Topic: Bitcoin Classic Roadmap annonced - page 3. (Read 2642 times)

No, if they're delivering what they say they are, they're not simply copy+pasting. As things stand right now, I believe Core will succeed, and not Classic (at least in short-medium term), but none of us holds the truth, so what I'm saying might be wrong in a few months/years. As I said, we'll see what happens So far we only know XT failed in implementing some of its changes

You need to take a look at their contributions in the past 12 months. Classic is a group of people who have lately done barely any work at all. If you exclude Jeff and Gavin you're left with mostly random people.

Claiming that you've developed something that you 'copy-pasted' is something else entirely.

Those are not exactly supportive of an secondary implementation 'altcoin', are they? [1]

---

---

[1] Elaboration.

sharing is caring.

Because Jeff and Gavin are inferior developers. Riiiiiiiight

Where do these morons keep coming from?

Nah, I've noticed plenty of "...Classic Rekt" etc hanging on this board without being moved anywhere.

Have you not noticed that XT/Classic/BU threads get moved somewhere?

If by "intend to deliver" you mean wait for Core to do most of the work and copy-paste it, then I agree.

Nope. This board is just right.

This is what we need: alternatives. Discussion. Finally these guys have something to say about what they intend to deliver. They're not aiming low, that for sure... And that can be either good or bad. We'll see about that in the future.

Their roadmap seems interesting, but I don't think it is complete... Hope they start talking more about it in the next few days. The roadmap is also late. It's coming after a pretty solid roadmap from the Bitcoin Core team... But better late than never

First it was XT breaking through, now Classic. Let's see where this goes. I'm definitely curious.

You've opened the thread in the wrong section. The roadmap is not really interesting. The absence of dates is not surprising.

Thank you Classic for providing us a road map that matches the vision we all originally bought into.   If the community can break through all the censorship and propaganda coming from Blockstream and their developers maybe Bitcoin can still have a future.

Garbage product by inferior developers pushing an even more garbage agenda

Sounds good on paper. Hopefully you guys succeed and everyone becomes rich.

-1

The result is going to be? Full 2MB blocks



Cutting out absent miners and users, how kind.



is this a joke?


A conference? Wouldn't a golf tourney be more appropriate, considering the fact there's 0 skilled developers on the Classic team?

https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/documentation/blob/master/roadmap/roadmap2016.md

Note: This is our initial roadmap proposal. We will run this by miners, companies and users for feedback, before it is finalized.

Bitcoin Classic 2016 Roadmap

The Bitcoin Classic team will help realize Satoshi’s vision of making Bitcoin scale into a global peer to peer cash system, and not just a settlement network. We believe on-chain scaling is crucial for the long term health of Bitcoin. On-chain scaling maximizes transaction volume, whose fees are needed to replace miner rewards on the medium to long term scale.

Our preferred strategy for on-chain scaling, is to eliminate the need for blocks to be synced within seconds. We will implement solutions that make continuous block syncing possible. Instead of transmitting the data for a new block all at once when it is found, we can significantly optimize current bandwidth by sending data during the full ten-minute interval between blocks. This will enable the Bitcoin network to scale to significant new levels, without endangering decentralization. We will scale using a 3-pronged approach:

Phase 1 (Q1-Q2)

Urgently resolve issue of blocks being almost full

Implement BIP 109: Raise block size limit from 1MB to 2MB.
Hard fork with 75% activation threshold (750 of 1000 blocks), 28 day activation grace period.
Software based on Bitcoin Core implementation 0.11.2 and 0.12.0.
Note: 0.11.2 is already finished and available for download here.

Phase 2 (Q2-Q3)

Eliminate the need for blocks to be sent within seconds

Reduce the effect of block propagation times on orphan rates (lost miner income)
De-emphasize block size as an obstacle for scaling and open up potential for on-chain transaction throughput gains using several improvements (listed below).
Optimizations for bandwidth constrained nodes via improvements to the P2P layer
Note: We intend to discuss various solutions such as the ones listed below and pick the best ones.

Parallel validation of blocks (theoretically reduces the profitability of excessive-sized block attacks).
Headers-first mining (largely nullifies excessive-sized block attacks).
Thin blocks: Blocks refer to transactions that have been well propagated rather than including them, allowing for minimization of bandwidth use.
Weak blocks: allow miners to pre-announce the blocks they are working on, to minimize the data sent once a block is found.
Validate Once: Transactions that have been validated when entering a node’s memory pool do not need to be revalidated when included in a block (speeds up block validation).

Phase 3 (Q3-Q4)

Make the block size limit dynamic

Note: This phase will only happen when miners & companies confirm Phase 2 successfully addressed their blocksize concerns.

Use a variation of Steven Pair’s/BitPay proposal. Validation cost of a block must be less than a small multiple of the average cost over the last difficulty adjustment period
Simplified version of Segregated Witness from Core, when it is available

Technical details

A more technical version of the roadmap can be found here

Conference

We plan to hold an on-chain scaling conference soon, where these and future scaling solutions & concerns can be discussed among the community.