Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 01:21:55 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 [1530] 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1807378 times)
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:04:59 PM
 #30581

Brg444, what do you think of my last response to your comment about moving the block size limit out of the consensus layer?

It is an interesting idea but I'm still thinking it through. Should get you a reply by this weekend.

As a quick thought: I'm worried about centralization issue. (yes :/)

First thought is what you are proposing could effectively creates an arm race in mining and node connectivity which will most likely prove to be out of reach of regular users.

Possibly centralizing these nodes farms & miners geographically because of internet politics.

Thanks for the feedback.  Again, I think this illustrates an ideological difference between us.  I read what you wrote as:

"By making it easier for node operators to exercise the power they already have (i.e., they can already increase their block size limit), I'm worried that the network as a whole would make a worse decision balancing centralization with Blockchain access than the decision a group of talented developers would make."

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
1481332915
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481332915

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481332915
Reply with quote  #2

1481332915
Report to moderator
1481332915
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481332915

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481332915
Reply with quote  #2

1481332915
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481332915
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481332915

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481332915
Reply with quote  #2

1481332915
Report to moderator
1481332915
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481332915

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481332915
Reply with quote  #2

1481332915
Report to moderator
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:15:07 PM
 #30582

It looks like Bitcoin*** has been released with the bigger-blocks patch.  Unfortunately, this news will likely be censored from /r/bitcoin.  

Below is Mike's email to the dev-list:

Quote from: Mike Hearn
Hello,

As promised, we have released Bitcoin XT 0.11A which includes the bigger blocks patch set. You can get it from

     https://bitcoinxt.software/

I feel sad that it's come to this, but there is no other way. The Bitcoin Core project has drifted so far from the principles myself and many others feel are important, that a fork is the only way to fix things.

Forking is a natural thing in the open source community, Bitcoin is not the first and won't be the last project to go through this. Often in forks, people say there was insufficient communication. So to ensure everything is crystal clear I've written a blog post and a kind of "manifesto" to describe why this is happening and how XT plans to be different from Core (assuming adoption, of course).

The article is here:

    https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1

It makes no attempt to be neutral: this explains things from our point of view.

The manifesto is on the website.

I say to all developers on this list: if you also feel that Core is no longer serving the interests of Bitcoin users, come join us. We don't bite.

EDIT: It hasn't been censored yet: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h42cz/bitcoin_is_forked/

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:26:56 PM
 #30583

I for one believe the depressed growth in price is largely influenced by the risk of bitcoin failure, and i suspect we'll see a lot of action when we get new information and certainty on Block size.

this is true.

between now and when this whole block size issue is resolved...there will be a ton of volatility.

███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████æ   
  ,████²█████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       Ñ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████Ñ         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ²██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ²▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ²▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                   ²²²                 
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.        SMOOTHIE'S HEALTH AND FITNESS JOURNAL          History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:31:09 PM
 #30584

Brg444, what do you think of my last response to your comment about moving the block size limit out of the consensus layer?

It is an interesting idea but I'm still thinking it through. Should get you a reply by this weekend.

As a quick thought: I'm worried about centralization issue. (yes :/)

First thought is what you are proposing could effectively creates an arm race in mining and node connectivity which will most likely prove to be out of reach of regular users.

Possibly centralizing these nodes farms & miners geographically because of internet politics.

Thanks for the feedback.  Again, I think this illustrates an ideological difference between us.  I read what you wrote as:

"By making it easier for node operators to exercise the power they already have (i.e., they can already increase their block size limit), I'm worried that the network as a whole would make a worse decision balancing centralization with Blockchain access than the decision a group of talented developers would make."

Then I presume you will not support Bitcoin XT?

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
OROBTC
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:37:39 PM
 #30585

...

Those of us who are not programmers or otherwise professionals re BTC can get a reasonably good overview of the debate re block size and related topics here (new piece by Mike Hearn):

https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1

I cannot confirm how valid the piece is, but non-tekkies ought to at least have an option of reading commentary like this which is in more-or-less plain English.

Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:38:04 PM
 #30586

the only bloatcoiner smart enough to see this clearly is Mike Hearn, and that is exactly why he has put in the effort to make XT.  Classic controlled demolition.

Excellent (and blessedly succinct) argument by analogy.  "Hostile/malicious fork" descriptive power just doesn't have the same je ne sais quoi as "controlled demolition."

Does not convince many. Not here and not there.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1144606.60

Bitcoin is explicitly non-democratic.  Populism has no power here.

Yes, the populism of the 1MBers has no power, neither in the threads of the elite nor anywhere else. That's why the limit will be raised within the next 12 month.

The "populism of the 1MBers" is not your concern.

