Bitcoin Forum
April 08, 2020, 08:51:38 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Bitcoin fork proposal by respected Bitcoin lead dev Gavin Andresen, to increase the block size from 1MB to 20MB.
pro
anti
agnostic
DGAF

Pages: « 1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 [80] 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Bitcoin 20MB Fork  (Read 154258 times)
traincarswreck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 17, 2015, 12:05:20 AM
 #1581


The difference is most everything.  Consensus is agreement.  Usually there isn't any debating at that point.
If it comes to a vote, or a battle, then it isn't a consensus.
Agreed.  But it is in fact consensus that we need to "move forward" right (ie not debate)?
1586335898
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1586335898

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1586335898
Reply with quote  #2

1586335898
Report to moderator
1586335898
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1586335898

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1586335898
Reply with quote  #2

1586335898
Report to moderator
1586335898
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1586335898

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1586335898
Reply with quote  #2

1586335898
Report to moderator
Best Rates For Exchanging Cryptocurrency Buy Crypto With Credit Card Smooth Exchange Multiple E-Payment Systems Check Now Check Now
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 1006



View Profile
February 17, 2015, 12:17:46 AM
 #1582

The consensus process will be users of the network upgrading their software to versions that support version 4 blocks, and miners producing those blocks.

The blockchain will record the point at which a consensus has been reached.
inBitweTrust
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 17, 2015, 12:19:02 AM
 #1583

The difference is most everything.  Consensus is agreement.  Usually there isn't any debating at that point.
If it comes to a vote, or a battle, then it isn't a consensus.

Consensus is preferred, but it is already clear that certain individuals are unwilling to compromise no matter what, so ultimately it will
never be reached between the whole bitcoin community. Ultimately, 95% consensus will be reached to make this happen. How quickly will the remaining 5% upgrade when the hardfork initiates will also be interesting to watch. My guess is at least 1% will fail to upgrade due to be stubborn or oblivious.

It would be wise for those being left behind to start getting ready to release their own hard fork to solve some serious concerns when they control less than 5% hashing power overnight on a forked coin. They should create their own github and start marketing it to users and miners to solve this serious problem which will make their currency unusable overnight unless they adjust difficulty retarget manually and possibly implement more checkpoints.

It will be interesting to see if their coin survives and for how long? Most miners and pools would be unlikely to attack their coin but with such a small hash rate one group may attempt a 51% attack out of spite, curiosity, or for profit.

Bitcoin has always remained interesting to say the least. Smiley

danielpbarron
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 213
Merit: 100


Daniel P. Barron


View Profile WWW
February 17, 2015, 12:39:55 AM
 #1584

It would be wise for those being left behind to start getting ready to release their own hard fork to solve some serious concerns when they control less than 5% hashing power overnight on a forked coin. They should create their own github and start marketing it to users and miners to solve this serious problem which will make their currency unusable overnight unless they adjust difficulty retarget manually and possibly implement more checkpoints.

You must be a paid stooge. Nobody can be this stupid. We already have a code repository, and it is you guys who are making the fork! This is like.. straight out of an Orwell novel: "the guys trying to keep the old rules are the ones trying to change it!"

Marriage is a permanent bond (or should be) between a man and a woman. Scripture reveals a man has the freedom to have this marriage bond with more than one woman, if he so desires. But, anything beyond this is a perversion. -- Darwin Fish
Cryddit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1044


View Profile
February 17, 2015, 12:48:08 AM
 #1585


You must be a paid stooge. Nobody can be this stupid. We already have a code repository, and it is you guys who are making the fork! This is like.. straight out of an Orwell novel: "the guys trying to keep the old rules are the ones trying to change it!"

True, you'll remain able to get the old version out of the repository, because it has all the past versions.  If you intend never to change anything ever again, I guess that's enough. 

Good luck with that. 
traincarswreck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 17, 2015, 12:53:31 AM
 #1586

I guess we decided to go back to debate.  But I think its still relevant to point out the difference between consensus and debate.  It seems to matter not whether we are discussing either the individual type or of the miner type consensus. To me, debating about consensus is a logical absurdity, nonetheless here we are.  

