Bitcoin Constitution - Looking for feedback

RocketSingh

legendary

Activity: 1662

Merit: 1050

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 06:51:35 PM

Quote from: RocketSingh on February 23, 2016, 05:59:31 PM

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:39:23 PM

The start using the word correctly.

I am.

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:39:23 PM

Follow up question. Do you understand what constitution means?

I do. Tell me what does Consensus mean?

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:39:23 PM

The conventional definition of a constitution is as a regulating mechanism of an entity through the use of violence or exclusionary methods (judicial system, LEA, exclusion.of membership, depriving access, etc), regardless of whether it is in a decentralized or centralized society. You talk about voluntary, shared success, etc like this is a 'constitution' for a My Little Pony clubhouse.

You failed to understand bitcoin. Not unusual for people brought up and brainwashed in a centralized hierarchical society.

Oh, I see. Since you can no longer articulate an argument, you immediately hide behind "you are brainwashed so you don't understand", hoping desperately that no one will see that you actually have no clue to what is being discussed here. But it's not unusual to see people to talk about things they don't even understand, arrogantly at that. And then hiding behind words like shared success, voluntary and now, consensus. Oh, the irony.

The fact, is, if you understood the concept of constitution, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Period.

As expected, you dodged the question, what does Consensus mean? Once you try to answer that logically, u'll start feeling where the concept of a Constitution coming from.

DropsOfJupiter

member

Activity: 113

Merit: 10

Quote from: RocketSingh on February 23, 2016, 05:59:31 PM

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:39:23 PM

The start using the word correctly.

I am.

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:39:23 PM

Follow up question. Do you understand what constitution means?

I do. Tell me what does Consensus mean?

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:39:23 PM

The conventional definition of a constitution is as a regulating mechanism of an entity through the use of violence or exclusionary methods (judicial system, LEA, exclusion.of membership, depriving access, etc), regardless of whether it is in a decentralized or centralized society. You talk about voluntary, shared success, etc like this is a 'constitution' for a My Little Pony clubhouse.

You failed to understand bitcoin. Not unusual for people brought up and brainwashed in a centralized hierarchical society.

Oh, I see. Since you can no longer articulate an argument, you immediately hide behind "you are brainwashed so you don't understand", hoping desperately that no one will see that you actually have no clue to what is being discussed here. But it's not unusual to see people to talk about things they don't even understand, arrogantly at that. And then hiding behind words like shared success, voluntary and now, consensus. Oh, the irony.

The fact, is, if you understood the concept of constitution, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Period.

RocketSingh

legendary

Activity: 1662

Merit: 1050

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:39:23 PM

The start using the word correctly.

I am.

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:39:23 PM

Follow up question. Do you understand what constitution means?

I do. Tell me what does Consensus mean?

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:39:23 PM

The conventional definition of a constitution is as a regulating mechanism of an entity through the use of violence or exclusionary methods (judicial system, LEA, exclusion.of membership, depriving access, etc), regardless of whether it is in a decentralized or centralized society. You talk about voluntary, shared success, etc like this is a 'constitution' for a My Little Pony clubhouse.

You failed to understand bitcoin. Not unusual for people brought up and brainwashed in a centralized hierarchical society.

DropsOfJupiter

member

Activity: 113

Merit: 10

Quote from: RocketSingh on February 23, 2016, 05:31:12 PM

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:26:57 PM

Do you understand what arbitrary means?

I do.

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:26:57 PM

If nothing can be enforced, in what universe is a "proposed constitution" practical?

In bitcoin universe. The conventional definition of enforcement as seen by centralized society does not apply here. People do not run nodes, because they are enforced. They run it, because they want to voluntarily support the bitcoin network and enjoys a 'shared success'.

The start using the word correctly.
Follow up question. Do you understand what constitution means?

The conventional definition of a constitution is as a regulating mechanism of an entity through the use of violence or exclusionary methods (judicial system, LEA, exclusion.of membership, depriving access, etc), regardless of whether it is in a decentralized or centralized society. You talk about voluntary, shared success, etc like this is a 'constitution' for a My Little Pony clubhouse.

RocketSingh

legendary

Activity: 1662

Merit: 1050

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:26:57 PM

Do you understand what arbitrary means?

I do.

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:26:57 PM

If nothing can be enforced, in what universe is a "proposed constitution" practical?

In bitcoin universe. The conventional definition of enforcement as seen by centralized society does not apply here. People run nodes, not because they are enforced. They run it, because they want to voluntarily support the bitcoin network and enjoys a 'shared success'.

DropsOfJupiter

member

Activity: 113

Merit: 10

Quote from: RocketSingh on February 23, 2016, 05:11:51 PM

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:07:01 PM

Quote from: upal on February 23, 2016, 04:45:45 PM

Quote from: CounterEntropy on February 23, 2016, 05:18:57 AM

One of the best proposal I have seen in recent times to end the consensus controversy. Have you tried to post it in the bitcoin-dev mailing list?

bitcoin-dev mailing list owner asked me to post it in bitcoin-discuss mailing list first. So, it is there - http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-discuss/2016-February/000080.html.

