Could someone explain what is happening with Bitcoin development?

[owm123]

Why we have Bitcoin Ultimate, XT, Classic? What does it mean for normal bitcoin? Is very confusing.

Are they compatible with each other, i.e, can I switch from normal Bitcoin to XT or to Classic and keep my current bitcoins?

[1714693106]

1714693106

[1714693106]

1714693106

[johnyj]

Why we have Bitcoin Ultimate, XT, Classic? What does it mean for normal bitcoin? Is very confusing.

Are they compatible with each other, i.e, can I switch from normal Bitcoin to XT or to Classic and keep my current bitcoins?

They are all potential president candidate, so far no one wins majority vote

[VirosaGITS]

Why we have Bitcoin Ultimate, XT, Classic? What does it mean for normal bitcoin? Is very confusing.

Are they compatible with each other, i.e, can I switch from normal Bitcoin to XT or to Classic and keep my current bitcoins?

They are all potential president candidate, so far no one wins majority vote

None is getting a visible minority vote either. Its a lot of noise, but the network does not care too much right now. As long as no money is being lost, nothing is really going to budge.

[Amph]

it does not mean anything in the end, the consensus will choose the right one, which is increase the block limit, no matter how this is achieved, it must be done

they are only wasting time for something that is mandatory, i would just increase it to 2 mb for now

[keepdoing]

it does not mean anything in the end, the consensus will choose the right one, which is increase the block limit, no matter how this is achieved, it must be done

they are only wasting time for something that is mandatory, i would just increase it to 2 mb for now

https://bitcoinclassic.com/   
The directional decision has been made.  Actual concensus is pretty much out there.  Unlike the delusional, fake, lying NON-concensus blockstream-core has been promoting.

Nothing to "Vote" on yet.  Now that decision has been made by those with power to implement, simple code is being prepared, checked, due diligance etc.  Soon at the above website will be an active download button.  Immediately you will see an enormous leap in nodes switching over.  It will happen fast, and it will happen despite the yells and screams and whines and FUD spreading blockstream-core hijaakers. 

"Voting Concensus" will occur when 750 of the last 1000 blocks are created with the Classic Flag flying.  Probably in March(?).  Then the Fork will trigger and blocks actually above 2mb will start being created.   Part of the FUD leading up to the event will include threats by some to "Never Give In" - to maintain the current path.  But once the actual Fork happens, they'll upgrade or become an alt.  Any of them with any sense will make a good show of blubbering and screeching, then quietly upgrade, and go back to work, keeping their noses down for a bit.  And Bitcoin will then get back to the business of growing along the path that Satoshi originally envisioned and laid out.

There isn't anything scary about it.  It isn't anything not in the original Satoshi plan.  It isn't going to cause any disruption to the Bitcoin network.  The second it happens, or leading up to that second, you will see Bitcoin Prices shoot pretty high, on its next leg up to its eventual destination.  You will see faith in Bitcoin again, and app and infrastructure and investment will immediately see increased and renewed activity. 

It is in short - simply some people finally having the guts to do what everyone knows needs doing.  And a blatant hijaaking and hostage taking attempt by blockstream will have failed.   And to be clear.... Gavin is who Satoshi originally turned this over to.  I think most people trust him a heck of a lot more than they trust these blockstream idiots.  So the biggest develoment in all of this is really that this is a big leap in faith for the "Governance" of bitcoin.  And all of this is a good thing.

[Mr. Forum]

I do thin that there are several versions of the bitcoin and it is the reason you are coming across the likes of XT among others. I do think that the idea behind it is to make the bitcoin stable as possible with the alternatives here and there.

[Bitcoinpro]

Why we have Bitcoin Ultimate, XT, Classic? What does it mean for normal bitcoin? Is very confusing.

Are they compatible with each other, i.e, can I switch from normal Bitcoin to XT or to Classic and keep my current bitcoins?

Bruce Fenton is trying to ressurect  the Bitcoin Foundation, ask him wat the plan is,

their is alot of investment flowing into Crypto now so development is pickjng up in

the private sphere which will eventually involve lobying the miners and the public

including other companies investing

[Bitcoinpro]

I dont think they are compatible havnt looked at classic yet, lighting and block scalability sounded

interesteing they are proposed  bitcoin upgrades aswell as block size, i think everything

should be left until after the halving except lightning

[johnyj]

In real world example it is like one party controls the senate and another party controls the house, so that majority of the proposal from either party will be vetoed by the other party. However this situation will just result in indecision, e.g. status quo. You can not split a country into two countries because the senate and house could not reach agreement

[BitUsher]

Why we have Bitcoin Ultimate, XT, Classic? What does it mean for normal bitcoin? Is very confusing.