Your concern is the multi-year duration and multi-billion-dollar magnitude of Bitcoin's current economic majority.

Are you going to be the first brave fellow to defect from that imposing majority by accepting Gavin-tainted XTcoins?  No?  Then you are just a poser.

In the remote possiblity XT becomes a matter of more importance than the hype, mirth, and scorn it generates at present, MPex and other 1MBer Elder Whales are prepared to use substantial (possibly exhaustive) portions of their extraordinarily massive war chests to repel 8MBer attacks.  To them, this is Holy War, with barbarian Gavinista hordes clamouring for a Free Shit Junta at the gates of their bespoke civilization.  They are more of a mood to impale heads atop spikes than reward with compromise Hearn's attacks on decentralization, Tor, and the consensus process.

Are you still sure you want to risk your tiny stash playing Hard Fork Poker with such ultra-high-rollers?

Before you answer, please take into account that nodes by default prioritize tx moving older coins, and the Royalty of La Serenissima possesses, in great quantities, very old coins.

What will you do when the limit isn't raised within the next 12 months?  Continue to cry wolf?  Self harm? Or admit being wrong?   Wink

You know iCE, I also am concerned by the idea of a hostile fork, but reading your propaganda it just dawned on me that the only hostilities are coming from people like you. Everyone of any worth agrees we need to increase the block size, it's just there is a hostile minority who feel they are in power who are wanting to pick a fight.

Accommodating bigger blocks over a 12 month period given Bitcoin's exponential growth is not a hostile act, it's not rushing in a controversial change, it's a practical prudent approach.

You are part of the minority who are making it controversial and calling it hostile. I just don't see why you're opposed to letting Bitcoin grow free of manipulation and control.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:39:55 PM
 #30587

Brg444, what do you think of my last response to your comment about moving the block size limit out of the consensus layer?

It is an interesting idea but I'm still thinking it through. Should get you a reply by this weekend.

As a quick thought: I'm worried about centralization issue. (yes :/)

First thought is what you are proposing could effectively creates an arm race in mining and node connectivity which will most likely prove to be out of reach of regular users.

Possibly centralizing these nodes farms & miners geographically because of internet politics.

Thanks for the feedback.  Again, I think this illustrates an ideological difference between us.  I read what you wrote as:

"By making it easier for node operators to exercise the power they already have (i.e., they can already increase their block size limit), I'm worried that the network as a whole would make a worse decision balancing centralization with Blockchain access than the decision a group of talented developers would make."

Then I presume you will not support Bitcoin XT?

I support bigger blocks.  If by showing support for XT I can help that process, then yes, I support it.  If I can help achieve larger blocks by supporting a BIP that proposes to move the block size limit out of the consensus layer, then I support that too.  

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
sAt0sHiFanClub
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


Warning: Confrmed Gavinista


View Profile WWW
August 15, 2015, 05:41:32 PM
 #30588

I for one believe the depressed growth in price is largely influenced by the risk of bitcoin failure, and i suspect we'll see a lot of action when we get new information and certainty on Block size.

this is true.

between now and when this whole block size issue is resolved...there will be a ton of volatility.

I would have thought the exact opposite - nobody wants to move until things are clearer. Gently sideways....

We must make money worse as a commodity if we wish to make it better as a medium of exchange
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:48:51 PM
 #30589


[..]

In the remote possiblity XT becomes a matter of more importance than the hype, mirth, and scorn it generates at present, MPex and other 1MBer Elder Whales are prepared to use substantial (possibly exhaustive) portions of their extraordinarily massive war chests to repel 8MBer attacks.  To them, this is Holy War, with barbarian Gavinista hordes clamouring for a Free Shit Junta at the gates of their bespoke civilization.  They are more of a mood to impale heads atop spikes than reward with compromise Hearn's attacks on decentralization, Tor, and the consensus process.

[...]


So you suggest the Elder Whales will buy up bitcoins from their stash of xtcoins? Just like a central bank would do? Well that is going to be interesting. But there is a risk of losing it all, so I would not bet that it plays out that way.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:59:08 PM
 #30590

By the way, the point in time where a gold backed money becomes a fiat money, is when there is just a tad more paper than gold in the system than the people are comfortable with, and a run starts. The state proclaims that the been (ref example) is just as good as gold, and apply a law to support that illusion. The law is the fiat point.


We don't have fiat money. Money is backed by deposits and securities. You will not get a credit (which is money) without that.

We do have fiat money, but the extent of debt is so large that it seems that debt is the basis. It is not, it is the fiat paper, plus the electronic only fiat created in QE. Unredeemable and unbacked. The debt extends the quantum of money while it exist, and contracts the money when it is extingushed by being paid back or written off. So debt is also money, I agree with that, but it is not the base, it is an extension of the base quantum.


