Pages:
Author

Topic: Amateur hour - page 8. (Read 8295 times)

legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
March 12, 2013, 11:39:10 AM
#21
I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes, if I so chose, and yet you are concerned about Satoishi Dice generating a few million transactions.
Yeah, so could dozens of other people here (the current devs included).  But try creating such a system and also make it completely decentralized, impossible to counterfeit, impossible to create fraudulent transactions, a fair system of distribution, and nearly free to send/receive said transactions.

Good luck.  Wink

I have no doubt that Bitcoin can (and will) be improved upon.  But this is an absolutely appropriate case of "put up or shut up", because any improvements that could be made are either in progress or unknown.  Unless you have specific ideas for how to improve upon the current system, or you program those ideas yourself, then your words are utterly meaningless and useless.
sr. member
Activity: 338
Merit: 253
March 12, 2013, 11:38:39 AM
#20
Right now, I not planning on re-arranging my life to take an unpaid position as a bitcoin developer.
You don't need to be unpaid. If your abilities are as good as you claim you should be able to find plenty of people willing to donate.

For example, just look at how quickly the OSX packaging for Armory bounty was raised.

That's a nice thought, but I checked out the donations to the Armory address and it came to about 200 bitcoins. That would last me about 2 weeks.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015
March 12, 2013, 11:36:46 AM
#19
I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes

Also this will cost you a lot in Bitcoins, feel free to feed the miners. This might cost you a hundred Bitcoins an hour though. Smiley
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
WTF???
March 12, 2013, 11:35:34 AM
#18
As a professional software developer this may be an opportune time to point out that the bitcoin code is an amateur production.

I have the greatest respect for Gavin and others that have donated untold hours to make bitcoin into a reality and I know from experience how tough self-funded development is.

Nevertheless, make no mistakes, the current incarnation of Bitcoin has a lot of ill-conceived design points and implementation weaknesses (as we have seen from the events of the last 24 hours).

Aside from the blunder that just resulted in a blockchain fork, there is a much larger, related issue looming on the horizon, which is the inability of the design to process large numbers of transactions. It is ludicrous we have people whining about "Satoshi Dice" creating numerous transactions. I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes, if I so chose, and yet you are concerned about Satoishi Dice generating a few million transactions. The problem of high-volume transaction handling needs to be answered at a new level which is, unfortunately, way above the paygrade of the current development team.


Nu uh. My penis is bigger than yours.
hero member
Activity: 721
Merit: 503
March 12, 2013, 11:33:05 AM
#17
If you don't have time to write the fix yourself, what about outlining how to fix it so that someone else can do the heavy lifting of coding it?

Not an attack or anything - just seems like if you truly have a way to fix the issues and the only issue is lack of time then describing your method would appear to be the least you can do.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1004
March 12, 2013, 11:27:57 AM
#16
I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes, if I so chose, and yet you are concerned about Satoishi Dice generating a few million transactions. The problem of high-volume transaction handling needs to be answered at a new level which is, unfortunately, way above the paygrade of the current development team.

It is hard to understand what you are even saying here.  Are you saying you are so good at software development that you could write a better client for handling high volume transactions or are you saying you could easily flood the network with transactions?  

Hint: Both is not an answer because you would be wrong on both points.  
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1001
March 12, 2013, 11:25:46 AM
#15
Those who can, do.

Those who can't, bitch.  Grin
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015
March 12, 2013, 11:24:59 AM
#14
Right now, I not planning on re-arranging my life to take an unpaid position as a bitcoin developer. I am just saying that it is inevitable that the design and development move to a new level, so we, as a community, need to adopt the mindset that evolution must occur and figure out how to do that.

If you buy Bitcoin and want the value of the Bitcoin to increase, giving up your time to fix issues you can clearly see will pay off will it not?

If you can help Bitcoin accommodate the issues you have identified and because of that Bitcoin will have more chance of becoming a global currency. Your actions will cause those Bitcoins you buy will be worth thousands and the time you invested to help that happen will pay off far more than taking a salary. Perhaps?
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
March 12, 2013, 11:24:22 AM
#13
As a professional software developer this may be an opportune time to point out that the bitcoin code is an amateur production.