Are they compatible with each other, i.e, can I switch from normal Bitcoin to XT or to Classic and keep my current bitcoins?

You can use Bitcoin Core, Ultimate and XT now. Classic doesn't exist yet.

You would be relatively safe with XT, safest with core, and least secure with ultimate.(but all three shouldn't give you any problems.) 

[oblivi]

They are trojan horses trying to destabilize the decentralization of nodes, notice the insistency of paid posters to shill their crap altcoins no one care about (proof: no one runs nodes for any of that crap).

[Snorek]

Why we have Bitcoin Ultimate, XT, Classic? What does it mean for normal bitcoin? Is very confusing.

Are they compatible with each other, i.e, can I switch from normal Bitcoin to XT or to Classic and keep my current bitcoins?

You can use Bitcoin Core, Ultimate and XT now. Classic doesn't exist yet.

You would be relatively safe with XT, safest with core, and least secure with ultimate.(but all three shouldn't give you any problems.) 

There is not way that developers force any bitcoin change without backward compatibility - this would killed bitcoin once and for all.
So your stashed coins are rather safe. BTW every change that affect block size limit must be done via forking. There is no other way.

[keepdoing]

it does not mean anything in the end, the consensus will choose the right one, which is increase the block limit, no matter how this is achieved, it must be done

they are only wasting time for something that is mandatory, i would just increase it to 2 mb for now

https://bitcoinclassic.com/  
The directional decision has been made.  Actual concensus is pretty much out there.  Unlike the delusional, fake, lying NON-concensus blockstream-core has been promoting.

Nothing to "Vote" on yet.  Now that decision has been made by those with power to implement, simple code is being prepared, checked, due diligance etc.  Soon at the above website will be an active download button.  Immediately you will see an enormous leap in nodes switching over.  It will happen fast, and it will happen despite the yells and screams and whines and FUD spreading blockstream-core hijaakers.  

"Voting Concensus" will occur when 750 of the last 1000 blocks are created with the Classic Flag flying.  Probably in March(?).  Then the Fork will trigger and blocks actually above 2mb will start being created.   Part of the FUD leading up to the event will include threats by some to "Never Give In" - to maintain the current path.  But once the actual Fork happens, they'll upgrade or become an alt.  Any of them with any sense will make a good show of blubbering and screeching, then quietly upgrade, and go back to work, keeping their noses down for a bit.  And Bitcoin will then get back to the business of growing along the path that Satoshi originally envisioned and laid out.

There isn't anything scary about it.  It isn't anything not in the original Satoshi plan.  It isn't going to cause any disruption to the Bitcoin network.  The second it happens, or leading up to that second, you will see Bitcoin Prices shoot pretty high, on its next leg up to its eventual destination.  You will see faith in Bitcoin again, and app and infrastructure and investment will immediately see increased and renewed activity.  

It is in short - simply some people finally having the guts to do what everyone knows needs doing.  And a blatant hijaaking and hostage taking attempt by blockstream will have failed.   And to be clear.... Gavin is who Satoshi originally turned this over to.  I think most people trust him a heck of a lot more than they trust these blockstream idiots.  So the biggest develoment in all of this is really that this is a big leap in faith for the "Governance" of bitcoin.  And all of this is a good thing.

See the above.  Simple.  FUD free facts.  I will add the following....

Bitcoin is Bitcoin Core.  It will always be Core, even if a Fork occurred that supported Classic, or XT, or unlimited.  These are just names of competing "Update Proposals" - like version 2.0, 2.1 etc  Bitcoin has been upgraded many times through BIP (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal).  Nothing new or scary about changes in the Bitcoin Protocol.  It was designed and intended to function this way by Satoshi.