Quote from: piotr_n on February 23, 2016, 04:20:19 PM

So how exactly is this constitution suppose to be enforced?
Why would anyone obey it?

Neither it needs to be enforced, nor anyone needs to obey it. It'll do good as an unofficially defined process for consensus resolution. And once, a hard fork proposal passes through the process stated in this constitution, it'll have the majority of hash power with majority of coins backing it. The majority of hash power with the backing of the majority coins is what makes the longest chain ticking in bitcoin ecosystem. Everyone else 'obeys' it.

So what is the incentive for anyone to even follow or obey a constitution that, in your words, no one needs to obey and is unenforceable?

Do u understand that u just read the first sentence of a 3 line statement and made an arbitrary comment? He has already explained why the consensus does not require to be enforced. In fact, in bitcoin network, nothing can be enforced. People are part of it because it benefits them and this proposed constitution fits very well to this ideology.

Do you understand what arbitrary means?
If nothing can be enforced, in what universe is a "proposed constitution" practical?

RocketSingh

legendary

Activity: 1662

Merit: 1050

Quote from: DropsOfJupiter on February 23, 2016, 05:07:01 PM

Quote from: upal on February 23, 2016, 04:45:45 PM

Quote from: CounterEntropy on February 23, 2016, 05:18:57 AM

One of the best proposal I have seen in recent times to end the consensus controversy. Have you tried to post it in the bitcoin-dev mailing list?

bitcoin-dev mailing list owner asked me to post it in bitcoin-discuss mailing list first. So, it is there - http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-discuss/2016-February/000080.html.

Quote from: piotr_n on February 23, 2016, 04:20:19 PM

So how exactly is this constitution suppose to be enforced?
Why would anyone obey it?

Neither it needs to be enforced, nor anyone needs to obey it. It'll do good as an unofficially defined process for consensus resolution. And once, a hard fork proposal passes through the process stated in this constitution, it'll have the majority of hash power with majority of coins backing it. The majority of hash power with the backing of the majority coins is what makes the longest chain ticking in bitcoin ecosystem. Everyone else 'obeys' it.

So what is the incentive for anyone to even follow or obey a constitution that, in your words, no one needs to obey and is unenforceable?

Do u understand that u just read the first sentence of a 3 line statement and made an arbitrary comment? He has already explained why the consensus does not require to be enforced. In fact, in bitcoin network, nothing can be enforced. People are part of it because it benefits them and this proposed constitution fits very well to this ideology.

DropsOfJupiter

member

Activity: 113

Merit: 10

Quote from: upal on February 23, 2016, 04:45:45 PM

Quote from: CounterEntropy on February 23, 2016, 05:18:57 AM

One of the best proposal I have seen in recent times to end the consensus controversy. Have you tried to post it in the bitcoin-dev mailing list?

bitcoin-dev mailing list owner asked me to post it in bitcoin-discuss mailing list first. So, it is there - http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-discuss/2016-February/000080.html.

Quote from: piotr_n on February 23, 2016, 04:20:19 PM

So how exactly is this constitution suppose to be enforced?
Why would anyone obey it?

Neither it needs to be enforced, nor anyone needs to obey it. It'll do good as an unofficially defined process for consensus resolution. And once, a hard fork proposal passes through the process stated in this constitution, it'll have the majority of hash power with majority of coins backing it. The majority of hash power with the backing of the majority coins is what makes the longest chain ticking in bitcoin ecosystem. Everyone else 'obeys' it.

So what is the incentive for anyone to even follow or obey a constitution that, in your words, no one needs to obey and is unenforceable?

DropsOfJupiter

member

Activity: 113

Merit: 10

Quote from: piotr_n on February 23, 2016, 04:20:19 PM

I think it means to move the power away from the miners, towards some smart people Wink

Define smart people.

Quote from: piotr_n on February 23, 2016, 04:20:19 PM

So how exactly is this constitution suppose to be enforced?
Why would anyone obey it?

Threats of state violence* naturally.

upal

full member

Activity: 165

Merit: 102

Quote from: CounterEntropy on February 23, 2016, 05:18:57 AM

One of the best proposal I have seen in recent times to end the consensus controversy. Have you tried to post it in the bitcoin-dev mailing list?

bitcoin-dev mailing list owner asked me to post it in bitcoin-discuss mailing list first. So, it is there - http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-discuss/2016-February/000080.html.

Quote from: piotr_n on February 23, 2016, 04:20:19 PM

So how exactly is this constitution suppose to be enforced?
Why would anyone obey it?

Neither it needs to be enforced, nor anyone needs to obey it. It'll do good as an unofficially defined process for consensus resolution. And once, a hard fork proposal passes through the process stated in this constitution, it'll have the majority of hash power with majority of coins backing it. The majority of hash power with the backing of the majority coins is what makes the longest chain ticking in bitcoin ecosystem. Everyone else 'obeys' it.

piotr_n

legendary

Activity: 2053

Merit: 1356

aka tonikt

Quote from: monsterer on February 23, 2016, 04:32:04 PM

Quote from: piotr_n on February 23, 2016, 04:20:19 PM

I think it means to move the power away from the miners, towards some smart people Wink

We need a proof of smart?

