Topic: Analysis and list of top big blocks shills (XT #REKT ignorers) - page 41. (Read 46564 times)
January 13, 2016, 10:03:08 AM
BTW I made a "Bitcoin Classic" discussion topic.
January 13, 2016, 10:02:46 AM
What I find troubling about Bitcoin Classic thus far is it appears more of a political wedge proposal instead of a technical one as people are voting on something without a BIP, whitepaper , or code available. What I like about it is there now is a competing implementation with some talented developers maintaining it which is great for our ecosystem. (BU and Libbitcoin need a lot of help, and XT has been deserted)
I will withhold judgment of Bitcoin classic's merits till at least a whitepaper is released.
I will withhold judgment of Bitcoin classic's merits till at least a whitepaper is released.
So long as Bitcoin isn't broken, there is no problem for the (increasingly abstruse) universe of Gavinista vanity forks to fix.
Bitcoin_Classic is vaporware, so people may project whatever properties they desire onto its nebulous cloud of anti-cyberpunk tropes.
That approach didn't work for Unlimiturd, and _Classic is likewise an imaginary solution in search of a problem.
January 13, 2016, 09:51:30 AM
Here, I'll clarify.
2MB immediate + 4MB later then stop = Bitcoin Pro
Bitcoin Pro + double block limit every 2 years forever = Bitcoin Platinum
Platinum + 90% trigger = Bitcoin Tournament Edition
BTE - RBF + SegWit - CLTV = Bitcoin Coin of the Year Collectors Pack
BCotYCP - checkpoints + TOR blacklists = Bitcoin XT Klassic Limited Edition
BXTKLE + unlimited blocks right now + 42 million coin total emission - halvings = Gavinista Peoples' Front Bitcoin Christmas Bonus Special Offer of the Month Club
Is that clear now?
Excellent, I welcome a diversity of ideas(your sarcasm doesn't escape me , but the more BIP's, involvement , and testing the better IMHO). What I find troubling about Bitcoin Classic thus far is it appears more of a political wedge proposal instead of a technical one as people are voting on something without a BIP, whitepaper , or code available. What I like about it is there now is a competing implementation with some talented developers maintaining it which is great for our ecosystem. (BU and Libbitcoin need a lot of help, and XT has been deserted)
I will withhold judgment of Bitcoin classic's merits till at least a whitepaper is released.
January 13, 2016, 09:44:56 AM
Bitcoin classic = 2mb?
Um OK, let's do it.
Um OK, let's do it.
There still isn't clarity if this is a 2MB kick the can proposal, and 2MB immediate, and 4MB later proposal , or and 2MB immediate and doubling every 2 years BIP 101 style proposal. (We are also unaware of the specifics to the hardfork transition) Since the normal BIP process isn't being followed and no whitepaper exists I cannot give my opinion on Bitcoin Classic. I would suggest that I do find it backwards and disheartening that so many are ACk'ing a proposal that isn't even clarified formally in either a whitepaper, BIP, or code which should all come before people judge it, IMHO.
Voting for this at this moment appears to be more of a political anti-vote against core than any technical vote upon the merits of the proposal.
Here, I'll clarify.
2MB immediate + 4MB later then stop = Bitcoin Pro
Bitcoin Pro + double block limit every 2 years forever = Bitcoin Platinum
Platinum + 90% trigger = Bitcoin Tournament Edition
BTE - RBF + SegWit - CLTV = Bitcoin Coin of the Year Collectors Pack
BCotYCP - checkpoints + TOR blacklists = Bitcoin XT Klassic Limited Edition
BXTKLE + unlimited blocks right now + 42 million coin total emission - halvings = Gavinista Peoples' Front Bitcoin Christmas Bonus Special Offer of the Month Club
Is that clear now?
January 13, 2016, 09:39:49 AM
https://bitcoin.consider.it/
https://bitcoinclassic.consider.it/
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Cg9Qo9Vl5PdJYD4EiHnIGMV3G48pWmcWI3NFoKKfIzU/edit#gid=0
Who has edit access to this google document?
https://bitcoinclassic.consider.it/
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Cg9Qo9Vl5PdJYD4EiHnIGMV3G48pWmcWI3NFoKKfIzU/edit#gid=0
Who has edit access to this google document?