Recently however, Bitcoin Core was hijaaked by a company with financial motives.  Blockstream.  Blockstream decided to hijaak the natural path of bitcoin growth, and crippled it.  You see, they have a financial business conflict of interest in seeing bitcoin be limited to sidechains/lightening network (their business) and so they stacked the deck with Core Developers loyal to them.  The ORIGINAL Core Dev (Gavin Andresen) that Satoshi actually appointed, screwed up a while back and "stepped down from the lead role.  He did this with a good, but naive, believe that it was in the good of bitcoin to decentralize further the leadership team.   The problem is that the leadership team then became corrupted (Blockstream).  The role of Blockstream in Core Development process of Bitcoin began to create growth problems for the overall bitcoin network.  Gavin was then duped by a guy named Mike Hearn to offer up a "Fork, known as Bitcoin XT.  Bitcoin XT was very ambitious, and created a scenario that could be abused by centralized powers (Banks, Governments etc).  It was eventually shot down by the community by virtue of the fact that simply nobody really downloaded it.  Another Fork was attempted that is Bitcoin Unlimited.  Similar but with some changes in how blocks grew.  Both XT & Unlimited are simply deemed too much, too fast, too uncertain.

Problem is that some sort of block growth is needed NOW in order for Bitcoin to keep growing,a nd transactions to process.  Gavin has finally stepped back in with a reasonable, small, limited growth proposal that does one thing only.... increase the Block size to 2 mb.

There is HUGE support and concensus for this path (although you must remember that this particular forum (bitcointalk) is the Blockchain controlled forum, so you find mostly Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt here.   Regardless, by March there should be a Fork.  The bitcoin path will split into two chains WHEN a super-majority of the comunity chooses (votes).  If the vote goes i favor of the "Bitcoin Classic" 2m block increase, then the bottom line is that Bitcoin Classic Proposal will simply evolve into Bitcoin.

Just bitcoin.  Everyone will come on board probably within the first few hours.  ALL the fear you see is Blockstream Company employees, paid consultants or Shill trying to confuse things, becuase they hope that somehow this will cause people to not "Vote Classic".  But to actually "Vote Classic" means 1) Upgrading your Node 2) Mining a Classic Block.  Since the Miners will ultimately decide the "Vote" and since they support the return to the CLASSIC Bitcoin path, including most big companies like Coinbase etc - this is pretty much already decided.

What isn't decided is whether Blockstream survives the loss of their reputation, and keeps their investors etc.  Should they continue their antics and treat this as a live or die fight - then it is obvious they will die.  No big deal.  SOmeone else will pick up sidechain development where they leave off.

[BitcoinNewsMagazine]

it does not mean anything in the end, the consensus will choose the right one, which is increase the block limit, no matter how this is achieved, it must be done

they are only wasting time for something that is mandatory, i would just increase it to 2 mb for now

https://bitcoinclassic.com/  
The directional decision has been made.  Actual concensus is pretty much out there.  Unlike the delusional, fake, lying NON-concensus blockstream-core has been promoting.

Nothing to "Vote" on yet.  Now that decision has been made by those with power to implement, simple code is being prepared, checked, due diligance etc.  Soon at the above website will be an active download button.  Immediately you will see an enormous leap in nodes switching over.  It will happen fast, and it will happen despite the yells and screams and whines and FUD spreading blockstream-core hijaakers.  

"Voting Concensus" will occur when 750 of the last 1000 blocks are created with the Classic Flag flying.  Probably in March(?).  Then the Fork will trigger and blocks actually above 2mb will start being created.   Part of the FUD leading up to the event will include threats by some to "Never Give In" - to maintain the current path.  But once the actual Fork happens, they'll upgrade or become an alt.  Any of them with any sense will make a good show of blubbering and screeching, then quietly upgrade, and go back to work, keeping their noses down for a bit.  And Bitcoin will then get back to the business of growing along the path that Satoshi originally envisioned and laid out.

There isn't anything scary about it.  It isn't anything not in the original Satoshi plan.  It isn't going to cause any disruption to the Bitcoin network.  The second it happens, or leading up to that second, you will see Bitcoin Prices shoot pretty high, on its next leg up to its eventual destination.  You will see faith in Bitcoin again, and app and infrastructure and investment will immediately see increased and renewed activity.  

It is in short - simply some people finally having the guts to do what everyone knows needs doing.  And a blatant hijaaking and hostage taking attempt by blockstream will have failed.   And to be clear.... Gavin is who Satoshi originally turned this over to.  I think most people trust him a heck of a lot more than they trust these blockstream idiots.  So the biggest develoment in all of this is really that this is a big leap in faith for the "Governance" of bitcoin.  And all of this is a good thing.

See the above.  Simple.  FUD free facts.  I will add the following....

