Bitcoin 0.8.2. What do you think? - page 3.

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: charleshoskinson on May 06, 2013, 03:27:28 PM

Gweedo you need to be a bit more patient with people. You're attacking Gavin for doing something and then when I ask what would you like to do you say it's not my job. Ok, I gather that so I ask about an alternative system. I'm sorry if someone asked this before, I just came to this thread.

But let me ask a slightly broader question. Do you still feel the bitcoin protocol reflects your philosophy? Or has the time come in your opinion for a fork?

I am not a attacking Gavin. I am saying what I don't like, just like a president (didn't use that word on accident), I am voicing my opinion. That is like asking "Bob why is alice failing at her job" well bob would answer "I don't know I don't study her job I do my own jobs, I know the outline of what her job should be and she doesn't deliver that so I would say no she isn't"

The bitcoin protocol doesn't reflect my views currently on that aspect. Would I said it is time for a fork I don't know yet.

charleshoskinson

legendary

Activity: 1134

Merit: 1008

CEO of IOHK

Quote

All you need to do is change your config file. It's not too difficult. I'd suggest that you develop your own client but changing the config file of 8.2 would be simpler. Your "problem" is solved.

If Bitcoin is going to become mainstream, then this is a bad idea. We need to understand the vast majority of new users will just accept the default configuration. It is unrealistic to expect anything else.

nikkisnowe

member

Activity: 105

Merit: 10

All you need to do is change your config file. It's not too difficult. I'd suggest that you develop your own client but changing the config file of 8.2 would be simpler. Your "problem" is solved.

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

It's a good idea    68 (26.3%)
It's a good idea, But not at 5430 Satoshi    12 (4.6%)
It's a bad idea    86 (33.2%)
It's a bad idea, It should be a lower # of btc    3 (1.2%)
It's a temporary fix that should adjust with price    32 (12.4%)
It's a temporary fix that should be revised later    58 (22.4%)
Total Voters: 259

Just want to point out majority think it is a bad idea... this voting hasn't changed "It's a bad idea" has been in the lead the whole time.

charleshoskinson

legendary

Activity: 1134

Merit: 1008

CEO of IOHK

Gweedo you need to be a bit more patient with people. You're attacking Gavin for doing something and then when I ask what would you like to do you say it's not my job. Ok, I gather that so I ask about an alternative system. I'm sorry if someone asked this before, I just came to this thread.

But let me ask a slightly broader question. Do you still feel the bitcoin protocol reflects your philosophy? Or has the time come in your opinion for a fork?

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: pekv2 on May 06, 2013, 03:22:50 PM

This decision still makes my skin crawl, because I know it is wrong to do, it is unethical. My skin crawls when I think of big bankers, because I know they are evil motherfuckers. I just cannot believe how many followers there are. It's like the ones that state, usa is not a police state, makes my skin fucking crawl. /venting

I know... The best part is that everyone just ignores us, cause they can't be bothered with the truth. It makes me so angry and sad at the same time.

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: charleshoskinson on May 06, 2013, 03:18:16 PM

Quote

That isn't my job, that is why Gavin gets a salary he should be working on that. Instead he just puts a temp patch and goes on a walk for an interview.

I would advocate leaving this decision to miners. Miners should have the ability to form a marketplace for what they will confirm in a block and what they won't confirm. Would you accept this system?

We have had this conversation over and over, and it is getting really hard to keep answering the same questions again and again. So just look in the thread you should be able to find it.

pekv2

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 502

Quote from: gweedo on May 06, 2013, 03:15:07 PM

Quote from: pekv2 on May 06, 2013, 03:08:40 PM

Trying to talk to a wall is impossible. They won't ever get it, they will follow and do what ever the dictator says or does. :/

Another words, they will follow

no matter what.

I know they rather try and take the thread off-topic before even learning what they are debating about if you can even call it debating LOL.