The Toomim brothers.
January 13, 2016, 09:10:27 AM
After the failure of XT Gavin moved to "Bitcoin Classic" and he calls it the vision of Satoshi. 
https://bitcoinclassic.com/
https://bitcoinclassic.com/
"The data shows consensus amongst miners for an immediate 2 MB increase, and demand amongst users for 8 MB or more."
Are they wrong??
https://bitcoin.consider.it/
https://bitcoinclassic.consider.it/
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Cg9Qo9Vl5PdJYD4EiHnIGMV3G48pWmcWI3NFoKKfIzU/edit#gid=0
Who has edit access to this google document?
January 13, 2016, 09:07:49 AM
Bitcoin classic = 2mb?
Um OK, let's do it.
Um OK, let's do it.
There still isn't clarity if this is a 2MB kick the can proposal, and 2MB immediate, and 4MB later proposal , or and 2MB immediate and doubling every 2 years BIP 101 style proposal. (We are also unaware of the specifics to the hardfork transition) Since the normal BIP process isn't being followed and no whitepaper exists, I cannot give my opinion on Bitcoin Classic. I would suggest that I do find it backwards and disheartening that so many are ACk'ing a proposal that isn't even clarified formally in either a whitepaper, BIP, or code which should all come before people judge it, IMHO.
Voting for this at this moment appears to be more of a political anti-vote against core than any technical vote upon the merits of the proposal.
January 13, 2016, 08:48:36 AM
"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.
Fear does funny things to people.
Fear does funny things to people.
Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?
Or was that yesterday?
Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.
Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.
The militant small block comedians already decided to raise the limit before the halving date, to 4 MB (to get 1.5 MB).
Aww, so gullible.
The Gavinistas think they're the only ones capable of manipulating public opinion via false narrative headfakes.
It's like Charlie Brown and the football. Lucy outwits him. Every. Single. Time.
January 13, 2016, 08:34:36 AM
"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.
Fear does funny things to people.
Fear does funny things to people.
Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?
Or was that yesterday?
Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.
Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.
The militant small block comedians already decided to raise the limit before the halving date, to 4 MB (to get 1.5 MB).
Aww, so gullible.
January 13, 2016, 08:21:11 AM
"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.
Fear does funny things to people.
Fear does funny things to people.
Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?
Or was that yesterday?
Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.
Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.
The militant small block comedians already decided to raise the limit before the halving date, to 4 MB (to get 1.5 MB).
January 13, 2016, 08:15:30 AM
"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.
Fear does funny things to people.
Fear does funny things to people.
Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?
Or was that yesterday?
Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.
Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.
The block size is still 1MB, and those in favor of changing cannot agree when to raise it, nor by how much, nor by what formula future increases should be governed.
You are still soaking in glorious gridlock despite all the sound and fury, and I am loving every second of your agitation.
January 13, 2016, 08:00:17 AM
"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.
Fear does funny things to people.
Fear does funny things to people.
January 13, 2016, 07:31:47 AM
I hope that they get 75% miner support right away so that I can watch their miners saying, "Oh shit, we just mined a ton of worthless altcoins!".
I can't wait either. As iCEBREAKER pointed out a few posts back this is mearly a wedge attempt, but at least this time with "Bitcoin Classic" they don't mince words and admit they want to fork Bitcoin.
Let 'em I say. I'll just grab some popcorn and watch it play out like all reddit-fueled drama does: "Yay, we did it!" euphoria followed by "Oh shit!" when holders of the Bitcoin Classic altcoin realize they were socially engineered.
January 13, 2016, 05:35:24 AM
I hope that they get 75% miner support right away so that I can watch their miners saying, "Oh shit, we just mined a ton of worthless altcoins!".
