshi appears now and make any movements to his coins, I think the Bitcoin price would crash.

[Pap0u]

If Satoshi appears now and make any movements to his coins, I think the Bitcoin price would crash.

This isn't about his wealth or amount of coins he holds. It's about that we face serious developmental issues that we need to find a solution for quick.

[franky1]

satoshi already made his opinion known.

however we should not blindly follow one persons desire. or even a group of devs desires no matter what 'team' they are on.
that is a path to dictatorship.
satoshi recognised this and disapeared to try keeping bitcoin away from dictatorship.

however dictatorship appears to be returning. many people dont want to make a decision for themselves and want to be told what to do

core devotee's know this because they think the debate is about core possibly losing dictator control, to another team.. instead of the rational argument that there should not be any dictator control by any side. but instead a general agreement by the majority of all involved.

we should have clear and open OPTIONS and choices and allowed to freely choose the best option and have it only activating if there is a clearly large majority in favour for it.
its built into bitcoin already, miners wont change if there is a risk that they cant spend the rewards of the change. users wont change if there is a risk miners wont accept their new changed transactions.
so they/we need to be sure the change is positive and also majority accepted before it will even activate.

however

softforks for instance are not an open choice where people can opt-out and thus prevent bitcoin going down a one way street.
soft forks are more "follow the one way street as it turns direction"(by upgrading) or "put your fingers in your ears and close your eyes"(by not upgrading).

put it this way, nothing can stop a miner changing something in a soft fork today,..

those that dont upgrade are not opting out of an option. they are not preventing it from happening.. they are just deciding to sit back and not check new data because they dont understand the new data. so just blindly pass it on.

softforks should not be used for direction changing things. but just for small minor alterations/bug fixes.

[richardsNY]

There is no point in waiting for Satoshi to return or at least give feedback on how to deal with this situation. The problem is that the developers and other high level Bitcoiners are not agreeing on the most important points, and probably never will if they don't put their ego's aside. That's why we have seen Bitcoin Classic and all other alternatives pop up. They were hoping to snoop away people from Core to their side.

[deisik]

There is no point in waiting for Satoshi to return or at least give feedback on how to deal with this situation. The problem is that the developers and other high level Bitcoiners are not agreeing on the most important points, and probably never will if they don't put their ego's aside. That's why we have seen Bitcoin Classic and all other alternatives pop up. They were hoping to snoop away people from Core to their side.

That's why any serious open-source project out there has someone fittingly called BDFL (benevolent dictator for life), a person, typically a project founder, who guides the development of the project and has the final word in disputes and disagreements arising within the community...

It appears that democracy doesn't work very well in practice if implemented for real

[yayayo]

With Bitcoin facing pending problems of scaling and malleability, developers are facing issues as whether to soft or hard fork Bitcoin. Are Bitcoins issues solveable by the current developers and community or must we pray for the founding father to return and help us as the only hope?

I think it's a rather strange opinion to think that only Satoshi knows the solution for scaling Bitcoin. With Bitcoin he has given us a great gift, but he is not an omniscient god. Bitcoin has improved by several orders of magnitude since he left. So it's safe to say, that we have capable developers working at Core.

Also I don't understand your preposition: The "problems" with scaling and malleability are already solved by successfully implementing SegWit. Apparently you've obtained your perspective from media reporting, where the bigblock/anti-decentralization extremists are spreading their FUD without seeing the real progress that has been made.

So there is no need to pray. SegWit is ready and will be activated in one of the next minor releases. After all, Bitcoin is about cryptography, not religion...

ya.ya.yo!

[franky1]

that we have capable developers working at Core.

Also I don't understand your preposition: The "problems" with scaling and malleability are already solved by successfully implementing SegWit. Apparently you've obtained your perspective from media reporting, where the bigblock/anti-decentralization extremists are spreading their FUD without seeing the real progress that has been made.

So there is no need to pray. SegWit is ready and will be activated in one of the next minor releases. After all, Bitcoin is about cryptography, not religion...

ya.ya.yo!

segwit has not solved malleability.. yet
segwit is not ready..  yet

its not even activated..
please wake up.. ur dreaming, or maybe you own a time machine and came from the future

why have "faith" in something that is not changing the world this very moment. and is only promises at this moment.
atleast wait until the promises are delivered..

as you say its not a religion but you have blind faith in Core..
seems from many of your posts you have lost total understanding of decentralization and only want a dictator (12 corporoate paid devs with 90 spelll checkers to pretend to be open)

[yayayo]

segwit has not solved malleability.. yet
segwit is not ready..  yet

its not even activated..
please wake up.. ur dreaming, or maybe you own a time machine and came from the future

and you say its not a religion but you have blind faith in Core..
seems from many of your posts you have lost total understanding of decentralization and only want a dictator (12 corporoate paid devs with 90 spelll checkers to pretend to be open)

What you want belongs to the altcoin section of this forum. It is XTCoin/ClassicCoin/UnlimitedCoin/VerHearnAndresen-WhateverCoin, but it is not Bitcoin. You are either a paid shill or seem to have serious problems with information processing. Otherwise it is not understandable why you continue to spread FUD regarding the Core development team.

