@ckkano since you brought up block size and BIP100 and I've been gone from the thread a while (months) can you summarize if/when/how you intend to support block size changes? Obviously I mean the over 1mb changes. I ask because it seems miners will get the "vote" on what to support (but really that means the pool owners).
Sorry if you have discussed before but I read back 10 or so pages and didn't see anything.
ftfy
Anyway, I put up the limit to 988,888 yesterday (and edited the first post)
Nothing has changed since the BIP100 vote was added to our (and other) pool coinbase sigs, other than gazik showing that BIP100 was a scam by the bitcoin core devs.
The bitcoin core devs seem to think that they control bitcoin, and that it isn't a peer 2 peer currency.
There are ways to prove them wrong, when you have a very large % of the mining network showing agreement for a change that the devs want to flex their imaginary power and push their agenda and bury it rather than proceeding with the obvious agreement of the majority of bitcoin mining.
The core devs want side chains and are pushing that since that is in their personal financial interest.
There is no need to force anything, there is a need to put in place BIP100 and allow the network vote, to accept or deny it, to occur.
I don't like the idea of block sizes growing at an exponential pre-determined rate, determined by one person.
Over 99% of the mining network has agreed to that and thrown out BIP101
Yes, in general, any block voting will effectively mean that pools will decide the vote, but the simple issue there is that if people care about bitcoin and what they want, they can vote by going to a pool that does what they want.
I also think that what I've done with regards to SPV is a point to show how bitcoin can work.
1 person can't make a change, but 1 person can inform others and make it well known what is going on and effect a change that way.
Happy Saturnalia
... and a payout due in a few blocks