Another helpful perspective might be to ask, and relation to the game we outlined (and keeping in mind I am the worlds greatest poker player, other than perhaps Satoshi, Nash, or Szabo to which they are free to come in and argue otherwise)...

Is there anyone here, who has already chosen their strategy (to which truly we all have in some form), that might be able to deviate and gain?  And we can and should also look at this from the hypothetical or theoretical sense in regards to miner's and bigger players like even whales or governments or MPcoiners or Gav coiners etc...Is there anyone here that can put up their hand and show that they could in fact gain from such a deviation?



inBitweTrust
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 17, 2015, 12:58:10 AM
 #1587

True, you'll remain able to get the old version out of the repository, because it has all the past versions.  If you intend never to change anything ever again, I guess that's enough.  

Good luck with that.  

It will be enough if they wish to have an unusable coin with confirmations being processed at a practically unusable speed for at least 2 weeks, and than slow as molasses for another 2 weeks. It may take many months with more miners dropping off with fear before they reach equilibrium due to the retarget limits set in the current source code.

This is why I was offering some friendly advice for them to get ready to create their own hard fork and migrate it to a new github so they have a chance of surviving during the brutal transition they will witness.

This isn't even going to address the possibility of an attack by existing miners either which brings up a whole other concern that they will need to consider.

traincarswreck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 17, 2015, 01:03:33 AM
 #1588

It will be enough if they wish to have an unusable coin with confirmations being processed at a practically unusable speed for at least 2 weeks, and than slow as molasses for another 2 weeks. It may take many months with more miners dropping off with fear before they reach equilibrium due to the retarget limits set in the current source code.
I'm off for some hours so don't fear my spam...but a quick question I leave us with..

Are you talking theoretically?  Or IRL?
danielpbarron
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 213
Merit: 100


Daniel P. Barron


View Profile WWW
February 17, 2015, 01:09:40 AM
 #1589

It will be enough if they wish to have an unusable coin with confirmations being processed at a practically unusable speed for at least 2 weeks, and than slow as molasses for another 2 weeks. It may take many months with more miners dropping off with fear before they reach equilibrium due to the retarget limits set in the current source code.

This is why I was offering some friendly advice for them to get ready to create their own hard fork and migrate it to a new github so they have a chance of surviving during the brutal transition they will witness.

You pulled this notion directly out of your ass, and you keep repeating it like that'll make it true. Do you think that if you mimic my confidence it will make up for your lack of understanding? And yeah, in order to prevent a hard-fork we're gonna make a hard fork.

Time to start over with a new account. Yours is dead.

Marriage is a permanent bond (or should be) between a man and a woman. Scripture reveals a man has the freedom to have this marriage bond with more than one woman, if he so desires. But, anything beyond this is a perversion. -- Darwin Fish
Cryddit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1044


View Profile
February 17, 2015, 01:11:21 AM
Last edit: February 17, 2015, 01:21:27 AM by Cryddit
 #1590

True, you'll remain able to get the old version out of the repository, because it has all the past versions.  If you intend never to change anything ever again, I guess that's enough.  

Good luck with that.  

It will be enough if they wish to have an unusable coin with confirmations being processed at a practically unusable speed for at least 2 weeks, and than slow as molasses for another 2 weeks. It may take many months with more miners dropping off with fear before they reach equilibrium due to the retarget limits set in the current source code.

This is why I was offering some friendly advice for them to get ready to create their own hard fork and migrate it to a new github so they have a chance of surviving during the brutal transition they will witness.

Ooooh yeah. Been there, explained that.  Best case scenario with 5% of the hashing power is dropping 6 out of every 7 transactions on the ground. And it'll take a hell of a lot longer than 2 weeks to get 2016 blocks.

But, you know, I'm waiting to see how they cope with Berkeley Database 4.8, and OpenSSL version 1.01k, and how things are going to fail when google changes the format of its protocol buffers, and how other things are going to fail with the next revision of boost, and ....  well, ALL of that stuff I keep pointing to and saying we need to fix?  All of the stuff that, until it gets fixed, is going to give us occasional maintenance jobs, some of which are emergencies?  

When software depends on a property of a library which is not important to the main purpose of that library and which may be changed at any moment, it is vulnerable to version breaks.  And right now, Bitcoin has several version breaks.  