Most sane individuals can tell the difference between an intelligent solution and a silly one when given the opportunity to directly compare their advantages and disadvantages. It's pretty clear that SegWit is an intelligent solution, while Hearn/Andresen's-big block scheme is not.

Speaking about third-party commitments: Gavin Andresen was the guy, who willfully visited the CIA and other governmental entities around the time Satoshi left...

ya.ya.yo!

[ournem]

hard forks for the sake of tech upgrade are fine, most everyone can agree to it and there are no competing chains.  hardforks for political reasons are just asking to split the network. 

the key will be learning how to hardfork bitcoin in a way that is done for the tech and not for the politics.

[franky1]

ya ya ya has really drank deep the sacred wine from the core religions glass..

he calls hardforkers "bigblockers" lol
hardfork =2mb bloat for 2x capacity..
softfork = 4mb bloat for 1.8x capacity

softfork doesnt need consensus(choice)
hardfor needs consensus(choice)

here ill make it simple 4mb BIGBLOCKER  2mb not bigblocker
here even simpler   2mb or 4mb.. which is bigger? even a 5yo cant get that wrong

so softfork = bigblockers and dictatators..

think rationally, think about bitcoin code and logic, not core devotion..
try to get your religious beleifs far away from your comments. only talk about logic, code and benefits

seems all the arguments against a hardfork actually apply to softforks if you stop your religious ideology and actually read some code and thought about it.

please stop taking the wine and bread handouts from your religion while standing in their church and instead look for the real information in the real world

[~Bitcoin~]

Satoshi is creator of idea behind bitcoin actually idea of blockchain network. And we don't need him to come back to solve the current problems like scability and block size as there are enough devs behind who can do this easily, but as bitcoin is controlled by community so it require majority of community decision to do anything.

[Pap0u]

Maybe. No amount of devs though created Bitcoin before Satoshi's insight. He might have knowledge that others can not comprehend at the moment.

[jonald_fyookball]

segwit has not solved malleability.. yet
segwit is not ready..  yet

its not even activated..
please wake up.. ur dreaming, or maybe you own a time machine and came from the future

and you say its not a religion but you have blind faith in Core..
seems from many of your posts you have lost total understanding of decentralization and only want a dictator (12 corporoate paid devs with 90 spelll checkers to pretend to be open)

What you want belongs to the altcoin section of this forum. It is XTCoin/ClassicCoin/UnlimitedCoin/VerHearnAndresen-WhateverCoin, but it is not Bitcoin. You are either a paid shill or seem to have serious problems with information processing. Otherwise it is not understandable why you continue to spread FUD regarding the Core development team.

Most sane individuals can tell the difference between an intelligent solution and a silly one when given the opportunity to directly compare their advantages and disadvantages. It's pretty clear that SegWit is an intelligent solution, while Hearn/Andresen's-big block scheme is not.

Speaking about third-party commitments: Gavin Andresen was the guy, who willfully visited the CIA and other governmental entities around the time Satoshi left...

ya.ya.yo!

Yes!  Anything not approved by Blockstream corporation is blasphemy!  Speaking badly of segwit or having an opinion not in line
with Blockstream is not Bitcoin!  And you're a paid shill or stupid if you disagree!!!

 

[ObscureBean]

If Satoshi came back, it would not be easy for him to hide his identity. At the time he was involved in Bitcoin he was not famous enough for people to really try and track him down. But I suppose if he really wanted to, he could probably contribute/suggest ideas anonymously or using a different name.

[Kprawn]

We do not need him to come back to solve every little problem we have with Bitcoin. If you believed all the Big block doom, we would have died 2

years ago, and we still around. It's easy for all of these outsiders to make ridiculous predictions on the scalability and what needs to happen, but

they will not have to face up to people, when Billions of dollars goes down the drain, when this project fail, IF they implemented the wrong code.

I think some of them are doing this, because they are invested in other projects and needs Bitcoin to fail, in the hope that they might succeed.