This decision still makes my skin crawl, because I know it is wrong to do, it is unethical. My skin crawls when I think of big bankers, because I know they are evil motherfuckers. I just cannot believe how many followers there are. It's like the ones that state, usa is not a police state, makes my skin fucking crawl. /venting

charleshoskinson

legendary

Activity: 1134

Merit: 1008

CEO of IOHK

Quote

That isn't my job, that is why Gavin gets a salary he should be working on that. Instead he just puts a temp patch and goes on a walk for an interview.

I would advocate leaving this decision to miners. Miners should have the ability to form a marketplace for what they will confirm in a block and what they won't confirm. Would you accept this system?

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: pekv2 on May 06, 2013, 03:08:40 PM

Trying to talk to a wall is impossible. They won't ever get it, they will follow and do what ever the dictator says or does. :/

Another words, they will follow

no matter what.

I know they rather try and take the thread off-topic before even learning what they are debating about if you can even call it debating LOL.

Quote from: charleshoskinson on May 06, 2013, 03:11:46 PM

I'm curious. Those who feel this shouldn't exist, then how do you propose we eliminate vacuous transactions meant to bog down the network?

That isn't my job, that is why Gavin gets a salary he should be working on that. Instead he just puts a temp patch and goes on a walk for an interview.

charleshoskinson

legendary

Activity: 1134

Merit: 1008

CEO of IOHK

I'm curious. Those who feel this shouldn't exist, then how do you propose we eliminate vacuous transactions meant to bog down the network?

nikkisnowe

member

Activity: 105

Merit: 10

It's, "You're just a follower, therefore I'm not even going..."

"In other words..."

pekv2

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 502

Quote from: gweedo on May 06, 2013, 03:04:23 PM

Quote from: nikkisnowe on May 06, 2013, 03:01:01 PM

You're attempting convince others in this forum to believe in the arguments you're presenting. Nobody is going to take you seriously when you present your arguments like a 15 year old girl texting her friends. Simply review your response to me. Who is going to take your views, versus the developers, regarding the changes to the bitcoin protocol seriously when you can't formulate a proper sentence.

Well you don't even understand the changes so how do you know my argument isn't correct or correct? It isn't a change to the protocol, it is to the client. You just a follower, not even going to waste even more replies on you.

Trying to talk to a wall is impossible. They won't ever get it, they will follow and do what ever the dictator says or does. :/

Another words, they will follow

no matter what.

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: nikkisnowe on May 06, 2013, 03:01:01 PM

You're attempting convince others in this forum to believe in the arguments you're presenting. Nobody is going to take you seriously when you present your arguments like a 15 year old girl texting her friends. Simply review your response to me. Who is going to take your views, versus the developers, regarding the changes to the bitcoin protocol seriously when you can't formulate a proper sentence.

Well you don't even understand the changes so how do you know my argument isn't correct or correct? It isn't a change to the protocol, it is to the client. You just a follower, not even going to waste even more replies on you.

nikkisnowe

member

Activity: 105

Merit: 10

You're attempting convince others in this forum to believe in the arguments you're presenting. Nobody is going to take you seriously when you present your arguments like a 15 year old girl texting her friends. Simply review your response to me. Who is going to take your views, versus the developers, regarding the changes to the bitcoin protocol seriously when you can't formulate a proper sentence.

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: nikkisnowe on May 06, 2013, 02:43:37 PM

Quote from: gweedo on May 06, 2013, 02:31:45 AM

Quote from: sturle on May 06, 2013, 02:26:52 AM

Quote from: bitcoiners on May 05, 2013, 11:10:08 PM

I don't care what you think. This is regulation plain and simple. This is not what I was led to believe bitcoin was. If bitcoin can't handle itself then another coin should take it's place. END OF STORY.

Why didn't you complain when 0.00000000 outputs were made non-standard in the same way some versions ago? Same problem, same reason to make them non-standard. Spendable, but only in theory because it doesn't make sense to pay fees to spend them. You can still send the transactions, and evil miners may mine them just like other dust creating transactions. I don't want them in the blockchain, so I won't help you relaying or mining them. That's my choice. You can't force me to, just as I can't force you to stop behaving badly.

Cause it was your option to pay the fees, miner still had to include them and relays still had to relay. Was that big of a deal to be honest. This is completely censoring.

Hey Gweedo,
Sorry for being the English police, but do you understand the difference between the words "cause" and "because"? While your arguments might have merit, you discredit yourself with your shitty adolescent understanding of basic grammar.

Yes I do, I was writing this at 2:30am, so I doubt anyone's grammer is of a high level scholar at that time. But what does this have to do with my views, I feel this is so off-topic and actually discredits you since, your attacking that, when the basic views I have talked about many times, and the people that need to understand, understood it.

nikkisnowe

member

Activity: 105

Merit: 10

Quote from: gweedo on May 06, 2013, 02:31:45 AM

Quote from: sturle on May 06, 2013, 02:26:52 AM

Quote from: bitcoiners on May 05, 2013, 11:10:08 PM

I don't care what you think. This is regulation plain and simple. This is not what I was led to believe bitcoin was. If bitcoin can't handle itself then another coin should take it's place. END OF STORY.

Why didn't you complain when 0.00000000 outputs were made non-standard in the same way some versions ago? Same problem, same reason to make them non-standard. Spendable, but only in theory because it doesn't make sense to pay fees to spend them. You can still send the transactions, and evil miners may mine them just like other dust creating transactions. I don't want them in the blockchain, so I won't help you relaying or mining them. That's my choice. You can't force me to, just as I can't force you to stop behaving badly.

Cause it was your option to pay the fees, miner still had to include them and relays still had to relay. Was that big of a deal to be honest. This is completely censoring.

Hey Gweedo,
Sorry for being the English police, but do you understand the difference between the words "cause" and "because"? While your arguments might have merit, you discredit yourself with your shitty adolescent understanding of basic grammar.

kjj

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1025

Quote from: tvbcof on May 06, 2013, 01:45:20 PM

Quote from: kjj on May 06, 2013, 12:54:20 PM

* I was thinking of writing a patch to create RPC commands to edit these configuration values without even needing the restart. Some moron claimed that 95% of bitcoin users weren't competent to edit their config file, which I don't in any way believe to be true. Still, adding a RPC command would make it settable by anyone that can find the debug window. It would also allow people to write third party bots to make live adjustments based on whatever data feeds they thought appropriate.

Great idea! I'm sure the solution could (and would) be extended to stream any wallet.dat files found kicking around to a new home pretty quickly.

That is a general problem with the RPC system. Sadly, adding a granular permission system to it is beyond what I'm able to tackle right now. Splitting the RPC calls into public, private and trusted, and having distinct credentials for each level would be quite a bit easier, but still not something I have time for.*

Also, a script to monitor a few data feeds and calculate appropriate fee levels would be pretty simple. Most people that would actually need such a thing should be able to write their own.

* If I were doing it, I would add four new config values, rpcpublicuser, rpcpublicpassword, rpcprivateuser and rpcprivatepassword. The current values (rpcuser and rpcpassword) would be for the trusted account, just like today. Another approach would be to leave the current values as the public info, and make trusted values, but this would break everything. Purely informational calls would require that the user authenticate using any of the three. Calls that could be annoying, but not dangerous, like settxrelayfee, would be public or trusted. Calls that could be dangerous, like sendtoaddress, would require the trusted account. Anyone want a relatively simple project to learn bitcoin development with?

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote

It's a temporary fix that should adjust with price
It's a temporary fix that should be revised later

This

and, if you want to do a lot of TX for value less then 1 penny just use LTC ?

tvbcof

legendary

Activity: 4592

Merit: 1276

Quote from: kjj on May 06, 2013, 12:54:20 PM

* I was thinking of writing a patch to create RPC commands to edit these configuration values without even needing the restart. Some moron claimed that 95% of bitcoin users weren't competent to edit their config file, which I don't in any way believe to be true. Still, adding a RPC command would make it settable by anyone that can find the debug window. It would also allow people to write third party bots to make live adjustments based on whatever data feeds they thought appropriate.

Great idea! I'm sure the solution could (and would) be extended to stream any wallet.dat files found kicking around to a new home pretty quickly.

Topic: Bitcoin 0.8.2. What do you think? - page 3. (Read 17081 times)