The hardfork will make Gavincoin plummet to zero

[onemorebtc]

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.

afaik he (over-)invested in a bitcoin device which would not be able to handle bigger blocks? did you hear sth else?

[homo homini lupus]

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.

you loose me the moment you fix a system that isn't broken without consensus on it ahead of actual demand
the 'innovation' is causing chaos and being wasteful with HD recources of users
it's no innovation at all

i don't see me downloading 2.8GB every day just to sync up - and i know almost nobody will do that, that's why gavincoin will be the loosing fork (that was the basic point of the thread)

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 i 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 together.

correct

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

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.

afaik he (over-)invested in a bitcoin device which would not be able to handle bigger blocks? did you hear sth else?

Link?

[sgbett]

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.

afaik he (over-)invested in a bitcoin device which would not be able to handle bigger blocks? did you hear sth else?

More simple, he posted on his blog. details here In summary, he believes bitcoin is something that only the wealthy should want/need to use and that it isn't meant to be for everyone. Hence why he sees no need for the change.

I believe bitcoin is new money, and for it to work as such then every transaction ever goes on the blockchain. Which is why I think we do need the update.

[onemorebtc]

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.

afaik he (over-)invested in a bitcoin device which would not be able to handle bigger blocks? did you hear sth else?

More simple, he posted on his blog. details here In summary, he believes bitcoin is something that only the wealthy should want/need to use and that it isn't meant to be for everyone. Hence why he sees no need for the change.

I believe bitcoin is new money, and for it to work as such then every transaction ever goes on the blockchain. Which is why I think we do need the update.

ok, thanks

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.

afaik he (over-)invested in a bitcoin device which would not be able to handle bigger blocks? did you hear sth else?

Link?

sorry cant help you with that - and you shouldnt take it for real. i've read it here on btct somewhere.

[podyx]

Gavincoin? Hardfork?

What are you guys talking about...

[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.

you loose me the moment you fix a system that isn't broken without consensus on it ahead of actual demand
the 'innovation' is causing chaos and being wasteful with HD recources of users
it's no innovation at all

i don't see me downloading 2.8GB every day just to sync up - and i know almost nobody will do that, that's why gavincoin will be the loosing fork (that was the basic point of the thread)

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 i 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 together.

correct

You keep doing this thing where you argue one thing, but then use the opposite premise to argue another thing. You seem really confused.

On the one hand you keep saying that we are nowhere near 1MB blocks yet, so why do the change?

On the other hand you keep saying that if we do the change that you don't want to download 2.8GB a day (which is every block maxed out at ~20MB)

20MB blocks aren't suddenly going to fill up, despite your wild assertions they suddenly will. As you have already said the 1MB blocks aren't being used. So your data usage isn't going to spike suddenly.

Then there are the next round of updates, the ones that actually reduce bandwidth usage and initial blockchain download times. Pretty compelling reasons to upgrade. Which means that by the time we actually need >1MB blocks, the majority (not everyone, you were right) will have upgraded.

Theres a subtle difference between consensus and majority. what is happening is that it is being discussed now so that in can be implemented in good time to make sure that all of the bad things you say might happen won't.

The way consensus is reached in the blockchain is that first a majority of nodes agree, then anyone that didn't agree is financially incentivised to go with the longer chain and so discards there shorter chain. Thus consensus is reached.

Thats what will happen with this update. Provided the majority agree, the change will go in. At which point you are free to refuse to upgrade. By the time it actually becomes necessary to mine >1MB blocks the majority will have upgraded.

So the MP blockchain fork can go right ahead for as long as it likes until those involved realise they'd be better off mining *actual* bitcoin, like the majority. Then consensus will once again be reached.

[sgbett]

Gavincoin? Hardfork?

What are you guys talking about...

OP is confused by and scared of the proposal to increase block size. So is trying to recruit people to try and create a fork of the bitcoin blockchain that they want to call MPcoin. He is also campaigning to get Bitcoin renamed to Gavincoin.

[Bit_Happy]

Gavincoin? Hardfork?

What are you guys talking about...

OP is trying to do damage, but there is no real problem updating Bitcoins' code.
The large mining pools control the network, and in this case, they can be trusted.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Gavincoin? Hardfork?
What are you guys talking about...

Well, the Bitcoin blockchain you know and love so much is going into the ashbin of history and is going to be replaced by a new blockchain called Bitcoin. OP is being a whiny baby about it because he's too lazy to update.

If OP is speaking on behalf of MP, he has a lot more at stake here than all that. How many bitcoins is Mr. Popescu estimated to have?

[RoadStress]

Why?

Because there are no users for the bloatcoin. People won't adopt it. They'll go for alts with smaller bloatchains.

This fucktard keeps pumping the bloatchain argument just like MP. So either you like to take it in the ass from MP or either you are an ultra retard.

THE BLOATCHAIN ISN'T AN ISSUE. IT CAN BE SOLVED YOU DUMB FUCKTARD!

What other reasons do you have for not forking? YOU DON'T!

[RoadStress]

^^^
misinfo/disinfo

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

He always does that. He only throws shit and eat shit. He has nothing else other than MP's dick in his butt.

[RoadStress]

More simple, he posted on his blog. details here In summary, he believes bitcoin is something that only the wealthy should want/need to use and that it isn't meant to be for everyone. Hence why he sees no need for the change.

I did post my view on MP's post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=941331.msg10377700#msg10377700 and will re post it for visibility

MP is a sensationalist and he likes drama and attention. In my view in business and in ecosystems there are no people, there are only ideas. Starting his article mentioning the person behind the idea is simply bad intended from the start. Right after that he starts praising MPEx which again has absolutely nothing related to the main idea and to the main subject of a bigger block size.

After filling half of the article with useless nonsense about MPEx he reverts to a journalistic move in order to divert the attention from the subject which is to reveal something sensational and he chose to reveal that regular users will need 914TB of storage in order to pay for their coffee. I have already answered to this stupid and non-existing issue. We will develop a way of not needing that amount of storage for regular coffee buyers.

Afterwards he starts pushing his view of the blockchain. For a decentralized thing people trying to limit things their way isn't so good. Gavin is only trying to not limit things and to have large open doors for everyone. Keeping a 1MB block limit is a bad intended and limiting move.

In the end of the shit article MP closes with:

If Bitcoin can't pay for its own security, it is best to find this out sooner rather than later.

Bitcoin security will be insured by the services running on top of it and allowing services to run on top of Bitcoin by increasing the block size limit will definitely insure security no matter what.

P.S. Sorry for the post spam. It's for better visibility.

[karolina]

You wanna know why I know the OP is trolling/an idiot?

It took us 6 years to hit a blockchain 30 GB in size.

Now OP is making claims that the blockchain will suddenly grow more than 30GB every two weeks if the 20m cap is implemented. (2.8GB/day).

I don't even wanna......


You can fit all 6 years of transactions on a $50 1TB hard drive, over thirty times lol... Nothing to worry about.

[RoadStress]

You wanna know why I know the OP is trolling/an idiot?

It took us 6 years to hit a blockchain 30 GB in size.

Now OP is making claims that the blockchain will suddenly grow more than 30GB every two weeks if the 20m cap is implemented. (2.8GB/day).

I don't even wanna......


You can fit all 6 years of transactions on a $50 1TB hard drive, over thirty times lol... Nothing to worry about.

He is also claiming that the blocks will fill from the first day we hard fork (which will happen in a minimum of 6 months I guess). He is claiming a lot, but he fails to have valid points and he also fails to back his statements. He only throws and eats shit from his master MP.

[karolina]

I'm sure 5 years from now, 4TB SSD's will be cheap enough that the common PC will have them.

I'm also sure that Google Fiber (or similar services) will be a lot more common around the world as well, boasting speeds of 1 Gbps or higher.

In any case, there is way too much vested interest to just let Bitcoin fail. The software will simply continue to adapt and evolve.

[knight22]

Conclusion of this thread:

[kwukduck]

It's not completely without risk, but i did some more reading.
It seems this will be very carefully planned in phases, yet unknown when.
It's also the only real option we have for bitcoin to make it future proof.


I would like to have seen a more 'smart' solution though than just increasing the blocksize. Something that will automatically scale on demand, like the difficulty.

All in all it's not as bad as some here would have us believe.

[Q7]

Come on, do we need to show that level of sarcasm? Fact is, if we don't do it now to increase the size, when will we? Just need to start to plan for the future and I see this is as one of the solution.

[zimmah]

^^^
misinfo/disinfo

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

Just put this troll on ignore, your arguments are completely valid, and beyond his level of comprehension apperaantly. I have explained exactly what you said, in several posts across several threads, and mainly this lupus guy responds with his bullshit.

He's pretty much the only one who thinks that way, and I wouldn't be surprised if the others are just his alts.

Bitcoin needs to upgrade to advance, and it needs to do so soon. We can't risk having bitcoin collapse under the 1mb limit when the next surge of new users come in. Which for all we know could happen tomorrow.