The hardfork will make Gavincoin plummet to zero

[homo homini lupus]

There is no such thing as gavincoin and mpcoin. (false info) OP is part of a co-ordinated smear campaign. (false info)

The strategy of OP is not to 'win' any argument about which coin is better - its as a trick to make you accept that there exists 2 coins automatically by arguing for one of them. (i don't even understand what he is saying here)

There is only one coin, Bitcoin. (two after the fork, well, Gavincoin and Bitcoin) There will be an update of the software, it will be well telegraphed, everyone (not everyone) will upgrade in plenty of time. Once the date passes then miners will be able to create bigger blocks when they need to, once that happens then people who haven't bothered to upgrade will suffer. (remains to be seen) They will be forced to upgrade because otherwise they will not be able to mine anymore. (false info, mining on the original bitcoin chain continues normal)

There will be no drama when this happens. There is no 'other' coin. (again, he just ignores it like he ignored the price all year) There is no debate. (so what are we having here?) The OP is just trying to drum up interest for their boss MP (i don't even know who MP is besides that i was reading his website) who's argument is that changing the block size is heresy, despite satoshi himself having said that this change can be phased in exactly how it is going to be (satoshi didn't say what gavin thinks he said - has been pointed out in the thread already)

He well understood the network needed to scale http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@metzdowd.com/msg09964.html

The only people that really have a problem with this (aside from the short interested bears simply glomming onto it as a way to talk dow the price) are those that fail to understand the most simple math.

1MB blocks mean a maximum of ~4000 transactions * 0.0001 transaction fee = 0.4 BTC max potential fees for a mined block
20MB blocks mean a maximum of ~80000 transaction * 0.0001 transaction fee = 8 BTC max potential fees for a mined block

Gavin's proposal isn't lets go to 20mb blocks and leave it at that though, it's lets scale max block size over time

(The blocks on gavinfork will be filled in no time with all kinds of shit - 20 MB will be there in no time and 20MB is just the beginning later it will be much more)

If you think limiting the block size will make people pay for transactions you are ignoring i) the most basic principals of human nature ii) sidechains, alts and the million other ways that people can transact of chain to avoid paying higher fees. (it is inevitable more chains will exist and actually it is more practical and more rational)

What it also fails to acknowledge is that one of the big argument for bitcoin is "no/low fees". How is that going to remain the case if now we are saying that actually you have to pay fees to get your transaction in the next block. It just doeasn't make any sense. (thenetwork won't be able to operate without fees after the inflation fades off in a few years - the blocklimit is an important metric to keep the chain viable. Nobody says it shouldn't be raised but it shouldn't be raised ahead of the demand because no fees will not work later because miners won't mine - the end of the story will be quantitative easing more coins into existance on the Gavincoin fork later)

The *only* way for fees to take over from the block reward as the main source of revenue is by increasing the volume of transactions such that tiny fees per transaction add up to something worthwhile. (the volume of transactions won't increase on a coin scaled up ahead of demand because nobody can afford to download 2.8GB ever day)

Its really simple maths.

Don't let people distract you from the simple maths with their imaginary drama.

Don't forget to read this OP..

happy major?

[homo homini lupus]

completely agree.
I get the "whole sky is falling" vibe with his hard fork proposal and for not doing shit in the last 5 years.
It really can wait a while longer to hash out more ideals.

it has been shown that once blocklimit would be reached fees would of course rise and a free market effect for txs would take hold (if you want fast transaction, pay higher fees). The first effect of this would be to drive a lot of the spamming microtransactions like satoshi dice for 50cents worth a bet and things like that off the chain. That's probably already 20% or 30% of the traffic. So the propaganda of 'the chain comes to a halt' is fearmongering and only serves the purpose of bullying everyone into accepting the gavinfork without a second thought.  

Once the MirceaPopescufork occurs, Mirceacoin will be all his. What is YOUR point here?

how is it 'all his'? It's bitcoin and everyone can and will continue to mine like normal. The network will stay decentralised. But your question doesn't fit the point raised in the text you quote.

[onemorebtc]

happy major?

dont you think its a little bit stupid to assume that 20mb blocks are filled immediatly as soon as they start to exists if atm 1mb blocks are not filled?

and dont forget miners are also people: if they think it should stay at 5mb it will be there... so there is no "automatic" doomsday scenario

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

completely agree.
I get the "whole sky is falling" vibe with his hard fork proposal and for not doing shit in the last 5 years.
It really can wait a while longer to hash out more ideals.

it has been shown that once blocklimit would be reached fees would of course rise and a free market effect for txs would take hold (if you want fast transaction, pay higher fees). The first effect of this would be to drive a lot of the spamming microtransactions like satoshi dice for 50cents worth a bet and things like that off the chain. That's probably already 20% or 30% of the traffic. So the propaganda of 'the chain comes to a halt' is fearmongering and only serves the purpose of bullying everyone into accepting the gavinfork without a second thought.  

Once the MirceaPopescufork occurs, Mirceacoin will be all his. What is YOUR point here?

how is it 'all his'? It's bitcoin and everyone can and will continue to mine like normal. The network will stay decentralised. But your question doesn't fit the point raised in the text you quote.

Oh it fits, alright. It fits BIG TIME!

But seriously: who else besides a handful of you will continue to support MPcoin? Seriously!? It will turn into an altcoin, right?

[onemorebtc]

Oh it fits, alright. It fits BIG TIME!

But seriously: who else beside a handful of you will continue to support MPcoin? Seriously!? It will turn into an altcoin, right?

even worse: an sha265 alt...
with a strong bitcoin with much much more hashrate this alt wouldnt survive long and wouldnt be safe from 51% attacks

[homo homini lupus]

happy major?

dont you think its a little bit stupid to assume that 20mb blocks are filled immediatly as soon as they start to exists if atm 1mb blocks are not filled?

and dont forget miners are also people: if they think it should stay at 5mb it will be there... so there is no "automatic" doomsday scenario

you say 1mb blocks aren't filled atm - correct. So there is obviously no need to scale up yet

if you introduce 20mb blocks ahead of demand thefollowing traffic will take hold:

- microstransactions for all kinds of nonsense
- parasitic services like counterparty that fill the blocks
- malicious spam

20MB will be filled in no time

Oh it fits, alright. It fits BIG TIME!

But seriously: who else besides a handful of you will continue to support MPcoin? Seriously!? It will turn into an altcoin, right?

Edit: or a sidechain??

I won't support any of the coins
I support bitcoin right now and since Mpcoin is Bitcoin and i don't have consensus on the fork i support Bitcoin of course.
Once the chaos occures i will not be holding bitcoin anymore same as most people - i am  not interested to get caught in this shit

Your assumption Mpcoin will turn to an altcoin is likely wrong because it is the integer Bitcoin blockchain (unforked)

[sgbett]

^^^
misinfo/disinfo

what a compelling counter argument to the facts I presented. bravo.

man, people need to inform themselves. I really don't have the nerves to refute all propaganda 10 times.

You say 'there is only one bitcoin'
correct and that's Mpcoin as it is the unforked chain and 1 to 1 bitcoin of today. Gavincoin is per definition a fork of bitcoin and thus an altcoin. (to put it really short)

you trying to tell people a second fork wouldn't exist is wrong information.

Why do you keep trying to rename bitcoin, what is your agenda. Its almost as if you are trying to frighten people, make them feel uncertain about bitcoin's future so they doubt it will succeed.

In actual fact, you trying to tell people a second fork will exist, is blatant speculation!

What's interesting is that your repeated use of the term 'hard fork' shows that you pay more attention to the media than to the facts. The term is used by media outlets because it carries gravitas, it generates click through revenue, it 'sells papers'.

What Gavin is proposing is an update to bitcoin core that allows for larger blocks - that is not a 'hard fork', despite what you read in the papers. The deployment of the update can be properly managed so as to create minimum disruption to all of those with a vested interest in the continued success of bitcoin, just as satoshi described.

What you actually mean is a blockchain fork. This is not something Gavin can do, or even MP in his omnipotence! A fork is just what happens when miners haven't yet reached consensus, eventually they do and one of the chains becomes orphaned and every one just carries on.

Here are two axiomatic truths. There will always exist bad actors. There will always be innocent people that just forget to upgrade.

What the bad actors here are trying to do, is subvert the upgrade process by trying to fork the blockchain by only accepting smaller blocks. The bad actors will intentionally not upgrade, and will take advantage of the fact that there are innocent people who have forgotten to upgrade and recruit there hashing power. (of course they will also then try to argue that all of these people are 'supporters')

The thing is, in reality those chains will too become orphaned in time. That too is mathematically certain. The only way this cannot happen is if the bad actors are able to pull off a 50% attack... Now is that really what you are suggesting that you would do just to stop this change from being implemented?

MP is super smart but an egomaniac with it, which makes his his blog blog a great read! (I'm serious btw).

Only he would try and hard fork the blockchain just to get his own way! ... whilst all the time accusing everyone else of being the villains

[homo homini lupus]

Oh it fits, alright. It fits BIG TIME!

But seriously: who else beside a handful of you will continue to support MPcoin? Seriously!? It will turn into an altcoin, right?

even worse: an sha265 alt...
with a strong bitcoin with much much more hashrate this alt wouldnt survive long and wouldnt be safe from 51% attacks

 on the other hand transactions on gavincoin wouldn't be safe

I think there's a fair chance miners don't leave the Bitcoin chain for gavincoin or return to the original chain once gavincoin has been shown to not be viable

[onemorebtc]

you say 1mb blocks aren't filled atm - correct. So there is obviously no need to scale up yet

as i said before an hard fork needs to be planned a long time ahead. if there is a need it is already too late by 6months (minimum)

edit: i cant imagine transactions more micro than faucets - and even they work with 1mb...
so where are those microtransactions coming from? btc gots more adoption by fee paying participants? GREAT!

if they would just spam no miner would include their transactions

[sgbett]

I don't plan on supporting the fork. I want more proposals and more options besides just gavins that obviously doesn't have the full community support. If there is going to be a hard fork; there are other things that need done at that time as well to prevent future hard forks from happening within the next decade again.

+1

the whole approach is bullshit so far

- no other proposals
- no consensus
- not even an urgent need to fork (some supporters of the gavinfork want tell you that it would be urgent but that has been shown to be wrong)

-----------

basically the community is devided in the people who think and talk sense and know the original purpose of the coin aswell as have a basic understanding of the tech and on the other side is the camp of the greedy sheep who don't give a fuck and tell everyone "just follow in line"

-----------

people need to inform themselves to protect their finances and be able to make educated decisions.

The change has to happen a long time before its needed to make sure everyone has time to upgrade.

Do keep up.

[homo homini lupus]

^^^
misinfo/disinfo

what a compelling counter argument to the facts I presented. bravo.

man, people need to inform themselves. I really don't have the nerves to refute all propaganda 10 times.

You say 'there is only one bitcoin'
correct and that's Mpcoin as it is the unforked chain and 1 to 1 bitcoin of today. Gavincoin is per definition a fork of bitcoin and thus an altcoin. (to put it really short)

you trying to tell people a second fork wouldn't exist is wrong information.

Why do you keep trying to rename bitcoin, what is your agenda. Its almost as if you are trying to frighten people, make them feel uncertain about bitcoin's future so they doubt it will succeed.

In actual fact, you trying to tell people a second for will exist, is blatant speculation!

What's interesting is that your repeated use of the term 'hard fork' shows that you pay more attention to the media than to the facts. The term is used by media outlets because it carries gravitas, it generates click through revenue, it 'sells papers'.

What Gavin is proposing is an update to bitcoin core that allows for larger blocks - that is not a 'hard fork', despite what you read in the papers. The deployment of the update can be properly managed so as to create minimum disruption to all of those with a vested interest in the continued success of bitcoin, just as satoshi described.

What you actually mean is a blockchain fork. This is not something Gavin can do, or even MP in his omnipotence! A fork is just what happens when miners haven't yet reached consensus, eventually they do and one of the chains becomes orphaned and every one just carries on.

Here are two axiomatic truths. There will always exist bad actors. There will always be innocent people that just forget to upgrade.

What the bad actors here are trying to do, is subvert the upgrade process by trying to fork the blockchain by only accepting smaller blocks. The bad actors will intentionally not upgrade, and will take advantage of the fact that there are innocent people who have forgotten to upgrade and recruit there hashing power. (of course they will also then try to argue that all of these people are 'supporters')

The thing is, in reality those chains will too become orphaned in time. That too is mathematically certain. The only way this cannot happen is if the bad actors are able to pull off a 50% attack... Now is that really what you are suggesting that you would do just to stop this change from being implemented?

MP is super smart but an egomaniac with it, which makes his his blog blog a great read! (I'm serious btw).

Only he would try and hard fork the blockchain just to get his own way! ... whilst all the time accusing everyone else of being the villains

Bitcoin is Bitcoin
Gavincoin is not Bitcoin

-----------

but i really loose patience here for the brain spasm - i go back to trading. Maybe i check back in once having better mood for educating some sheep

[onemorebtc]

Bitcoin is Bitcoin
Gavincoin is not Bitcoin

-----------

but i really loose patience here for the brain spasm - i go back to trading. Maybe i check back in once having better mood for educating some sheep

infact bitcoin is what bitcoin.org and the github repo says it is...
bitcoin core defines the protocol and gavin happens to be one of the people able to change it.

if he changes it: YOU/MP need to fork bitcoin repo to something else

[homo homini lupus]

hehehe
Gavincoin will be very centralised

[onemorebtc]

hehehe
Gavincoin will be very centralised

says one of mpcoin-advocates with probably 6 holders and miners

[homo homini lupus]

here is the threads for the people who want to get educated:


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919629.0


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=941331.0


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=946236.0

[homo homini lupus]

i found this one interesting too:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=945604.0

[ElectricMucus]

Let them do it, set the precedent, sit back relax and watch it go down the slippery slope over the decade.

Perhaps long after reversible transactions, inflation/deflation according to economic factors and a more sane transaction storage practice are in it finally becomes a usable payment system one can call a currency. Nobody except the victims of the pump & dump will shed a tear about the fixed coin supply if there is real economic growth.

[homo homini lupus]

Let them do it, sit back relax and watch it go down the slippery slope over the decade.

Perhaps long after reversible transactions, inflation/deflation according to economic factors and a more sane transaction storage practice are in it finally becomes a usable payment system one can call a currency. Nobody except the victims of the pump & dump will shed a tear about the fixed coin supply if there is real economic growth.

interesting approach

What you describe there is certainly not the bitcoin people sign up for today though.

But i'll probably personally really take the approach of sitting back and relaxing. Speculating on alts just became a lot more rational.

I'm pretty confident the original Bitcoin chain will live on for decades though.

[sgbett]

You have posted a lot that you don't want gavin's update but you haven't actually posted why.

All you have done is repeatedly assured us that if the update goes in then MP will try to fork the blockchain.

I know why MP doesn't want the change, he's made it perfectly clear. I don't agree with him, but it's his opinion so I respect that. We just want different things out of bitcoin.

Why don't you actually want the change?  Hint: "Because it will fork the blockchain" isn't an answer, its at best FUD at worst a threat.

[ElectricMucus]

Let them do it, sit back relax and watch it go down the slippery slope over the decade.

Perhaps long after reversible transactions, inflation/deflation according to economic factors and a more sane transaction storage practice are in it finally becomes a usable payment system one can call a currency. Nobody except the victims of the pump & dump will shed a tear about the fixed coin supply if there is real economic growth.

interesting approach

What you describe there is certainly not the bitcoin people sign up for today though.

But i'll probably personally really take the approach of sitting back and relaxing. Speculating on alts just became a lot more rational.

I'm pretty confident the original Bitcoin chain will live on for decades though.

Here is the thing: Nobody required them to to sign up for anything, not satoshi, gavin, the bitcoin foundation or mark karpeles.
And it does matter what people decide to be Bitcoin in the future, innovations don't happen inevitably. It happens only if a majority of the people realize they need it and if the people who have the necessary skills to innovate decide to work on it.

Take things like the electric car or the electronic cigarette. The concepts were around for decades but they started to become a thing just a few years ago. That happened not because an inevitable trend but because a few people decided to do it and many others saw how good it is and started using it.