Berkeley Database is one that happened a while ago but we've never cleaned it out of the code.  OpenSSL broke just last month.  Protocol buffers and Boost haven't broken yet, but the people who maintain them WILL change them eventually.  Protocol buffers, in particular, are going to be a semi-emergency when it happens (same as OpenSSL was) because we have a dependency on the binary form of the data; if it changes, our signatures break, so we can't just convert data.  

But hey, if you're committed to never changing the software?  I guess you never have to build it either.  Just static-link that sucker and wait for the next Heartbleed bug....

inBitweTrust
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 17, 2015, 01:22:36 AM
 #1591

Some honest advice of how you will need to ultimately defeat "Gavincoin" from occurring and/or destroying any antiquated remnant fork:
Start buying more asics and insure that you control at least 6% of hashrate at any given moment.

I have absolutely no idea how many miners your small group currently has but it is certainly possible if you invest enough, quickly enough, you may be able to prevent this from occurring or at least delay it.

You will need at least 20,085,506 GH/s and growing as difficulty is increasing in 6 days.

An investment of 17,390 ANTMINER S5s should do it

https://www.bitmaintech.com/productDetail.htm?pid=00020141223160858878EmLu6L5Q067D

which when purchased in bulk will cost over 6.1 million dollars .... but you will likely have to source miners from all companies new and used due to limitations in stock and asic retailers scamming you so costs will be much higher. Of course some of you may already mine so it would be a good idea to get together and figure out how much of a group buy is needed.

cheers.

onemorebtc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 17, 2015, 01:29:49 AM
 #1592

Some honest advice of how you will need to ultimately defeat "Gavincoin" from occurring and/or destroying any antiquated remnant fork:
Start buying more asics and insure that you control at least 6% of hashrate at any given moment.

I have absolutely no idea how many miners your small group currently has but it is certainly possible if you invest enough, quickly enough, you may be able to prevent this from occurring or at least delay it.

You will need at least 20,085,506 GH/s and growing as difficulty is increasing in 6 days.

An investment of 17,390 ANTMINER S5s should do it

https://www.bitmaintech.com/productDetail.htm?pid=00020141223160858878EmLu6L5Q067D

which when purchased in bulk will cost over 6.1 million dollars .... but you will likely have to source miners from all companies new and used due to limitations in stock and asic retailers scamming you so costs will be much higher. Of course some of you may already mine so it would be a good idea to get together and figure out how much of a group buy is needed.

cheers.


it would be easier for them by making a reward program where mp sends coins to any coinbase (miner-address) which does not advertise it'll make bigger blocks.

thats the best way i can imagine to prevent a fork - not that i want them to do that...

transfer 3 onemorebtc.k1024.de 1
inBitweTrust
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 17, 2015, 01:29:58 AM
 #1593

Ooooh yeah. Been there, explained that.  Best case scenario with 5% of the hashing power is dropping 6 out of every 7 transactions on the ground. And it'll take a hell of a lot longer than 2 weeks to get 2016 blocks.

But, you know, I'm waiting to see how they cope with Berkeley Database 4.8, and OpenSSL version 1.01k, and how things are going to fail when google changes the format of its protocol buffers, and how other things are going to fail with the next revision of boost, and ....  well, ALL of that stuff I keep pointing to and saying we need to fix?  All of the stuff that, until it gets fixed, is going to give us occasional maintenance jobs, some of which are emergencies?  

When software depends on a property of a library which is not important to the main purpose of that library and which may be changed at any moment, it is vulnerable to version breaks.  And right now, Bitcoin has several version breaks.  

Berkeley Database is one that happened a while ago but we've never cleaned it out of the code.  OpenSSL broke just last month.  Protocol buffers and Boost haven't broken yet, but the people who maintain them WILL change them eventually.  Protocol buffers, in particular, are going to be a semi-emergency when it happens (same as OpenSSL was) because we have a dependency on the binary form of the data; if it changes, our signatures break, so we can't just convert data.  

But hey, if you're committed to never changing the software?  I guess you never have to build it either.  Just static-link that sucker and wait for the next Heartbleed bug....



+ 1 insightful post that reflects the difference between who develops code and who doesn't. This is exactly why I am sincerely warning them to prepare their hardfork and start getting their dev team ready. I am not doing so to mock them or strike fear in them, but sincerely rooting for them because some of them are showing signs they have absolutely no idea what to expect. Part of me wants them to be ready and survive the transition as it will sure be an interesting experiment.


it would be easier for them by making a reward program where mp sends coins to any coinbase (miner-address) which does not advertise it'll make bigger blocks.

thats the best way i can imagine to prevent a fork - not that i want them to do that...

Another brilliant idea... but how long could such bribery last?

A bit sad that we are left formulating strategies for them because they have no answers besides sticking their heads in the sand(with exception to tvbcof and one or two others who has been giving some well reasoned posts I can respect)

traincarswreck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 17, 2015, 02:27:49 AM
 #1594

It should be necessary to show that at least one of us can change our strategies and gain.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1002

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
February 17, 2015, 02:39:05 AM
 #1595

it would be easier for them by making a reward program where mp sends coins to any coinbase (miner-address) which does not advertise it'll make bigger blocks.

thats the best way i can imagine to prevent a fork - not that i want them to do that...
Loss of faith in Bitcoin would make make the bribes less and less due to the law of diminishing returns until it lost it's network effect. Really they have no chance and it will be amusing to see just how desperate they become to use this FUD tactic. Their next tactic will be to promote what they consider a superior altcoin. Watch MPs Trilemma blog for this in the near future.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
inBitweTrust
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 17, 2015, 03:07:10 AM
 #1596

it would be easier for them by making a reward program where mp sends coins to any coinbase (miner-address) which does not advertise it'll make bigger blocks.

thats the best way i can imagine to prevent a fork - not that i want them to do that...
Loss of faith in Bitcoin would make make the bribes less and less due to the law of diminishing returns until it lost it's network effect. Really they have no chance and it will be amusing to see just how desperate they become to use this FUD tactic. Their next tactic will be to promote what they consider a superior altcoin. Watch MPs Trilemma blog for this in the near future.

Perhaps this is his plan all along because he is becoming less and less relevant daily which must be infuriating for a megalomaniac sociopath. Since they have their own community they have nurtured which looks as if it has ~20 active members expect this to fail faster than paycoin but amusing nonetheless.... not interesting enough to do any research over there as most of the posts are incomprehensible pretentious drivel and spending 1 minute on their IRC reflects at least 60% grade school circle jerk humor.... and I thought Bitcoin talk was getting bad lately.  Roll Eyes

BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1107



View Profile
February 17, 2015, 03:15:35 AM
 #1597

The consensus process will be users of the network upgrading their software to versions that support version 4 blocks, and miners producing those blocks.

The blockchain will record the point at which a consensus has been reached.

I don't need to buy a new laptop for this do I Roll Eyes Wink Huh

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
inBitweTrust
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 17, 2015, 03:32:31 AM
 #1598

I don't need to buy a new laptop for this do I Roll Eyes Wink Huh

Increasing the block limit will not increase transactions or bloat by itself. Further adoption  certainly would and thus if you have to worry about upgrading your laptops HD to store a full node you will certainly have the funds to do so because bitcoin would be much more valuable or you could just run a pruned node which is going to be offered in 0.11

forevernoob
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 17, 2015, 04:01:25 AM
 #1599

I don't need to buy a new laptop for this do I Roll Eyes Wink Huh

Increasing the block limit will not increase transactions or bloat by itself. Further adoption  certainly would and thus if you have to worry about upgrading your laptops HD to store a full node you will certainly have the funds to do so because bitcoin would be much more valuable or you could just run a pruned node which is going to be offered in 0.11

Isn't pruning available in 0.10?

inBitweTrust
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 17, 2015, 04:14:09 AM
 #1600

I don't need to buy a new laptop for this do I Roll Eyes Wink Huh

Increasing the block limit will not increase transactions or bloat by itself. Further adoption  certainly would and thus if you have to worry about upgrading your laptops HD to store a full node you will certainly have the funds to do so because bitcoin would be much more valuable or you could just run a pruned node which is going to be offered in 0.11

Isn't pruning available in 0.10?


No , some changes were made to accommodate future pruning that will likely appear in 0.11

Pages: « 1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 [80] 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 »
  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!