Fiat means 'out of nothing'. Money IS debt, and nothing different. It is not paper, and the debt is backed by deposits and securities. A bank creates money, as soon as you take a credit (backed by your deposit).

It's the fractional reserve lending that is fiat, is it not?

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 808


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 06:00:26 PM
 #30591

the only bloatcoiner smart enough to see this clearly is Mike Hearn, and that is exactly why he has put in the effort to make XT.  Classic controlled demolition.

Excellent (and blessedly succinct) argument by analogy.  "Hostile/malicious fork" descriptive power just doesn't have the same je ne sais quoi as "controlled demolition."

Does not convince many. Not here and not there.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1144606.60

Bitcoin is explicitly non-democratic.  Populism has no power here.

Yes, the populism of the 1MBers has no power, neither in the threads of the elite nor anywhere else. That's why the limit will be raised within the next 12 month.

The "populism of the 1MBers" is not your concern.

Your concern is the multi-year duration and multi-billion-dollar magnitude of Bitcoin's current economic majority.

Are you going to be the first brave fellow to defect from that imposing majority by accepting Gavin-tainted XTcoins?  No?  Then you are just a poser.

In the remote possiblity XT becomes a matter of more importance than the hype, mirth, and scorn it generates at present, MPex and other 1MBer Elder Whales are prepared to use substantial (possibly exhaustive) portions of their extraordinarily massive war chests to repel 8MBer attacks.  To them, this is Holy War, with barbarian Gavinista hordes clamouring for a Free Shit Junta at the gates of their bespoke civilization.  They are more of a mood to impale heads atop spikes than reward with compromise Hearn's attacks on decentralization, Tor, and the consensus process.

Are you still sure you want to risk your tiny stash playing Hard Fork Poker with such ultra-high-rollers?

Before you answer, please take into account that nodes by default prioritize tx moving older coins, and the Royalty of La Serenissima possesses, in great quantities, very old coins.

What will you do when the limit isn't raised within the next 12 months?  Continue to cry wolf?  Self harm? Or admit being wrong?   Wink
MP is the great visionary who sold forward 5,000 ETH for 1 BTC.

In the unlikely event they have enough honour to put their money where their mouth is, the 1Mber will go broke because there are less smart than they think they are, and it will be funny to watch.
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 06:12:43 PM
 #30592


146 up-votes in 57 minutes and 94 comments. 

And now it's gone.

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 06:21:12 PM
 #30593

I for one believe the depressed growth in price is largely influenced by the risk of bitcoin failure, and i suspect we'll see a lot of action when we get new information and certainty on Block size.

this is true.

between now and when this whole block size issue is resolved...there will be a ton of volatility.

I would have thought the exact opposite - nobody wants to move until things are clearer. Gently sideways....

Bitcoin has been very stable true. But since Blockstream proposed to break Bitcoin (original dialogue suggested it could be considered a scaling solutions although denied when it was suggested that, that may be a motive for resisting block size increases)  the price has been declining (be it stable). That's good news in my it reflects coins are in responsible hands.

There is still no guarantee Bitcoin as conceived will prevail.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 06:29:33 PM
 #30594

the only bloatcoiner smart enough to see this clearly is Mike Hearn, and that is exactly why he has put in the effort to make XT.  Classic controlled demolition.

Excellent (and blessedly succinct) argument by analogy.  "Hostile/malicious fork" descriptive power just doesn't have the same je ne sais quoi as "controlled demolition."

Does not convince many. Not here and not there.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1144606.60

Bitcoin is explicitly non-democratic.  Populism has no power here.

Yes, the populism of the 1MBers has no power, neither in the threads of the elite nor anywhere else. That's why the limit will be raised within the next 12 month.

The "populism of the 1MBers" is not your concern.

Your concern is the multi-year duration and multi-billion-dollar magnitude of Bitcoin's current economic majority.

Are you going to be the first brave fellow to defect from that imposing majority by accepting Gavin-tainted XTcoins?  No?  Then you are just a poser.

In the remote possiblity XT becomes a matter of more importance than the hype, mirth, and scorn it generates at present, MPex and other 1MBer Elder Whales are prepared to use substantial (possibly exhaustive) portions of their extraordinarily massive war chests to repel 8MBer attacks.  To them, this is Holy War, with barbarian Gavinista hordes clamouring for a Free Shit Junta at the gates of their bespoke civilization.  They are more of a mood to impale heads atop spikes than reward with compromise Hearn's attacks on decentralization, Tor, and the consensus process.

Are you still sure you want to risk your tiny stash playing Hard Fork Poker with such ultra-high-rollers?