January 13, 2016, 05:17:42 AM
Peak comedy @smalblockers imminent?
https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/40ppt9/censored_front_page_thread_about_bitcoin_classic/cyw40xf
https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/40ppt9/censored_front_page_thread_about_bitcoin_classic/cyw40xf
January 13, 2016, 05:16:17 AM
I hope that they get 75% miner support right away so that I can watch their miners saying, "Oh shit, we just mined a ton of worthless altcoins!".
I have to question your understanding if you can make a statement like this.
January 13, 2016, 04:50:38 AM
wtf are these out of your ass "ifs" and "conditions"?
shitcoiners gotta shitpost.
Sorry. I overestimated your capacity of processing complexity. Will never happen again.
January 13, 2016, 04:31:38 AM
I hope that they get 75% miner support right away so that I can watch their miners saying, "Oh shit, we just mined a ton of worthless altcoins!".
Why are you so sure it will be an altcoin? If 70% of the miners mine the new chain, they have the power to defrag the old chain without risk, like it happened so often with altcoins, and they also have an economic incentive to do so. No sane investor would buy the old coins, no miner would mine it, no merchant would accept it, no exchange would hold it, cause they are the most vulnerable altcoin on earth, just living on bless of the miner's of the new bitcoin.
If the fork happens like described by classic / xt, it will play out very soon. People that try to double spent between the chains will loose their coins, people who kept their coins unspent on the old chain can simple take them to the new chain.
If I think about it ... the miner's of the new bitcoin can just 51 the old coin and force it into their fork. After this there will be some old nodes left, that can still spent, but not receive nor relay ... it's really easy. A fork with the supermajority of miners will be the only one.
Miners wont be mining some shitcoin. Forcing anything (eg. attack) wont even matter as their revenue would instantly fall.
It is about all nodes or none. It is about ROI and not social-media-democracy.
if miners don't mine it, there will be no fork.
I think you should have the mental capacities to understand that if we talk about what happens "if" something happens we should start with the notion that something happens. Saying "If (x=1) than (x!=1)" obviously hurts logic.
And if the condition: miners mine new coin is true, than it's also true that miners of the new coin can 51 the old coin.
And if the condition old coin = vulnerable to 51 is true, than under the condition of ROI-seeking participants it's true that old coin = less worth than new coin.
Do you understand or does your brain only read "Shitcoin shitcoin shitcoin"?
wtf are these out of your ass "ifs" and "conditions"?
shitcoiners gotta shitpost.
January 13, 2016, 04:28:46 AM
January 13, 2016, 04:22:30 AM
I hope that they get 75% miner support right away so that I can watch their miners saying, "Oh shit, we just mined a ton of worthless altcoins!".
Why are you so sure it will be an altcoin? If 70% of the miners mine the new chain, they have the power to defrag the old chain without risk, like it happened so often with altcoins, and they also have an economic incentive to do so. No sane investor would buy the old coins, no miner would mine it, no merchant would accept it, no exchange would hold it, cause they are the most vulnerable altcoin on earth, just living on bless of the miner's of the new bitcoin.
If the fork happens like described by classic / xt, it will play out very soon. People that try to double spent between the chains will loose their coins, people who kept their coins unspent on the old chain can simple take them to the new chain.
If I think about it ... the miner's of the new bitcoin can just 51 the old coin and force it into their fork. After this there will be some old nodes left, that can still spent, but not receive nor relay ... it's really easy. A fork with the supermajority of miners will be the only one.
Miners wont be mining some shitcoin. Forcing anything (eg. attack) wont even matter as their revenue would instantly fall.
It is about all nodes or none. It is about ROI and not social-media-democracy.
if miners don't mine it, there will be no fork.
I think you should have the mental capacities to understand that if we talk about what happens "if" something happens we should start with the notion that something happens. Saying "If (x=1) than (x!=1)" obviously hurts logic.
And if the condition: miners mine new coin is true, than it's also true that miners of the new coin can 51 the old coin.
And if the condition old coin = vulnerable to 51 is true, than under the condition of ROI-seeking participants it's true that old coin = less worth than new coin.
Do you understand or does your brain only read "Shitcoin shitcoin shitcoin"?
Jump to: