Bitcoin Forum
May 27, 2017, 10:14:38 AM *
News: If the forum does not load normally for you, please send me a traceroute.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Moving towards user activated soft fork activation  (Read 17628 times)
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
March 20, 2017, 10:49:37 PM
 #141

SHA256 Mining trustless distributed critical consensus is the most important (and the most resilient) point of resistance of Bitcoin, against the governments and the financial oligarchy.

Fixed it for you.  Bitcoin mining is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

I wish you could understand the difference between

A. signaling readiness for a new feature, and
B. voting for a new features

I know it's all very subtle and you don't do nuance, but please stop spreading the lie that miners are in charge of Bitcoin.

They are not and never will be.  That's not how any of this works.

Just because there are armed guards in front of the bank it doesn't mean those armed guards make executive decisions for the bank.

They are just hired muscle and may be fired if they forget their place and get uppity.
Problem is, we don't have a police force that can lock these muscle men up if they were to turn on the bank and become bank robbers themselves. I guess we're stuck with paying them off unless we hire someone bigger and stronger.

We do have such a police force.  It's called 'the economic majority.'


A little learning is a dangerous thing, or so they say.

So tell me iCE, whats the difference between

A. Acquiescence

and

B. Engagement

LOL what's the difference between your ass and a hole in the ground?   Cheesy

The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Core GUI - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }
MoneroForCash.com  |  Buy and sell XMR near you  |  Easymonero.com  |  Bitsquare.io - Decentralized XMR Exchange
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014

Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016
Blocks must necessarily be full for the Bitcoin network to be able to pay for its own security.  davout 2015
Blocksize is an intentionally limited resource, like the 21e6 BTC limit.  Changing it degrades the surrounding economics, creating negative incentives.  Jeff Garzik 2013


"I believed @Dashpay instamine was a bug & not a feature but then read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13017231#msg13017231
I'm not against people making money, but can't support questionable origins."
https://twitter.com/Tone_LLT/status/717822927908024320


The raison d'être of bitcoin is trustlessness. - Eric Lombrozo 2015
It is an Engineering Requirement that Bitcoin be “Above the Law”  Paul Sztorc 2015
Resiliency, not efficiency, is the paramount goal of decentralized, non-state sanctioned currency -Jon Matonis 2015

Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016

Technology tends to move in the direction of making surveillance easier, and the ability of computers to track us doubles every eighteen months. - Phil Zimmerman 2013

The only way to make software secure, reliable, and fast is to make it small. Fight Features. - Andy Tanenbaum 2004


Warning Dash is a planned instamine, it wasn't
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
tonymidlee
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 7


View Profile
March 23, 2017, 06:17:37 AM
 #142

Seems the only logical choice now since BU  attack is so close.  Oh yes, lets code the UASF and  PoW  change HF at the same time and get rid of those MFkers all at once.

You are fired!
pamparam
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 32


View Profile
March 23, 2017, 08:18:37 AM
 #143

The biggest problems for BTC and all crypto currency:

1. Its centralized. It will never be a decentralized system until all mining process will be as easy as downloading your bitcoin core wallet. Actually, it should be done like this: you can activate mining by clicking one button in your wallet. Now still the whole bitcoin thing is understandable only to small percentage of people in the world, and mining is only possible to those who are advanced level in tech and programming. If BTC has a vision to be better and more popular than fiat, it should be made much more easier to use and to mine. (Soon the whole mining power will be in few hands and it will no longer be different from fiat).

2. Voting power should be not only in miners hands, but in ordinary bitcoins users too. Now BTC is facing the problem that it is slowly transforming to the ordinary money system, where the whole power have federal reserve bank, and here the control is slowly taken by big mining pools and wealthy BTC holders. They want to make decisions to the rest of the users, because they think they can make better decisions.

The whole situation sucks, and the current path of BTC is wrong. Ordinary user with his wallet, should be a miner too, mining rewards should be split among everyone fairly, all have the voting power.
tomkat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462


View Profile
March 23, 2017, 04:42:16 PM
 #144

The biggest problems for BTC and all crypto currency:

1. Its centralized. It will never be a decentralized system until all mining process will be as easy as downloading your bitcoin core wallet. Actually, it should be done like this: you can activate mining by clicking one button in your wallet. Now still the whole bitcoin thing is understandable only to small percentage of people in the world, and mining is only possible to those who are advanced level in tech and programming. If BTC has a vision to be better and more popular than fiat, it should be made much more easier to use and to mine. (Soon the whole mining power will be in few hands and it will no longer be different from fiat).

2. Voting power should be not only in miners hands, but in ordinary bitcoins users too. Now BTC is facing the problem that it is slowly transforming to the ordinary money system, where the whole power have federal reserve bank, and here the control is slowly taken by big mining pools and wealthy BTC holders. They want to make decisions to the rest of the users, because they think they can make better decisions.

The whole situation sucks, and the current path of BTC is wrong. Ordinary user with his wallet, should be a miner too, mining rewards should be split among everyone fairly, all have the voting power.

Well, I can understand your pain, and how nice would it be to go back in time and have yet another chance to mine easy BTC when the price was $1 or even less, but unfortunately it's old good 2017 :-) However, if you had that chance again, and knew nothing of what you know today, would you really be interested in Satohi's idea?
pamparam
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 32


View Profile
March 23, 2017, 04:56:38 PM
 #145

The biggest problems for BTC and all crypto currency:

1. Its centralized. It will never be a decentralized system until all mining process will be as easy as downloading your bitcoin core wallet. Actually, it should be done like this: you can activate mining by clicking one button in your wallet. Now still the whole bitcoin thing is understandable only to small percentage of people in the world, and mining is only possible to those who are advanced level in tech and programming. If BTC has a vision to be better and more popular than fiat, it should be made much more easier to use and to mine. (Soon the whole mining power will be in few hands and it will no longer be different from fiat).

2. Voting power should be not only in miners hands, but in ordinary bitcoins users too. Now BTC is facing the problem that it is slowly transforming to the ordinary money system, where the whole power have federal reserve bank, and here the control is slowly taken by big mining pools and wealthy BTC holders. They want to make decisions to the rest of the users, because they think they can make better decisions.

The whole situation sucks, and the current path of BTC is wrong. Ordinary user with his wallet, should be a miner too, mining rewards should be split among everyone fairly, all have the voting power.

Well, I can understand your pain, and how nice would it be to go back in time and have yet another chance to mine easy BTC when the price was $1 or even less, but unfortunately it's old good 2017 :-) However, if you had that chance again, and knew nothing of what you know today, would you really be interested in Satohi's idea?

You missed my point. If the mining process from the begining would have been easier, like downloading the wallet and pressing button to start it, now we would have really decentralized coin. But from the begining all things related to BTC is too difficult for ordinary people to adopt it.
tomkat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462


View Profile
March 23, 2017, 05:27:58 PM
 #146

The biggest problems for BTC and all crypto currency:

1. Its centralized. It will never be a decentralized system until all mining process will be as easy as downloading your bitcoin core wallet. Actually, it should be done like this: you can activate mining by clicking one button in your wallet. Now still the whole bitcoin thing is understandable only to small percentage of people in the world, and mining is only possible to those who are advanced level in tech and programming. If BTC has a vision to be better and more popular than fiat, it should be made much more easier to use and to mine. (Soon the whole mining power will be in few hands and it will no longer be different from fiat).

2. Voting power should be not only in miners hands, but in ordinary bitcoins users too. Now BTC is facing the problem that it is slowly transforming to the ordinary money system, where the whole power have federal reserve bank, and here the control is slowly taken by big mining pools and wealthy BTC holders. They want to make decisions to the rest of the users, because they think they can make better decisions.

The whole situation sucks, and the current path of BTC is wrong. Ordinary user with his wallet, should be a miner too, mining rewards should be split among everyone fairly, all have the voting power.

Well, I can understand your pain, and how nice would it be to go back in time and have yet another chance to mine easy BTC when the price was $1 or even less, but unfortunately it's old good 2017 :-) However, if you had that chance again, and knew nothing of what you know today, would you really be interested in Satohi's idea?

You missed my point. If the mining process from the begining would have been easier, like downloading the wallet and pressing button to start it, now we would have really decentralized coin. But from the begining all things related to BTC is too difficult for ordinary people to adopt it.

The beginnings of any technology is difficult for ordinary people. Look at Windows 3.11, or Windows 95 and so on. Do you remember how difficult it was to install device drivers back in late 90's? And now you don't even bother about it in modern Windows or Linux distros.
piotr_n
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652


aka tonikt


View Profile WWW
March 23, 2017, 09:41:22 PM
 #147

You missed my point. If the mining process from the begining would have been easier, like downloading the wallet and pressing button to start it, now we would have really decentralized coin. But from the begining all things related to BTC is too difficult for ordinary people to adopt it.

Ech, you kids... Smiley

Believe me or not, but the mining process was that easy at the beginning.
You had to check the option "generate coins" in the pop-up menu and they'd sometimes just appear in your wallet.

But that times are long gone. Now you need a bloody power plant to compete on this market.
Nobody could have stopped it and I seriously doubt anyone will be able to...
It's a mining arm race and nobody is really in control.

Which brings us back to the topic: if anyone actually tries to change the bitcoin protocol while not having the mining majority, because he thinks that "users majority" or "economic majority" is just enough, this will be his funeral.
Or in other words, one more time: UASF without mining majority can never succeed, because it's against the nature of bitcoin.
Anyone who doesn't understand this simple fact is not really a very smart bitcoin developer.

Check out gocoin - my original project of full bitcoin node & cold wallet written in Go.
PGP fingerprint: AB9E A551 E262 A87A 13BB  9059 1BE7 B545 CDF3 FD0E
tomkat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462


View Profile
March 24, 2017, 08:21:39 AM
 #148

You missed my point. If the mining process from the begining would have been easier, like downloading the wallet and pressing button to start it, now we would have really decentralized coin. But from the begining all things related to BTC is too difficult for ordinary people to adopt it.

Ech, you kids... Smiley

Believe me or not, but the mining process was that easy at the beginning.
You had to check the option "generate coins" in the pop-up menu and they'd sometimes just appear in your wallet.

But that times are long gone. Now you need a bloody power plant to compete on this market.
Nobody could have stopped it and I seriously doubt anyone will be able to...
It's a mining arm race and nobody is really in control.

Which brings us back to the topic: if anyone actually tries to change the bitcoin protocol while not having the mining majority, because he thinks that "users majority" or "economic majority" is just enough, this will be his funeral.
Or in other words, one more time: UASF without mining majority can never succeed, because it's against the nature of bitcoin.
Anyone who doesn't understand this simple fact is not really a very smart bitcoin developer.

Core's behavior is really strange to me. Those guys are smarter than most of the rest of the world, so it's obvious they know how it all works, and what will be the result of going to war with miners, but somehow they're limited to their current stance. Normally, you could expect reasonable discussion with arguments on both sides, and finally a compromise, but surprisingly it's not happening for some reason. Usually, if you have no idea what something is all about, or why something obvious isn't happening, then it's probably about money and/or power.
piotr_n
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652


aka tonikt


View Profile WWW
March 24, 2017, 12:24:01 PM
 #149

I think they are just bluffing - both sides.
 One side  claiming that it has enough hash power and interest to enforce controversial protocol changes.
 The other side claiming that bitcoin can either go without the mining or continue to exist with a different POW function.
Both sides are talking bullshit and on both sides you have important people who know it very well, but won't admit that it's only bluffing.
Instead they keep letting their minions to spread FUD and escalate havoc even further.

It's actually very sad to watch how both the parties are playing some pathetic politics which aren't going to change anything about bitcoin, except its perception among people who don't understand it.

Check out gocoin - my original project of full bitcoin node & cold wallet written in Go.
PGP fingerprint: AB9E A551 E262 A87A 13BB  9059 1BE7 B545 CDF3 FD0E
classicsucks
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Activity: 311


View Profile
March 24, 2017, 01:41:14 PM
 #150

I think they are just bluffing - both sides.

Instead they keep letting their minions to spread FUD and escalate havoc even further.

It's actually very sad to watch how both the parties are playing some pathetic politics which aren't going to change anything about bitcoin, except its perception among people who don't understand it.

FUD is how you motivate people in the tech centers of the world. Think of how much fear they feel from the propaganda they watch every day, showing terror attacks. Fear works.

UASF was pathetic, a non-starter. Hacking Unlimited was a cheap shot, but it worked. Unlimited's 40% mining support is starting to be a major factor. Core is dead silent and dead set on pumping Segwit, which is on life support.

Luckily this ugly blocksize struggle is not playing out too much in the mainstream. It's just too complicated for them.
piotr_n
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652


aka tonikt


View Profile WWW
March 24, 2017, 02:08:04 PM
 #151

Yes, fear - I get it.
But FUD can't change bitcoin protocol.
Only majority of miners can do that.

The 40% is not so much disturbing if you know that each single one of them is voting to keep the block size limited to 1MB - nobody's pointing that out.
If it is a political statement, you should read it: we don't like the core, but we want to keep the protocol as is (no fork)

However the disturbing part is that all this fear / FUD about moving the miners out of the business, connected with the price drop must surely have a negative effect on new investments into mining infrastructure. Which means it gets easier to actually build up a single enterprise that controls 50% of the hashrate.

Check out gocoin - my original project of full bitcoin node & cold wallet written in Go.
PGP fingerprint: AB9E A551 E262 A87A 13BB  9059 1BE7 B545 CDF3 FD0E
conspirosphere.tk
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2030


Revolution will be decentralized


View Profile
March 24, 2017, 02:51:31 PM
 #152

Or in other words, one more time: UASF without mining majority can never succeed, because it's against the nature of bitcoin.
Anyone who doesn't understand this simple fact is not really a very smart bitcoin developer.

Hey Piotr, welcome back. I still miss your Goxbot. Why don't you make a new one for some major exchange?

Imho what is wrong with Bitcoin is that there are no incentives for full nodes. If a part (or all, why not) of the Tx fees where distributed to full nodes (maybe according the tx relayed by each one) we would have a much stronger network of some order of magnitudes more full nodes. Moreover the game would be much more fair since anyone with a consumer grade puter could gain like in the good old times.

I already made this same proposal here years ago but nobody cared. Maybe now someone will?

hv_
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
March 24, 2017, 03:02:46 PM
 #153

Or in other words, one more time: UASF without mining majority can never succeed, because it's against the nature of bitcoin.
Anyone who doesn't understand this simple fact is not really a very smart bitcoin developer.

Hey Piotr, welcome back. I still miss your Goxbot. Why don't you make a new one for some major exchange?

Imho what is wrong with Bitcoin is that there are no incentives for full nodes. If a part (or all, why not) of the Tx fees where distributed to full nodes (maybe according the tx relayed by each one) we would have a much stronger network of some order of magnitudes more full nodes. Moreover the game would be much more fair since anyone with a consumer grade puter could gain like in the good old times.

I already made this same proposal here years ago but nobody cared. Maybe now someone will?

In the very beginning, miners where full nodes.  They ve just overoptimized things and now small user nodes think they control bitcoin. I m very sure miners have to rerun more nodes and bitcoin is back.

Carpe diem  -  cut the down side  -  be antifragile
A feature that needs more than one convincing argument is no.
My coding style is legendary but limited to 1MB, sorry but cannot come much over my C64 and Bill Gates...
da2ce7
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1222


Live and Let Live


View Profile
March 24, 2017, 04:03:46 PM
 #154

UASF is a wonderful tool in today's bitcoin political environment, I have no reason to believe it is unsafe and will not work as specified.