For many people it is same as proof of wealth

monsterer

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1007

Quote from: piotr_n on February 23, 2016, 04:20:19 PM

I think it means to move the power away from the miners, towards some smart people Wink

We need a proof of smart?

piotr_n

legendary

Activity: 2053

Merit: 1356

aka tonikt

Quote from: monsterer on February 23, 2016, 11:03:34 AM

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 22, 2016, 10:47:58 PM

We should work to reduce the influence of miners. Selfish miners are part of the problem of long confirmation times. As block rewards move towards fees rather than the halving finders rewards, mining operations may return to a byproduct of running a full node.

Miners create consensus. You suggest we move away from consensus, and into what? Divergent chaos?

I think it means to move the power away from the miners, towards some smart people Wink

So how exactly is this constitution suppose to be enforced?
Why would anyone obey it?

monsterer

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 22, 2016, 10:47:58 PM

We should work to reduce the influence of miners. Selfish miners are part of the problem of long confirmation times. As block rewards move towards fees rather than the halving finders rewards, mining operations may return to a byproduct of running a full node.

Miners create consensus. You suggest we move away from consensus, and into what? Divergent chaos?

jl777

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1134

Quote from: MarbleBoss on February 23, 2016, 05:49:41 AM

Quote from: jl777 on February 22, 2016, 07:27:44 PM

You speak of blasphemy.

To contaminate the separation of mining and owning BTC is violation of the sacred PoW commandments

You will be called a PoS zealot if to require BTC. Next thing you know you would want it based on some sort of PoS basis. Only miners are supposed to have any powers to decide.

Why not require some special PoW calculations that cost 21BTC? That way the miners who keep selling all their BTC will still have the total power to decide everything

James

Are you on a high? Is this how u criticize a technical proposal?

sorry, just experienced a hard lesson in the controlling interests having and using that control

my post was intended to be humorous, but i guess i loses effect without the soundtrack

MarbleBoss

full member

Activity: 169

Merit: 110

Quote from: jl777 on February 22, 2016, 07:27:44 PM

You speak of blasphemy.

To contaminate the separation of mining and owning BTC is violation of the sacred PoW commandments

You will be called a PoS zealot if to require BTC. Next thing you know you would want it based on some sort of PoS basis. Only miners are supposed to have any powers to decide.

Why not require some special PoW calculations that cost 21BTC? That way the miners who keep selling all their BTC will still have the total power to decide everything

James

Are you on a high? Is this how u criticize a technical proposal?

CounterEntropy

full member

Activity: 214

Merit: 278

Quote from: upal on February 22, 2016, 06:49:59 PM

In the light of recent disagreements that is going on regarding consensus, I thought of if we can define a mathematically verifiable process to achieve the same. Hence I have put up my idea in details at http://upalc.com/bitcoin-constitution.php.

One of the best proposal I have seen in recent times to end the consensus controversy. Have you tried to post it in the bitcoin-dev mailing list?

jl777

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1134

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 23, 2016, 04:17:16 AM

I suggested that with the block generation time reduction,

Also BIP0009 could reduce the need for a hard fork.

This document specifies a proposed change to the semantics of the 'version' field in Bitcoin blocks, allowing multiple backward-compatible changes (further called "soft forks") to be deployed in parallel. It relies on interpreting the version field as a bit vector, where each bit can be used to track an independent change. These are tallied each retarget period. Once the consensus change succeeds or times out, there is a "fallow" pause after which the bit can be reused for later changes.

the issue is not the technical one of getting the hardfork, but an economic one of how to convince people to vote for something that is against their economic interest

Jet Cash

legendary

Activity: 2828

Merit: 2472

https://JetCash.com

I suggested that with the block generation time reduction,

Also BIP0009 could reduce the need for a hard fork.

This document specifies a proposed change to the semantics of the 'version' field in Bitcoin blocks, allowing multiple backward-compatible changes (further called "soft forks") to be deployed in parallel. It relies on interpreting the version field as a bit vector, where each bit can be used to track an independent change. These are tallied each retarget period. Once the consensus change succeeds or times out, there is a "fallow" pause after which the bit can be reused for later changes.

jl777

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1134

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 22, 2016, 10:47:58 PM

We should work to reduce the influence of miners. Selfish miners are part of the problem of long confirmation times. As block rewards move towards fees rather than the halving finders rewards, mining operations may return to a byproduct of running a full node.

A bit too late I am afraid.

Any new hard fork is chosen by the miners, so how exactly is there a path from a miner determined process to one that isnt?

I am not debating what is better, just about the reality of the math. It is usually best to not fight against the math.

Maybe you can trick them to adopt something that appears neutral or even in their favor, but it isnt but highly doubtful they will miss that. One possibility is a tradeoff of giving miners even more in the short term, in exchange for less influence after this bakshish period

James

Topic: Bitcoin Constitution - Looking for feedback (Read 1639 times)