Bitcoin Dev Sells 50% of his Bitcoin due to 51% threat.

[BittBurger]

Peter Todd announced he has sold 50% of his Bitcoins due to the GHashIO situation, citing political biases in the system controlled by (i assume) Bitcoin core dev team and others refusing to address it.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/281ftd/why_i_just_sold_50_of_my_bitcoins_ghashio/

My suggestion was this:

This is a decentralized system.  But sometimes the question will arise:  Who manages the project in a decentralized system?  I suppose the community should be the most powerful influence in a decentralized system, yet there seems to be zero method by which the community can vote / influence the course of the code.  Obviously we don't want votes on every tiny issue, but on major issues like this, yes.  

Why doesn't someone institute a worldwide consensus voting system?  Bitcoin is perfect for such a thing, and being the first fraud-proof voting system on earth, this would be ideal.  In the end, powerful people and organizations are going to try to influence the bitcoin core code.  There should be a system put in place that doesn't allow any major changes without worldwide consent.  In this case, miners may be opposed to the proposal.  That wont matter because they will only have so many votes.

I am new here so be gentle.  This is just my idea from a newbie outsider perspective.  Its strange to see everyone just sitting around throwing their hands up doing nothing.  Very weird.

If change is needed.  Someone do something to make it happen.

Even if you don't think its that big of a threat, im pretty sure even you would agree it wouldn't hurt to institute limitations anyways.

-B-

[BurtW]

If I were you I would not base anything on that guy's post.  He is just a guy, on the internet, with an opinion, which happens to be wrong.

I tried to be as gentle as possible.

[blatchcorn]

He has a very valid point that the incentives in place are not strong enough to prevent a 51% threat

[Beliathon]

He has a very valid point that the incentives in place are not strong enough to prevent a 51% threat

People who think GHASH.io is a legitimate threat to Bitcoin fail to understand the organic nature of this network.

[Justin00]

yes yes I understand this would never happn and evn if someone did no one ould use the new code, but it would be cool if the algo was changed so the other 99% of the bitfcoin community could go back to mining and makinf minimal profits... kinnnddaa bit to commercial these days.

anyways more importantly how much did this  bitcoin dev make  $ ?

[BitCoinDream]

He has a very valid point that the incentives in place are not strong enough to prevent a 51% threat

People who think GHASH.io is a legitimate threat to Bitcoin fail to understand the organic nature of this network.

Can u plz substantiate your claim with proper logic ?

[dwma]

Peter Todd announced he has sold 50% of his Bitcoins due to the GHashIO situation, citing political biases in the system controlled by (i assume) Bitcoin core dev team and others refusing to address it.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/281ftd/why_i_just_sold_50_of_my_bitcoins_ghashio/

My suggestion was this:

This is a decentralized system.  But sometimes the question will arise:  Who manages the project in a decentralized system?  I suppose the community should be the most powerful influence in a decentralized system, yet there seems to be zero method by which the community can vote / influence the course of the code.  Obviously we don't want votes on every tiny issue, but on major issues like this, yes.  

Why doesn't someone institute a worldwide consensus voting system?  Bitcoin is perfect for such a thing, and being the first fraud-proof voting system on earth, this would be ideal.  In the end, powerful people and organizations are going to try to influence the bitcoin core code.  There should be a system put in place that doesn't allow any major changes without worldwide consent.  In this case, miners may be opposed to the proposal.  That wont matter because they will only have so many votes.

I am new here so be gentle.  This is just my idea from a newbie outsider perspective.  Its strange to see everyone just sitting around throwing their hands up doing nothing.  Very weird.

If change is needed.  Someone do something to make it happen.

Even if you don't think its that big of a threat, im pretty sure even you would agree it wouldn't hurt to institute limitations anyways.

-B-

Bitshares is creating DPOS (delegated POS).  The delegates are voted on and they do the equivalent of miners.  I believe they use system metrics to change votes by default.  IE a Delegate/miner is misbehaving or not performing to expecttations, then the vote is automatically changed.  However, there will be a way to override it.

As far as ignoring Peter Todd as some guy on the internet.  LOL.  Peter Todd is probably one of the better BTC core devs.  You people need to wake up.  Stuff like this will keep BTC from ever growing past the current market cap.

[bitgold]

I wonder what will make him sell another 50% next time.

[BitCoinDream]

I wonder what will make him sell another 50% next time.

When he is kicked out of the dev team.

[devphp]

I wonder what will make him sell another 50% next time.

I told him to put at least half of his fiat into NXT, since NXT cannot be practically 51%-attacked. He hasn't replied yet, probably thinking about it.

[reg]

If I were you I would not base anything on that guy's post.  He is just a guy, on the internet, with an opinion, which happens to be wrong.

I tried to be as gentle as possible.

it should be explained why the op is wrong for another guy on the internet with an opinion!. I happen to think the op has a good point and proposal but would like to hear the exact argument against rather than a superior dismissive.  My perspective on btc from the beginning was to precisely avoid political interferences as well as financial ones in a single persons autonomy over these factors. I have read the technical arguments that seem to minimise the effect of a 51% attack as well as means to overcome it -but political decisions override technical  ability in the current systems and I would not want it to be so in the btc sphere? thoughts.

[bitgold]

I wonder what will make him sell another 50% next time.

I told him to put at least half of his fiat into NXT, since NXT cannot be practically 51%-attacked. He hasn't replied yet, probably thinking about it.

But he claimed on LTB that NXT is not truly a decentralized currency. So as a purist like him, I doubt it.

[CEG5952]

He has a very valid point that the incentives in place are not strong enough to prevent a 51% threat

People who think GHASH.io is a legitimate threat to Bitcoin fail to understand the organic nature of this network.

The "organic nature" of the network? Could you elaborate on what you mean? Centralized mining is always a problem and a threat. And a pool doesn't need 51% to be a threat either, it just increases the probability of successful double spending.

[devphp]

But he claimed on LTB that NXT is not truly a decentralized currency. So as a purist like him, I doubt it.

He might change his opinion now that he started doubting Bitcoin. It's who put most efforts into achieving decentralization is more decentralized. All is relative.

[bitgold]

But he claimed on LTB that NXT is not truly a decentralized currency. So as a purist like him, I doubt it.

He might change his opinion now that he started doubting Bitcoin. It's who put most efforts into achieving decentralization is more decentralized. All is relative.

Yes, all is relative, but I am sure he'll find something else to complain about NXT.

That's a problem when people become too smart  

So he's going to implement his tree chain on NXT?    

[Este Nuno]

I'm pretty sure that the bitcoin dev team(and almost certainly the mining community) are extremely resistant to change and might just be straight up inflexible. I can't imagine a situation where the current bitcoin devs would push forward with any major protocol change. And I think it makes it reasonably likely that an altcoin with totally new technology will eventually surpas bitcoin. (note: I own no altcoins)

[devphp]

Yes, all is relative, but I am sure he'll find something else to complain about NXT.

That's a problem when people become too smart  

So he's going to implement his tree chain on NXT?    

NXT could use his coding skills for sure, whatever he would like to implement on it. Since it's extendable and can plug services on top of it, opportunities for software engineers are limitless.

[humanitee]

I would like to extend a hefty "Fuck you" to Peter Todd.

This is a market failure plain and simple, not a Bitcoin failure. This will be resolved in due time, sans hard fork.

[whtchocla7e]

I would like to extend a hefty "Fuck you" to Peter Todd.

This is a market failure plain and simple, not a Bitcoin failure.

Then why does Bitcoin allow such a market condition in the first place?

[humanitee]

I would like to extend a hefty "Fuck you" to Peter Todd.

This is a market failure plain and simple, not a Bitcoin failure.

Then why does Bitcoin allow such a market condition in the first place?

Because it's a young, fledgling technology.