Yep.. BU absolutely definitely possibly maybe ready for prime time..

[spartacusrex]

https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-unlimited-suffers-biggest-node-crash-on-record

Anyone ?

[megynacuna]

Well I never supported it anyway do it serves them right. They've been decisively dealt with and I hope no one will try to plagiarize Bitcoin in the future.

[amacar2]

Haven't checked their software yet because i am not supporting hard fork, i think this crash is the third one and looks the biggest out all of them.

[FiendCoin]

We all know that BU does not have great coders and is terrible. Only the big block shills will say different.

[Catmony]

We all know that BU does not have great coders and is terrible. Only the big block shills will say different.

Yes their dev team looks like don't have enough coding knowledge or time to fix one problem for over a month. They are aware of this bug for several months now but they haven't been successful to find a better solution to this.

How they can expect to gain support from bitcoin community if they can't deliver a proper stable software.

[Kprawn]

They will solve this with proprietary code that will be hidden from the public, until it is noticed and then they will find some excuse to justify that

move. They never apologized once for their buggy code, but rather turned to pointing fingers at the people who identified it. Their solution is to

blame Bitcoin Core developers for all the mistakes they are making.  

[Genedarner123]

excatly man everytime something goes wrong they blame core. and code being not an open source?  . start a bank and control everything

[chek2fire]

[HabBear]

HHahahaa...."absolutely definitely possible maybe"....what are you talking about? I hope this is a solid joke.

Translation - still, no one know's if or when a hard fork is going to happen. How is that possible?

[franky1]

https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-unlimited-suffers-biggest-node-crash-on-record

Anyone ?

530 nodes affected..
vs thousands of core nodes affected in 2013..

OP's link atleast needs to try better and be accurate, otherwise it just becomes a biased narrative

[FiendCoin]

https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-unlimited-suffers-biggest-node-crash-on-record

Anyone ?

530 nodes affected..
vs thousands of core nodes affected in 2013..

OP's link atleast needs to try better and be accurate, otherwise it just becomes a biased narrative

Keep shilling alive franky!

[chek2fire]

https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-unlimited-suffers-biggest-node-crash-on-record

Anyone ?

530 nodes affected..
vs thousands of core nodes affected in 2013..

OP's link atleast needs to try better and be accurate, otherwise it just becomes a biased narrative

if you not payed for what you do then you do something wrong and you must contact Roger Ver asap

[franky1]

if you not payed for what you do then you do something wrong and you must contact Roger Ver asap

funny part is that my opinions are about not any dictatorship.
i want diverse decentralised peer network

many have tried and failed to put me into one brand or another but they are not seeing the big picture.
all they see is "who does/should own bitcoin". they can never actually imagine a network owned by no group

i am going to laugh when blockstream jumps over to litecoin or hyperledger once they have finished messing with bitcoin

my mindset is on the next 120 years of bitcoin. not any particular brand and especially not a particular brand that has so much banscore code and block snobbery about version rather than validity

[chek2fire]

if you not payed for what you do then you do something wrong and you must contact Roger Ver asap

funny part is that my opinions are any dictatorship.
i want diverse decentralised peer network

many have tried and failed to put me into one brand or another but they are not seeing the big picture.
all they see is "who does/should own bitcoin". they can never actually imagine a network owned by no group

i am going to laugh when blockstream jumps over to litecoin or hyperledger once they have finished messing with bitcoin

my mindset is on the next 120 years of bitcoin. not any particular brand and especially not a particular brand that has so much banscore code and block snobbery about version rather than validity

and what is this "Big Picture" ? An unstable blockchain system that crash every month?

[franky1]

and what is this "Big Picture" ? An unstable blockchain system that crash every month?

hello
wake up

if there was only one brand then there would be crashes..
please learn the consensus of a DIVERSE DECENTRALISED PEER NETWORK

[chek2fire]

and what is this "Big Picture" ? An unstable blockchain system that crash every month?

hello
wake up

if there was only one brand then there would be crashes..
please learn the consensus of a DIVERSE DECENTRALISED PEER NETWORK

and why the only brand that has not crash from 2013 is Bitcoin core and why is the majority of the network? Bitcoin is an open source code and anyone can participate from it. In open source if you dont agree with the road of a project you just fork off from it. Is that simple. But i dont think you know about what is open source.
Are you a mac or windows closed source fanboy?

[franky1]

and why the only brand that has not crash from 2013 is Bitcoin core and why is the majority of the network? Bitcoin is an open source code and anyone can participate from it. In open source if you dont agree with the road of a project you just fork off from it. Is that simple. But i dont think you know about what is open source.
Are you a mac or windows closed source fanboy?

open source even in gmaxwells words means you can read the source but does not mean millions of people can edit it without the blockstream gate keeper.

anyone seen "forking off" from the blockstream gatekeeper and moderators get REKT and insulted

what should happen is the independent devs should be free to help out with any/all implementations. not be dependent on one implementation.
as thats the titanic/banks too big to fail mindset

[BitcoinPanther]

They will solve this with proprietary code that will be hidden from the public, until it is noticed and then they will find some excuse to justify that

move. They never apologized once for their buggy code, but rather turned to pointing fingers at the people who identified it. Their solution is to

blame Bitcoin Core developers for all the mistakes they are making.  

This is quite sad.  Instead of acknowledging their mistakes, they point fingers to other camp as if, if the bug were made by the core.  If the bug was not there, in the first place, there should have nothing to exploit.  They should be thankful instead if the other party such as Bitcoin Core is showing them how clumsy their is  coding is, so that they can fix and improve their codes.

[ImHash]

https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-unlimited-suffers-biggest-node-crash-on-record

Anyone ?

530 nodes affected..
vs thousands of core nodes affected in 2013..

OP's link atleast needs to try better and be accurate, otherwise it just becomes a biased narrative

I think the only one reading from scrips word by word it's you, because you keep mentioning 2013 and fail to point to another big crash/ bug. also BU didn't come out after 2013 but they started BU in 2015 I mean what was the 2 years gap for? assuming they wanted nothing but the success of bitcoin then they should've come up with BU soon after 2013.
Also can you provide us with Core crashes in short periods of time like BU?
140 years in the future aside they can't even sustain and maintain a stable network for 140 days.

As Satoshi said once there should not be different implementations of version because all the nodes need to get the exact same results after even 1000B syncing/ connection.

Moreover IMAO other versions should only run in the back ground of sorts as backups if Core somehow failed then BU or other versions/ forks could carry on temporarily until Core is fixed and back on the track to take the wheel/ lead.

[franky1]

fail to mention another bug.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/labels/Bug