it's another chain(or altcoin if you prefer) with no limit on the block size, which is currently set to 1MB, it seems that for now this hardfork will not happen thanks to a bug that was discovered in BU
anyway
https://www.bitcoinunlimited.info/^ to correct this guy ^
BU is another bitcoin implementation that has been running for 2 years on the bitcoin network.
bitcoin has many implementations that all run on the bitcoin network
btcd - implementation wrote in Go
nbitcoin - implementation wrote in C#
bitcoin ruby
bitcoinj
Bitcoin unlimited
bitcoin classic
bitcoin xt
bitcoin knots
bitcoin core
bitcoin statoshi
bitcoin btcc
the list goes on.
bitcoin unlimited want the community to vote by using their software if the community want dynamic blocks. where by the blocksize changes and grows at a safe node capable and node accepting rate without needing endless debate with devs and without devs being needed as much to run the network. allowing the nodes to self regulate.
yes its a tweak of core code, but so is many others. simple solutions dont need complete rewrites.
also bitcoin unlimited are not wishing to act like dev-kings owning the network.
which is why over the last 2 years of having bitcoinunlimited running on the network they have not shown any desire to split the network or take control. infact they have done the opposite, and refused to split the network up.
if "other devs" were actually independent they would happily bounce around all the implementations and help the community and peer review all the implementations.. but instead the core devs while wearing a independent shirt are wearing the blockstream name badge and refusing to help out independently. and the scream that other implementations are not independently reviewed (self fulfilling hypocrisy at its best)
instead they just exist as a free and option choice. take them or leave them.
the blocksize will only move forward if the majority of nodes allow it (this means if you run classic, xt or a dozen other nodes that allow for adjustable block sizes, then your still part of the community). an its only a few lines of code to tweak if core want to prepare themselves if the majority decide on it.
if the majority dont decide on it. so be it
the community have voted.
and another implementation proposal offering something the community do want or need may come about.
the whole debate is about fake politics of BU taking over the network.
where the reality is that its core holding back the network with false hope half measure features and bypassing community voting (consensus).
th multiple implementations believe in the real bitcoin of one network of diverse distributed decentralised nodes forming consensus to strengthen bitcoin and kep it robust with no single point of failure.
EG if a few nodes go offline, the network continues.
but if everything became "core only" .. if core had a bug taking core nodes offline. then that would be all node (emphasis in a core only network)