Before you answer, please take into account that nodes by default prioritize tx moving older coins, and the Royalty of La Serenissima possesses, in great quantities, very old coins.

What will you do when the limit isn't raised within the next 12 months?  Continue to cry wolf?  Self harm? Or admit being wrong?   Wink

You know iCE, I also am concerned by the idea of a hostile fork, but reading your propaganda it just dawned on me that the only hostilities are coming from people like you. Everyone of any worth agrees we need to increase the block size, it's just there is a hostile minority who feel they are in power who are wanting to pick a fight.

Accommodating bigger blocks over a 12 month period given Bitcoin's exponential growth is not a hostile act, it's not rushing in a controversial change, it's a practical prudent approach.

You are part of the minority who are making it controversial and calling it hostile. I just don't see why you're opposed to letting Bitcoin grow free of manipulation and control.

Well said, Adrian.

Ice seems to have some issues with change (i guess).

███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████æ   
  ,████²█████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       Ñ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████Ñ         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ²██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ²▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ²▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                   ²²²                 
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.        SMOOTHIE'S HEALTH AND FITNESS JOURNAL          History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
domob
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 937


View Profile WWW
August 15, 2015, 06:30:33 PM
 #30595

...

Those of us who are not programmers or otherwise professionals re BTC can get a reasonably good overview of the debate re block size and related topics here (new piece by Mike Hearn):

https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1

I cannot confirm how valid the piece is, but non-tekkies ought to at least have an option of reading commentary like this which is in more-or-less plain English.

Note that Hearn himself wrote in the email to the mailing list that this is not supposed to be neutral.  So you have to see it as one side of the discussion (i. e., his opinion).

Use your Namecoin identity as OpenID: https://nameid.org/
Donations: 1domobKsPZ5cWk2kXssD8p8ES1qffGUCm | NMC: NCdomobcmcmVdxC5yxMitojQ4tvAtv99pY
BM-GtQnWM3vcdorfqpKXsmfHQ4rVYPG5pKS | GPG 0xA7330737
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 06:37:28 PM
 #30596

...

Those of us who are not programmers or otherwise professionals re BTC can get a reasonably good overview of the debate re block size and related topics here (new piece by Mike Hearn):

https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1

I cannot confirm how valid the piece is, but non-tekkies ought to at least have an option of reading commentary like this which is in more-or-less plain English.

Note that Hearn himself wrote in the email to the mailing list that this is not supposed to be neutral.  So you have to see it as one side of the discussion (i. e., his opinion).

I actually don't hear many good arguments as to why the block size should not increase and why a select few have decided to remain static for as long as possible in a supposedly ground breaking and growing technology.

███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████æ   
  ,████²█████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       Ñ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████Ñ         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ²██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ²▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ²▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                   ²²²                 
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.        SMOOTHIE'S HEALTH AND FITNESS JOURNAL          History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 06:54:00 PM
 #30597


146 up-votes in 57 minutes and 94 comments. 

And now it's gone.

Stranger yet.  In the post that remains uncensored, it appears that many of the comments referring to the censorship of the previous post, or links to the larger-block size code, are being deleted:




Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
Bagatell
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 719



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 07:07:08 PM
 #30598

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h424p/why_is_bitcoin_forking/cu4498v

Quote
[–]i_rarely_post_ 2 points 10 minutes ago

Hi, can someone please explain why all posts that mention the deleted "Bitcoin is forked" thread or ask for an explanation are deleted? I'm serious, please explain (please don't delete this post).

    perma-linksavereportgive goldreply

[–]StarMaged [M] 1 point 4 minutes ago

Sure.

That post itself is off-topic because it is a download link to an alt-coin. The discussion is removed for being a duplicate of the drama that we allowed for three straight days earlier this week.
awemany
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 07:11:02 PM
 #30599


146 up-votes in 57 minutes and 94 comments. 

And now it's gone.

Stranger yet.  In the post that remains uncensored, it appears that many of the comments referring to the censorship of the previous post, or links to the larger-block size code, are being deleted:

http://i.imgur.com/aDQv2ZA.png

http://i.imgur.com/GzYjFAE.png

Is there a way to get the mod situation on /r/Bitcoin fixed?
If not, is there a way that any mod action could be stored for reference somewhere, so that there is at least a visible trail of what happened?

BTW: Just curious, and maybe our BIP is not needed anyways, but did you have a look at my comment with regards to not-quite hard forking?
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 07:11:17 PM
 #30600

I would not mind if Hearn created XT sidechain and XT supporters will be merge mining both chains.

Win win. MC will stay small and BloatChainers will have unlimited space for spamming.
It would be fine if Blockstream shows XT-SC before the end of year.
Pages: « 1 ... 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 [1530] 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 »
  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!