Bitcoin is Bitcoin Core.  It will always be Core, even if a Fork occurred that supported Classic, or XT, or unlimited.  These are just names of competing "Update Proposals" - like version 2.0, 2.1 etc  Bitcoin has been upgraded many times through BIP (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal).  Nothing new or scary about changes in the Bitcoin Protocol.  It was designed and intended to function this way by Satoshi.

Recently however, Bitcoin Core was hijaaked by a company with financial motives.  Blockstream.  Blockstream decided to hijaak the natural path of bitcoin growth, and crippled it.  You see, they have a financial business conflict of interest in seeing bitcoin be limited to sidechains/lightening network (their business) and so they stacked the deck with Core Developers loyal to them.  The ORIGINAL Core Dev (Gavin Andresen) that Satoshi actually appointed, screwed up a while back and "stepped down from the lead role.  He did this with a good, but naive, believe that it was in the good of bitcoin to decentralize further the leadership team.   The problem is that the leadership team then became corrupted (Blockstream).  The role of Blockstream in Core Development process of Bitcoin began to create growth problems for the overall bitcoin network.  Gavin was then duped by a guy named Mike Hearn to offer up a "Fork, known as Bitcoin XT.  Bitcoin XT was very ambitious, and created a scenario that could be abused by centralized powers (Banks, Governments etc).  It was eventually shot down by the community by virtue of the fact that simply nobody really downloaded it.  Another Fork was attempted that is Bitcoin Unlimited.  Similar but with some changes in how blocks grew.  Both XT & Unlimited are simply deemed too much, too fast, too uncertain.

Problem is that some sort of block growth is needed NOW in order for Bitcoin to keep growing,a nd transactions to process.  Gavin has finally stepped back in with a reasonable, small, limited growth proposal that does one thing only.... increase the Block size to 2 mb.

There is HUGE support and concensus for this path (although you must remember that this particular forum (bitcointalk) is the Blockchain controlled forum, so you find mostly Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt here.   Regardless, by March there should be a Fork.  The bitcoin path will split into two chains WHEN a super-majority of the comunity chooses (votes).  If the vote goes i favor of the "Bitcoin Classic" 2m block increase, then the bottom line is that Bitcoin Classic Proposal will simply evolve into Bitcoin.

Just bitcoin.  Everyone will come on board probably within the first few hours.  ALL the fear you see is Blockstream Company employees, paid consultants or Shill trying to confuse things, becuase they hope that somehow this will cause people to not "Vote Classic".  But to actually "Vote Classic" means 1) Upgrading your Node 2) Mining a Classic Block.  Since the Miners will ultimately decide the "Vote" and since they support the return to the CLASSIC Bitcoin path, including most big companies like Coinbase etc - this is pretty much already decided.

What isn't decided is whether Blockstream survives the loss of their reputation, and keeps their investors etc.  Should they continue their antics and treat this as a live or die fight - then it is obvious they will die.  No big deal.  SOmeone else will pick up sidechain development where they leave off.

I guess we will see. The core developers are already in process of implementing SegWit to increase transactions/second until they think it is time to fork to remove the 1 MB limit. This is XT all over again with 2 MB instead of 8 MB blocks also minus Mike Hearn. XT was not successful with only a handful of blocks mined. It will be interesting to see how Classic fares. Something as disruptive as a bitcoin hard fork should never be allowed with 75% consensus. The trigger should have been set at 900 of the last 1000 blocks mined.

[voos]

tl dr?

[keepdoing]

I guess we will see. The core developers are already in process of implementing SegWit to increase transactions/second until they think it is time to fork to remove the 1 MB limit. This is XT all over again with 2 MB instead of 8 MB blocks also minus Mike Hearn. XT was not successful with only a handful of blocks mined. It will be interesting to see how Classic fares. Something as disruptive as a bitcoin hard fork should never be allowed with 75% consensus. The trigger should have been set at 900 of the last 1000 blocks mined.

Yes.  I do believe they are going to unsafely rush SegWit in an attempt to head off a reasonable and simple 2mb increase that everyone is in favor of.  This is what I mean by dirty playing.  They aren't thinking in terms of what is best for Bitcoin.  Just protecting their Blockstream Business Model.

And LOSERS like you, that masquerade as NEWS Media - are nothing but little paid flunkie shits.  Why don't you stick to reporting News, instead of telling everyone what SHOULD happen.

When Classic prevails - I am cutting / pasting / saving your comments.  Advertisers need to boycott using "News Sources" whose opinions and story content can be so easily bought and paid for.

"Bitcoin News Magazine" .... what a joke.  Paid Whore is more like it.