One off NP-Hard.
tomkat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462


View Profile
March 24, 2017, 04:17:24 PM
 #155

I think they are just bluffing - both sides.

Maybe, but if they are, it cannot last forever. The discussion is too long, and it's time for solution(s).
Bitcoin is losing market share quickly, and even the tx backlog is not that big recently.
Apparently many users already started using other coins for their operations.
piotr_n
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652


aka tonikt


View Profile WWW
March 24, 2017, 04:53:07 PM
 #156

I think they are just bluffing - both sides.

Maybe, but if they are, it cannot last forever. The discussion is too long, and it's time for solution(s).
Bitcoin is losing market share quickly, and even the tx backlog is not that big recently.
Apparently many users already started using other coins for their operations.

I don't think there will be any solutions.
The miners votes has been too polarized.
They've seen how some people were trying to fuck them.
It won't be easy now to regain the lost trust - they will be far more skeptical in the future.

IMHO the blockchain protocol will be fixed for years to come.  
You can forget about the core's fancy road map - it's not gonna happen, unless for an altcoin.
Which may actually not be such a bad thing.
It can surely use some stability now, after all these shit and havoc of a two competing forks just about to come... Each one of them 'to fix bitcoin'  Smiley

Bitcoin doesn't need fixing, but some people should definitely learn more respect towards it.

Check out gocoin - my original project of full bitcoin node & cold wallet written in Go.
PGP fingerprint: AB9E A551 E262 A87A 13BB  9059 1BE7 B545 CDF3 FD0E
Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652



View Profile
March 24, 2017, 05:22:06 PM
 #157

UASF is a wonderful tool in today's bitcoin political environment, I have no reason to believe it is unsafe and will not work as specified.

I prefer the Flag Day approach, precisely because of the toxic political environment you're referring to (or at least I'm calling it toxic). But it's arguably UASF in a different guise, although "user activated" is a little of a misnomer for Flag Day activation.

Vires in numeris
da2ce7
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1222


Live and Let Live


View Profile
March 24, 2017, 05:44:36 PM
 #158

UASF is a wonderful tool in today's bitcoin political environment, I have no reason to believe it is unsafe and will not work as specified.

I prefer the Flag Day approach, precisely because of the toxic political environment you're referring to (or at least I'm calling it toxic). But it's arguably UASF in a different guise, although "user activated" is a little of a misnomer for Flag Day activation.


Any sane UASF will use a flag-day for the activation.

One off NP-Hard.
classicsucks
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Activity: 311


View Profile
March 25, 2017, 07:28:01 PM
 #159

Yes, fear - I get it.
But FUD can't change bitcoin protocol.
Only majority of miners can do that.

The 40% is not so much disturbing if you know that each single one of them is voting to keep the block size limited to 1MB - nobody's pointing that out.
If it is a political statement, you should read it: we don't like the core, but we want to keep the protocol as is (no fork)

However the disturbing part is that all this fear / FUD about moving the miners out of the business, connected with the price drop must surely have a negative effect on new investments into mining infrastructure. Which means it gets easier to actually build up a single enterprise that controls 50% of the hashrate.

I agree that BU signalling is a statement of opposition to Core. Core doesn't get it, and continues to alienate people who are undecided, and continues to hype the dead Segwit. The FUD is a desperate attempt to scare people into line with Core. It's not working.

The net result is flight into alts. Good job Core. You could've upped the blocksize 4 years ago. Now you're committing suicide in a spectacular show of drama.

piotr_n
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652


aka tonikt


View Profile WWW
March 25, 2017, 10:34:33 PM
 #160

I agree that BU signalling is a statement of opposition to Core. Core doesn't get it, and continues to alienate people who are undecided, and continues to hype the dead Segwit. The FUD is a desperate attempt to scare people into line with Core. It's not working.

That's probably a pretty accurate description of what's going on.

Check out gocoin - my original project of full bitcoin node & cold wallet written in Go.
PGP fingerprint: AB9E A551 E262 A87A 13BB  9059 1BE7 B545 CDF3 FD0E
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!