AntPool, BTCChina Pool, 21 Inc., BW Pool and KNCMiner support 8MB - page 2.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: entertainment on August 21, 2015, 10:41:36 AM

I sencerely don't like Core in the last time, where a sifnificant number of devs are working or presiding a company for profit, a company that will be probably favored if the limit does not scale.

Exactly what is wrong with that? The developers decided to make a company to profit via something that they're going to build on top of Bitcoin. Are you trying to tell me that if you were in their position, that you would not try to do the same? Roll Eyes

They will increase the block size limit, they just have to reach consensus in regards to how much and when.

Quote from: entertainment on August 21, 2015, 10:41:36 AM

If the majority switch, you will have to do it also. If not, at least XT will push to solve this issue earlier. Come on, we can't continue otheres 24 months speaking about the same...

Wrong. I don't have to do anything. There are plenty of coins that are better than XT (due to their bugged "patches"). XT is one of the worst outcomes of this debate.

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on August 21, 2015, 10:46:30 AM

i guess now there is 75-80% of all hashpower for bigger blocks = XT (because there is no other solution at the moment)

No.

LiteCoinGuy

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1014

In Satoshi I Trust

i guess now there is 75-80% of all hashpower for bigger blocks = XT (because there is no other solution at the moment)

LiteCoinGuy

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1014

In Satoshi I Trust

pedrog

legendary

Activity: 2786

Merit: 1031

How are they voting for 8MB?

entertainment

sr. member

Activity: 422

Merit: 250

Quote from: Lauda on August 21, 2015, 10:30:00 AM

Quote from: entertainment on August 21, 2015, 10:24:01 AM

Btw, Antpool has said that they are reasy to switch to XT: https://twitter.com/JihanWu

See, you're doing it again. Taking things out of context. They put a big IF in that sentence:"IF we see majority has switched.". Obviously they are simply stating if the majority switches then they will to (logic, else they'd be behind). That statement has no words of support in regards to XT.

Quote from: entertainment on August 21, 2015, 10:24:01 AM

They only implementation right now supporting 8mb (BIP101) is XT. If Core doesn't implement it, they will go to XT.

Wrong. I support bigger blocks (maybe even 8 MB), but I will never go XT (take this as an example).
Also: Supporting 8 MB blocks =/= supporting BIP 101.
People simplify this too much. While someone might support 8 MB blocks, they might not support the additional increases that BIP 101 contains (they are unsustainable).

Quote from: S4VV4S on August 21, 2015, 10:26:47 AM

There is no immediate need for larger blocks.

Most people do not realize this and think that their opinion is the absolute correct one. Dunning–Kruger effect shines bright around here.

I sencerely don't like Core in the last time, where a sifnificant number of devs are working or presiding a company for profit, a company that will be probably favored if the limit does not scale.

If the majority switch, you will have to do it also. If not, at least XT will push to solve this issue earlier. Come on, we can't continue otheres 24 months speaking about the same...

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: entertainment on August 21, 2015, 10:24:01 AM

Btw, Antpool has said that they are reasy to switch to XT: https://twitter.com/JihanWu

See, you're doing it again. Taking things out of context. They put a big IF in that sentence:"IF we see majority has switched.". Obviously they are simply stating if the majority switches then they will to (logic, else they'd be behind). That statement has no words of support in regards to XT.

Quote from: entertainment on August 21, 2015, 10:24:01 AM

They only implementation right now supporting 8mb (BIP101) is XT. If Core doesn't implement it, they will go to XT.

Wrong. I support bigger blocks (maybe even 8 MB), but I will never go XT (take this as an example).
Also: Supporting 8 MB blocks =/= supporting BIP 101.
People simplify this too much. While someone might support 8 MB blocks, they might not support the additional increases that BIP 101 contains (they are unsustainable).

Quote from: S4VV4S on August 21, 2015, 10:26:47 AM

There is no immediate need for larger blocks.

Most people do not realize this and think that their opinion is the absolute correct one. Dunning–Kruger effect shines bright around here.

S4VV4S

hero member

Activity: 1582

Merit: 502

Quote from: entertainment on August 21, 2015, 10:24:01 AM

Quote from: Lauda on August 21, 2015, 10:22:45 AM

Yeah, it was better that I realized on time that I would say this another few thousand times.
Supporting block size increase =/= supporting XT
Supporting 8 MB blocks (or BIP 101) =/= supporting XT

Unless they state we support 8 MB blocks in addition to XT, then you're taking things out of context for the sake of this tiring political battle between Core and XT.

They only implementation right now supporting 8mb (BIP101) is XT. If Core doesn't implement it, they will go to XT.

Not necessarily.
There is no immediate need for larger blocks.
And if there is and there is no consensus reached by the developers by then, then IMO, we as community should step in and fork the Community version of Bitcoin Core.
The version we as Bitcoiners want to use and not the one imposed to us.

entertainment

sr. member

Activity: 422

Merit: 250

Quote from: Lauda on August 21, 2015, 10:22:45 AM

Yeah, it was better that I realized on time that I would say this another few thousand times.
Supporting block size increase =/= supporting XT
Supporting 8 MB blocks (or BIP 101) =/= supporting XT

Unless they state we support 8 MB blocks in addition to XT, then you're taking things out of context for the sake of this tiring political battle between Core and XT.

They only implementation right now supporting 8mb (BIP101) is XT. If Core doesn't implement it, they will go to XT.

Btw, Antpool has said that they are reasy to switch to XT: https://twitter.com/JihanWu

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Yeah, it was better that I realized on time that I would say this another few thousand times.
Supporting block size increase =/= supporting XT
Supporting 8 MB blocks (or BIP 101 - if they support addition increases) =/= supporting XT

Unless they state we support 8 MB blocks in addition to XT, then you're taking things out of context for the sake of this tiring political battle between Core and XT.

entertainment

sr. member

Activity: 422

Merit: 250

f2pool signed for 8mb support, so they will accept soon I suppose.

http://www.8btc.com/blocksize-increase-2

keepdoing

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 101

Why are their gaps in the voting? Antpool for example as you go down the chain sometimes votes 8mb, and sometimes it doesn't. Pools are comprised of many, so isn't this a bit misleading to say "The Pool" supports blah blah blah.

yeponlyone

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

By looking at https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/blocks/1, we can now see that AntPool, BTCChina Pool, 21 Inc., BW Pool and KNCMiner support 8MB.

Of the major pools, DiscusFish/F2Pool, Bitfury and Eligius (surprise Wink

) do not (yet) support 8MB.

Topic: AntPool, BTCChina Pool, 21 Inc., BW Pool and KNCMiner support 8MB - page 2. (Read 1978 times)