No, Bitcoin is a spontaneous production by a pro:

Quote
I actually did this kind of backwards.  I had to  write all the code before I could convince myself that I could solve every problem, then I wrote the paper.  I think I will be able to release the code sooner than I could write a detailed spec.

Satoshi Nakamoto, Nov 2008

He was solving a problem with an experiment. This is the experiment. Either create your own experiment that results in a half a billion dollar market (that could disappear tomorrow) or quit whining about the experiment in progress.

Thanks.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
March 12, 2013, 11:21:34 AM
#12
Right now, I not planning on re-arranging my life to take an unpaid position as a bitcoin developer.
You don't need to be unpaid. If your abilities are as good as you claim you should be able to find plenty of people willing to donate.

For example, just look at how quickly the OSX packaging for Armory bounty was raised.
sr. member
Activity: 338
Merit: 253
March 12, 2013, 11:17:09 AM
#11
As a professional software developer this may be an opportune time to point out that the bitcoin code is an amateur production.

I have the greatest respect for Gavin and others that have donated untold hours to make bitcoin into a reality and I know from experience how tough self-funded development is.

Nevertheless, make no mistakes, the current incarnation of Bitcoin has a lot of ill-conceived design points and implementation weaknesses (as we have seen from the events of the last 24 hours).

Aside from the blunder that just resulted in a blockchain fork, there is a much larger, related issue looming on the horizon, which is the inability of the design to process large numbers of transactions. It is ludicrous we have people whining about "Satoshi Dice" creating numerous transactions. I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes, if I so chose, and yet you are concerned about Satoishi Dice generating a few million transactions. The problem of high-volume transaction handling needs to be answered at a new level which is, unfortunately, way above the paygrade of the current development team.


Then do it.  Take the codebase fork it and produce BlinkCoin.  Let the market decide which one is superior. STFU or do it.   Here is my challenge to you.  "You can't. You absolutely and completely lack that skills to accomplish what you claim".  Prove me wrong.

Right now, I not planning on re-arranging my life to take an unpaid position as a bitcoin developer. I am just saying that it is inevitable that the design and development move to a new level, so we, as a community, need to adopt the mindset that evolution must occur and figure out how to do that.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015
March 12, 2013, 11:14:53 AM
#10
As a professional software developer this may be an opportune time to point out that the bitcoin code is an amateur production.

If you care about Bitcoin, you should get on board and start making changes, if they do not allow your changes then create a fork.

Nevertheless, make no mistakes, the current incarnation of Bitcoin has a lot of ill-conceived design points and implementation weaknesses (as we have seen from the events of the last 24 hours).

This is the first major problem Bitcoin has had, a few others have been smaller. But the developers have worked wonders. We have an entire decentralized monetary system that has been working with increased use for almost 3 years without a stop.

Aside from the blunder that just resulted in a blockchain fork, there is a much larger, related issue looming on the horizon, which is the inability of the design to process large numbers of transactions. It is ludicrous we have people whining about "Satoshi Dice" creating numerous transactions. I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes, if I so chose, and yet you are concerned about Satoishi Dice generating a few million transactions.

Whilst I agree the views against S.Dice are short sighted, the problem isn't the volume of transactions but the returns of 1 satoshi that is being considered spam. I personaly think that the developers need a solution that makes what S.Dice is doing a non-issue, but its causing issueis because of lots of 1 satoshi tx which is spamming the chain. Its a problem that needs a lot of work.

The problem of high-volume transaction handling needs to be answered at a new level which is, unfortunately, way above the paygrade of the current development team.

This is rude and I can't answer if its true or not, but based on the vibe I get from you I bet you have no idea what your talking about. Many of us here are actually professional programmers/engineers and the Bitcoin project is hard! Its way out there and new, not your average web app or business application. This is new territory and of course there will be problems.
sr. member
Activity: 338
Merit: 253
March 12, 2013, 11:06:12 AM
#9
I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes, if I so chose

Someone doesn't know how fees and transaction priorities work.

If they worked, then we wouldn't have a problem with Satoishi Dice would we?
legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1002
March 12, 2013, 11:04:47 AM
#8
Aside from the blunder that just resulted in a blockchain fork, there is a much larger, related issue looming on the horizon, which is the inability of the design to process large numbers of transactions.

That's not due to software design, but Bitcoin design. Broadcasting massive amounts of transaction data to home nodes, for authentication and relay, without T1 level bandwidth is not feasible. I've written a solution which addresses that issue.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
March 12, 2013, 11:02:48 AM
#7
Phew, what we really needed was another entire thread on this.  I mean, honestly, who thought 20 threads already was really enough?
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
March 12, 2013, 11:01:27 AM
#6
As a professional software developer this may be an opportune time to point out that the bitcoin code is an amateur production.

I have the greatest respect for Gavin and others that have donated untold hours to make bitcoin into a reality and I know from experience how tough self-funded development is.

Nevertheless, make no mistakes, the current incarnation of Bitcoin has a lot of ill-conceived design points and implementation weaknesses (as we have seen from the events of the last 24 hours).

Aside from the blunder that just resulted in a blockchain fork, there is a much larger, related issue looming on the horizon, which is the inability of the design to process large numbers of transactions. It is ludicrous we have people whining about "Satoshi Dice" creating numerous transactions. I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes, if I so chose, and yet you are concerned about Satoishi Dice generating a few million transactions. The problem of high-volume transaction handling needs to be answered at a new level which is, unfortunately, way above the paygrade of the current development team.


Then do it.  Take the codebase fork it and produce BlinkCoin.  Let the market decide which one is superior. STFU or do it.   Here is my challenge to you.  "You can't. You absolutely and completely lack that skills to accomplish what you claim".  Prove me wrong.
sr. member
Activity: 293
Merit: 250
March 12, 2013, 11:00:32 AM
#5
I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes, if I so chose

Someone doesn't know how fees and transaction priorities work.
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1001
March 12, 2013, 10:59:59 AM
#4
As a professional software developer this may be an opportune time to point out that the bitcoin code is an amateur production.

I have the greatest respect for Gavin and others that have donated untold hours to make bitcoin into a reality and I know from experience how tough self-funded development is.

Nevertheless, make no mistakes, the current incarnation of Bitcoin has a lot of ill-conceived design points and implementation weaknesses (as we have seen from the events of the last 24 hours).

Aside from the blunder that just resulted in a blockchain fork, there is a much larger, related issue looming on the horizon, which is the inability of the design to process large numbers of transactions. It is ludicrous we have people whining about "Satoshi Dice" creating numerous transactions. I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes, if I so chose, and yet you are concerned about Satoishi Dice generating a few million transactions. The problem of high-volume transaction handling needs to be answered at a new level which is, unfortunately, way above the paygrade of the current development team.


Really? A lot of ill-conceived design points and implementation weaknesses? Bitcoin has been around since 2009. There was one bug that caused a fork in 2010, and another one last night. Both got solved in a matter of hours. The blockchain size is an issue of agreement between the devs, not a technical one.

And all of this for a piece of software that is still in beta. Do you, a professional, have any idea how this compares with, oh, I don't know... Windows 95?Huh
legendary
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1001
March 12, 2013, 10:58:53 AM
#3
...the current incarnation of Bitcoin has a lot of ill-conceived design points and implementation weaknesses ...there is a much larger, related issue looming on the horizon, which is the inability of the design to process large numbers of transactions.

Fortunately, Bitcoin is open source. Go ahead and fork the repository, apply your fixes (since you're a developer) and let me know once you've got that debugged and tested. Then, write a paper describing your revolutionary improvements allowing Bitcoin to scale while retaining its decentralized properties.

Until then, STFU.
legendary
Activity: 1099
Merit: 1000
March 12, 2013, 10:58:25 AM
#2
Please, not again ...  Roll Eyes
Pages:
Jump to: