"Bitcoin classic", brought up by literal crooks

iCEBREAKER

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1072

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

Quote from: figmentofmyass on January 29, 2016, 09:09:15 PM

standing outside Core's gates complaining as loudly as possible

Lost it right there I did, imagining the filthy petulant Toominista/Gavinista rabble indignantly chanting "2MB!! RIGHT FUCKING MEOW!!1!" Cheesy

Quote from: figmentofmyass on January 29, 2016, 09:09:15 PM

Bitcoin XT, Unlimited and Classic will give birth to another 5 fail implementations.

Oh that would be glorious.

The next governance coup attempt appears to be based on convincing the Chinese Bitcoin community that Core are racist sinophobes who don't 'respect China.'

So we get to look forward to Hearn's beatific vision for "Chinese Bitcoin" (ie one operating solely behind the Great Firewall) creating new heights of FUD, chaos and drama, as well as new (local) lows for the price of Bitcoin.

figmentofmyass

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1483

Quote from: calkob on January 28, 2016, 05:15:17 PM

Why does anything new have to have some other frikin stupid name behind it... Huh

why cant Bitcoin core just have 2mb blocks? does it need to be called bitcoin classic,bitcoin new, bitcoin nextyear, bitcoin 2100..... Huh

just watch the epically stagnant development on the Classic repo (and the XT repo before it). these guys can't begin to replace Core -- Toomim thinks he can have Core do everything for him and then simply copy it. https://imgur.com/gallery/wbsxJ

just standing outside Core's gates complaining as loudly as possible. but they can't even establish a facade that they are capable of maintaining bitcoin.

their only power is political (ie argument). and as it becomes more and more clear that this small group of less experienced and less talented developers are wholly incapable of surpassing Core on a technical level, they will continue to push political arguments, resulting in a further splintering among them.

with any hope, Bitcoin XT, Unlimited and Classic will give birth to another 5 fail implementations.

BlindMayorBitcorn

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1115

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on January 29, 2016, 08:50:41 PM

teeming unbanked

*Shakes fist*
iCEBREAKER!!!!!

iCEBREAKER

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1072

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

Quote from: franky1 on January 29, 2016, 02:15:07 AM

blockstream suggests they are all about the code and not the business/politics.. Angry

but, um: PwC Cry

(ill leave you to google it) Cry

Most financially/economically literate adults don't need to "google" PwC.

We know who they are, we know what they do.

PwC knows which way the wind is blowing; it's blowing in the direction of davout's famous maxim.

Quote from: davout on March 09, 2015, 10:33:32 AM

The true value that Bitcoin brings to the table is not "everyone gets to write into the holy ledger", it is instead "everyone gets to benefit from sane and non-inflationary financial instutions whose sanity and honesty are ensured by the holy blockchain". -davout

Does it upset you that the teeming unbanked get to benefit from PwC like financial instutions whose sanity and honesty are ensured by the holy blockchain? Grin

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

blockstream suggests they are all about the code and not the business/politics..

but, um: PwC

(ill leave you to google it)

iCEBREAKER

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1072

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

Quote from: ?? on ??

Adam Back is telling a string of lies on Twitter as I type. Not sure which side has the most liars, Classic or Core?

https://twitter.com/adam3us

In each one of these cases of problematic devs, all you have to do is follow the money. Blockstream must exit core in order for bitcoin to survive.

Name just a single lie Dr. Back has told. It should be easy to pick one, if he's "telling a string" of them.

Oh, that's right. You're obviously very butthurt that @Dan_Pantera, the 500lb gorilla of BTC VCs, has come down squarely on the side of Team Core.

You're so fucking R3KT all the evidence-free hand-waving counter-accusations in the world won't change that hard fact.

https://medium.com/@PanteraCapital/the-governance-of-anarchists-blockchain-letter-january-2016-798842f468de?source=latest---------1

Quote

Bitcoin Classic: in theory, implementing an immediate 2MB change would immediately alleviate block congestion but would require a hard fork. Hard forking carries with it certain systemic risks:

Bitcoins received from before the fork can be spent twice, once on both sides of the fork. This creates a high double-spend risk.
Bitcoins received after the fork are only guaranteed to be spendable on the side of the fork they were received on. This means some
users will have to lose money to restore Bitcoin to a single chain.

In essence, if a hard fork goes bad, it will likely cause large-scale confusion and make Bitcoin incredibly difficult to use until the situation is resolved. There’s also a very real chance of total system failure if a hard fork’s deployment is not well-coordinated across the entire network.

Dan Morehead
Chief Executive Officer
@Dan_Pantera

iCEBREAKER

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1072

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

Quote from: thejaytiesto on January 28, 2016, 12:09:45 PM

I still can't believe some people are supporting these guys with the risk to lose actual talented people like Greg Maxwell and Peter just for the stupid idea of a hard fork to have the blocksize doubled when we don't even necessarily need it now, this feels like a bad dream and I hope it's over soon and Core devs can continue working in a more relaxed environment but I guess it will only keep getting worse so we need to stay alert and remain strong.

You need to grow a thicker hide and accept these populist/demagogic attacks on Bitcoin governance will never end.

Then prepare to keep fighting the entropy, forever.

calkob

hero member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 520

Quote from: Quantus on January 28, 2016, 04:13:41 PM

As soon as I saw the name "bitcoin classic" I instantly identified it for what it is, the name itself is meant to trick people into thinking its the 'real' bitcoin.
Its just another in a long line of banker backed scummy GigaBloatCoin forks meant to appropriate full control of our network so they can run it into the ground ether intentionally or unintentionally.

1st thing i thought of was coke classic, which was ment to do exactlly what you said "make people think it was the real coke" which it was after they made a balls up with the recipe....

calkob

hero member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 520

Why does anything new have to have some other frikin stupid name behind it... Huh

why cant Bitcoin core just have 2mb blocks? does it need to be called bitcoin classic,bitcoin new, bitcoin nextyear, bitcoin 2100..... Huh

Quantus

legendary

Activity: 883

Merit: 1005

As soon as I saw the name "bitcoin classic" I instantly identified it for what it is, the name itself is meant to trick people into thinking its the 'real' bitcoin.
Its just another in a long line of banker backed scummy GigaBloatCoin forks meant to appropriate full control of our network so they can run it into the ground ether intentionally or unintentionally.

worhiper_-_

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

Quote from: gmaxwell on January 28, 2016, 01:58:06 AM

Quote from: Yakamoto on January 28, 2016, 12:24:26 AM

Classic has been losing reliability and credibility, as to my knowledge, the development has been quite stagnant

There may be more development in secret. Rather than having public activity on github they seem to have mostly done code dumps with their initial patches. It certainly seems more dead than even XT did.

I agree that it's shady but I'm curious, would you change your mind if the code was released and it was good? Or does it come down to trust?

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1004

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: thejaytiesto on January 28, 2016, 12:09:45 PM

I still can't believe some people are supporting these guys with the risk to lose actual talented people like Greg Maxwell and Peter just for the stupid idea of a hard fork to have the blocksize doubled when we don't even necessarily need it now, this feels like a bad dream and I hope it's over soon and Core devs can continue working in a more relaxed environment but I guess it will only keep getting worse so we need to stay alert and remain strong.

Everything happens for a reason.

I'm not sure if you don't understand the arguments on the other side of the debate,
or if you simply disagree with them.

HostFat

staff

Activity: 4256

Merit: 1203

I support freedom of choice

Show me the code that Satoshi has wrote before making Bitcoin

Anyway, they are touching (mainly Gavin) very few parts of the code, and this doesn't stop other better devs to come and making other better changes. Wink

pereira4

legendary

Activity: 1610

Merit: 1183

Quote from: HostFat on January 28, 2016, 12:22:29 PM

While I don't think that we will lose them so easily, I want to remember you that we have also lost Satoshi, and this doesn't seem that has stopped the developing of Bitcoin.

If you told me that we are getting people that HAS demonstrated already something of remarkable value like the 2 devs the poster quoted (something like CT and segwit), maybe I would consider it in a serious way, but those guys are lightyears from the Core devs and are literally saying that they want to keep living off Core's github. Those guys have no foundation whatsoever to run the full node.

HostFat

staff

Activity: 4256

Merit: 1203

I support freedom of choice

While I don't think that we will lose them so easily, I want to remember you that we have also lost Satoshi, and this doesn't seem that has stopped the developing of Bitcoin.

thejaytiesto

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1014

I still can't believe some people are supporting these guys with the risk to lose actual talented people like Greg Maxwell and Peter just for the stupid idea of a hard fork to have the blocksize doubled when we don't even necessarily need it now, this feels like a bad dream and I hope it's over soon and Core devs can continue working in a more relaxed environment but I guess it will only keep getting worse so we need to stay alert and remain strong.

HostFat

staff

Activity: 4256

Merit: 1203

I support freedom of choice

Quote from: gmaxwell on January 28, 2016, 01:58:06 AM

Quote from: Yakamoto on January 28, 2016, 12:24:26 AM

Classic has been losing reliability and credibility, as to my knowledge, the development has been quite stagnant

There may be more development in secret. Rather than having public activity on github they seem to have mostly done code dumps with their initial patches. It certainly seems more dead than even XT did.

The secret code

https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/tree/0.11.2

danielW

sr. member

Activity: 277

Merit: 250

Quote from: franky1 on January 28, 2016, 07:53:34 AM

Quote from: Lauda on January 28, 2016, 07:43:48 AM

Quote from: European Central Bank on January 28, 2016, 07:40:27 AM

This'll never end while there's unrest. If the original team want to keep the peace then they need some ideas that satisfy most people. Evidently they are not supplying them right now.

I'd rather say that the 'most people' need to educate themselves better. We should not be implementing worse proposals just because people can't understand the better ones.

Quote from: danielW on January 28, 2016, 07:28:32 AM

Rubbish its not about code its about taking control of Bitcoin. The change was minimal irrelevant in effect, change whos only purpose is to be different then core to get people to use different client. Coinbase said that it wants Bitcoin run by different team led by Gavin.

Exactly. Once we let a political fork succeed, then we might as well move onto some altcoin as Bitcoin's decentralization will start disappearing.

Quote from: _mr_e on January 28, 2016, 07:10:37 AM

The people behind the fork don't matter at all, just like who satoshi is doesn't matter either.

Sure they don't, keep living in that delusion. Who's to say that another fork won't take over from Classic? A fork lead by the banks, because the people behind the code don't matter right?

lol if core thinks a fork is about losing control if not forking, how about core be the one that do the fork then!.. that way core take the control..win win for core
as for the doomsday scenario of alternate chains.. if consensus has not agreed to 2mb. then blocks larger then 1mb will get orphaned.. Lauda please learn about orphans.. as it will teach you that there wont be 2 chains
here is a bit of animation

A and B are 1mb miners. c is >1mb miner
scenario is that consensus has not been reached to be 2mb.

Its like trying to find the end of a rainbow, the closer you come the further it gets. Satisfying these demands is useless because they will always change as the fundamental idea is to gain power.

If core proposed 2mb hardfork in December, they probably would have said thats just not enough and we need 4mb hard fork.

European Central Bank

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1087

Quote from: Lauda on January 28, 2016, 07:43:48 AM

I'd rather say that the 'most people' need to educate themselves better. We should not be implementing worse proposals just because people can't understand the better ones.

I can see the sense of that. In that case it's also the original team's job to put their point across in a better and more convincing way. If bitcoin has the possibility of spiraling off down a path they think will be disastrous then explain it in a way that regular guys can understand. If it's that cut and dried why is there so much noise about this?

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

Quote from: Lauda on January 28, 2016, 07:43:48 AM

Quote from: European Central Bank on January 28, 2016, 07:40:27 AM

This'll never end while there's unrest. If the original team want to keep the peace then they need some ideas that satisfy most people. Evidently they are not supplying them right now.

I'd rather say that the 'most people' need to educate themselves better. We should not be implementing worse proposals just because people can't understand the better ones.

Quote from: danielW on January 28, 2016, 07:28:32 AM

Rubbish its not about code its about taking control of Bitcoin. The change was minimal irrelevant in effect, change whos only purpose is to be different then core to get people to use different client. Coinbase said that it wants Bitcoin run by different team led by Gavin.

Exactly. Once we let a political fork succeed, then we might as well move onto some altcoin as Bitcoin's decentralization will start disappearing.

Quote from: _mr_e on January 28, 2016, 07:10:37 AM

The people behind the fork don't matter at all, just like who satoshi is doesn't matter either.

Sure they don't, keep living in that delusion. Who's to say that another fork won't take over from Classic? A fork lead by the banks, because the people behind the code don't matter right?

lol if core thinks a fork is about losing control if not forking, how about core be the one that do the fork then!.. that way core take the control..win win for core
as for the doomsday scenario of alternate chains.. if consensus has not agreed to 2mb. then blocks larger then 1mb will get orphaned.. Lauda please learn about orphans.. as it will teach you that there wont be 2 chains
here is a bit of animation

A and B are 1mb miners. c is >1mb miner
scenario is that consensus has not been reached to be 2mb.

Topic: "Bitcoin classic", brought up by literal crooks (Read 2648 times)