Block Size Debate, finally an ideal solution: Bitcoin Unlimited

[Hyena]

Ethereum Classic is a good example of how a fork will turn out. Stakeholders will lose nothing. We don't need consensus. Both parties can have their own fork of Bitcoin and go on their own way. Eventually the most effective one will prevail.

Now we obviously have a bunch of egoistic manboys on both sides who think their fork should be THE BITCOIN and the other fork should be something else. I don't have an answer to this, it's just stupid. But as I have said before this situation will be solved by itself. No party is stupid enough to fork right now without having a consensus.

i think its best you highlight ethereums "fork" was an intentional split. otherwise it confuses the issue of what a fork is

soft fork= no permanent split, no consensus needed by user level nodes, only consensus needed by pools to activate
hard consensual fork= no permanent split, consensus needed by user level  nodes first then pools second to activate
hard controversial fork = no permanent split, consensus isn't set, lots of orphaning occurs because no one can agree
hard intentional split fork=  permanent split, nodes 'ban IP' the opposition nodes to avoid them orphaning own desires, altcoin is created

The next big bitcoin rally brings a new wave of people first time into the Bitcoin business. We can call them "the next generation of Bitcoiners".

A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.

The new generation of Bitcoiners will have to choose a wallet. They will read the descriptions of Bitcoin Unlimited and Bitcoin Core. I'm sure they will choose BU because it's an elegant solution while SegWit is an ugly hack.

Even if the network is unable to come to a preliminary consensus and multiple forks come to be, it is possible to build a Bitcoin wallet that tracks ownership on all forks. What needs to be propagated is the fact that the longest chain is the true Bitcoin block chain. It is the responsibility of wallet providers to prevent users from spending coins that don't belong to the longest block chain.

[smoothie]

...

Although your reasoning is plausible I would still argue that a free market solution would fix everything. Miners that are not satisfied with the rewards gained from the fees can feel free to quit mining. I will gladly be amongst the ones filling their place.

A free market implies payment. How are the miners supposed to be paid without a block reward?

TX fees.

How do you ensure enough fees exist if there is no cap on block size/space?

[Hyena]

...

Although your reasoning is plausible I would still argue that a free market solution would fix everything. Miners that are not satisfied with the rewards gained from the fees can feel free to quit mining. I will gladly be amongst the ones filling their place.

A free market implies payment. How are the miners supposed to be paid without a block reward?

TX fees.

How do you ensure enough fees exist if there is no cap on block size/space?

How do you ensure enough fees exist if there is 1 MiB cap on block size/space?

In some of my earlier posts I have indicated that there is no such thing as "no cap on block size". There is always going to be a hard cap defined by the network parameters. It is so whether the consensus likes it or not. Since the effective maximum block size is dependent on the overall network speed it does not belong to a protocol layer. Instead, each and every node should be able to define their own preferred maximum block size just like nodes can define their own TX fee. What core is trying to accomplish is like trying to enforce a predefined TX fee for every node with an ugly hack. Bitcoin wallet software is already complex. Making it even more complex will just prevent new developers from contributing. For a MIT licensed open-source project this is hypocrisy overload. Not to mention that blockstream is not the owner nor the creator of Bitcoin. Yet they act like they were. This is unacceptable.

[yelllowsin]

I have been in the Bitcoin business since 2011. I have obviously followed the block size debate and even tried to propose solutions myself.

Today I was watching this video (Waves Weekly Crypto Roundup. Golem Project E06). In the very end it mentions that now a mining pool with 7% of hashing power supports Bitcoin Unlimited and thus Segwit will never get 95% of consensus. At first I thought it was really bad news for Bitcoin but then I started to investigate what the hell is Bitcoin Unlimited. Turns out that Bitcoin Unlimited is the ultimate free market solution to the block size debate. We already have child-pays-for-parent system implemented in Bitcoin. Now, removing the maximum block size limit is the next logical step. I am surprised that I didn't think of it myself a year ago. This is simply ingenious.

A miner will not all of sudden start to produce 1 GiB blocks because it will be orphaned for sure. Free market is the natural protection against any attempts to abuse the absence of block size limit. The block size limit doesn't belong to the protocol layer as a strict number. Instead, it should be determined by the free market. Bitcoin Unlimited is the way to go. It's fully compatible with the philosophy of Satoshi Nakamoto. I support it because I support the free market.

So, if Bitcoin Unlimited is so great, then why isn't everyone talking about it? I guess it's because several big boys have invested a lot of money into Segwit and other alternatives. Also, big miners with shitty internet speed do not like the idea of a theoretically unlimited block size. You know how this kind of situation is also called? Self-interest and corruption at the expense of the greater good. From this day I finally have a strong opinion on the block size debate and this is great. All I needed is to see that the removal of block size limit is a step in favour of the free market and that free market itself will eliminate all the problems that might rise from this. However, if you know that there is an option even better than Bitcoin Unlimited then please let me know in this thread as my decision about supporting Bitcoin Unlimited is not final.

Hi, first thanks for taking a step on supporting BU (Bitcoin Unlimited). I don't support SegWit either, it is a very complex implementation that is not needed right now. Bitcoin scaling problems right now could be solved simply with BU. They try to convince you that SegWit is needed, but only for their own interested as Blockstream private company supports now the Bitcoin Core members.

My vote is for maintaing the current bitcoin code and give support to Bitcoin Unlimited which is running just fine and basically only increase the block size.

Bitcoin Unlimited = Make Bitcoin great again  

[kiklo]

Bitcoin Unlimited won't happen unless the Chinese Mining Pools agree to implement it ,
since they control over 51% of the mining hash.

 

[tokeweed]

It's funny how mods transferred this thread to the altcoin section.    I can imagine some people who are supporting Bitcoin Unlimited getting really butthurt with this.  Maybe it's time for it's followers to converge at forum.bitcoin.com.  That's Ver's forum and I'm pretty sure you guys will find like minded people.

I go there from time to time and the traffic is decent.

[azguard]

Bitcoin Unlimited won't happen unless the Chinese Mining Pools agree to implement it ,
since they control over 51% of the mining hash.

 

this wont happen any time soon maybe in several year when they start to lose if the start to lose domination on market
considering they control mining power all over the world think that they will decide how it will be one one way or the other

[flipme]

"Free market" is New world Order and has to fail.  The internet is a battlefield that is only just starting to spill blood. It will soon become full war. Not between nations but between the people and the ruling classes. It started with Brexit and is spreading into the US. The people will take back control but first we must crash fiat. It has started with the GB £ and the US $ will follow

Bitcoin must not go mainstream, It must stay the payment system for the Resistance to the New world Order.  A global insurrection against banker occupation has began. If we scale too quickly they will hijack our tech. I'm with segregated witness. Let's see the banking system fail first and then we will see if we get 95%

While I agree with most of what you said I cannot interpret free market as a symptom of the new world order. Quite the opposite. No idea how you came up with that. Sorry.

"Free market" is New world Order and has to fail.  The internet is a battlefield that is only just starting to spill blood. It will soon become full war. Not between nations but between the people and the ruling classes. It started with Brexit and is spreading into the US. The people will take back control but first we must crash fiat. It has started with the GB £ and the US $ will follow

Bitcoin must not go mainstream, It must stay the payment system for the Resistance to the New world Order.  A global insurrection against banker occupation has began. If we scale too quickly they will hijack our tech. I'm with segregated witness. Let's see the banking system fail first and then we will see if we get 95%

check out where Greg maxwells wages are coming from..
check out where matt corallos wages are coming from
check out where pieter wuilles wages are coming from
that $75mill investment so far into blockstream has come from the banking groups.

think about it, research it and realise who is controlling it.

Thanks for pointing that out. Follow the money. Good idea.

EDIT:
For anyone new to this thread, listen to this video. I just discovered it and it sure is relevant to this topic.

Good that you feel violated, you should realise that Bitcoin is close to its headshot.
Why there's two categories at all? Its all about crypto, some alts maybe better in the meantime.
You BTC cowboys got to be shot off your high horse already and get your shit in order.
You're standing in the way of development and evolution, your pissing all over the place.

You've lost it already. You got nothing to do with the BTC market anymore, anyway, thats Chinese, 99%, the rest will follow and then you can start out like every other alt and you can name it Bitcoin Unlimited or whatever and see how far you'll make it with your outdated pile of crap.

[jbreher]

Good that you feel violated, you should realise that Bitcoin is close to its headshot.
Why there's two categories at all? Its all about crypto, some alts maybe better in the meantime.
You BTC cowboys got to be shot off your high horse already and get your shit in order.
You're standing in the way of development and evolution, your pissing all over the place.

You've lost it already. You got nothing to do with the BTC market anymore, anyway, thats Chinese, 99%, the rest will follow and then you can start out like every other alt and you can name it Bitcoin Unlimited or whatever and see how far you'll make it with your outdated pile of crap.

Comedy Gold.

Butthurt much? Sorry your preferred crypto is but a pimple on Bitcoin's ass.

[Hyena]

Good that you feel violated, you should realise that Bitcoin is close to its headshot.
Why there's two categories at all? Its all about crypto, some alts maybe better in the meantime.
You BTC cowboys got to be shot off your high horse already and get your shit in order.
You're standing in the way of development and evolution, your pissing all over the place.

You've lost it already. You got nothing to do with the BTC market anymore, anyway, thats Chinese, 99%, the rest will follow and then you can start out like every other alt and you can name it Bitcoin Unlimited or whatever and see how far you'll make it with your outdated pile of crap.

Comedy Gold.

Butthurt much? Sorry your preferred crypto is but a pimple on Bitcoin's ass.

+1

I always chuckle when I see butthurt altcoin boys. They secretly hate themselves for not buying into Bitcoin when it was cheap and then hope to undo their mistake by buying into scammy ICOs.

edit:
Great News: Bitmain CEO Jihan Wu Will Firmly Support Funding of Bitcoin Unlimited

[jbreher]

I always chuckle when I see butthurt altcoin boys. They secretly hate themselves for not buying into Bitcoin when it was cheap and then hope to undo their mistake by buying into scammy ICOs.

And they'll hate themselves even more this time next year for not buying in now.

Great News: Bitmain CEO Jihan Wu Will Firmly Support Funding of Bitcoin Unlimited

Interesting article, but full of so much bad reporting that I don't trust any of it.
- implication aim of BU is to create a second chain (rather all be on one chain with user-set blocksize)
- implication aim of BU is to increase the 21M emission limit (ummm... no)

Just another poorly-written advocacy piece.

[Hyena]

Interesting article, but full of so much bad reporting that I don't trust any of it.
- implication aim of BU is to create a second chain (rather all be on one chain with user-set blocksize)
- implication aim of BU is to increase the 21M emission limit (ummm... no)

Just another poorly-written advocacy piece.

Haha you are right. That article is biased so MUCH it sickens me.

I hope this SegWitCoin will be rejected so hard the Core devs get fired by blockstream.