Topic: Bitcoin Core or XT? POLL - page 4. (Read 12702 times)

That's why I support the idea of getting rid of the Proof-of-Work mining altogether and replacing it with Proof-of-Stake. Right now miners are parasites to the network. The only owners of the network are actual bitcoin holders.

It's disheartening to see that even a miner, the people I would expect to have at least some technical knowledge and be capable of making an informed decision, can get this concept mixed up so easily.  Why is it so difficult for people to comprehend?  You will only be processing the transactions that are there, same as you do now.  It's not like there's going to be an extra 50 million transactions overnight just because the fork goes ahead.  In future, there will likely be more transactions and the network needs to be able to handle that.  The extra users will be including fees with their transactions if they want them processed urgently, just like users do now, so there will be more revenue coming in to help pay for any additional bandwidth costs. 

it will take years before there will be 20MB blocks...

I thought Gavin's changes would only make 20MB blocks available when needed (years from now)? Most blocks will remain unchanged by the fork.

I voted core...

But I am old school.
I am also a professional miner.
If 20MB blocks go through, I will have to shut my node down entirely and go mine another coin.
In my world, it's the core or nothing at all... whilst I want to remain in Bitcoin, I won't be able to save my earnings and will be auto-sold.
Put more downwards selling pressure on the network... I'm just one miner, though not the only one.
I also never lost a satoshi and been in this business for 3-4 years now.
Then I will transfer the coin leftover to a savings coin... like DigiByte.
If anything, this fork will only hurt Bitcoin but Gavin's skin flute players won't hear anything else.

Not just me who pays for their bandwidth... the entire world is going towards a pay-per-bandwidth model.
At $75 for 20GB, I would need 3 separate internet connections minimum and pay around $400 a month on internet alone for blockchain upkeep.
More wasteful than the power used to power the network...
So instead of making power companies richer, now miners will make ISP's richer too.
Other coins don't force me into the red, why would Bitcoin?  #DestructionOfBitcoinViaFIAT

This means I'll go mine another coin and run THEIR core.
No fucking way I can afford $1,000 of internet when it costs me $75 right now.... just to upkeep the core, fuck that.
I'm, also Canadian, so trying to screw over Chinese miners you fuck over everyone who mines.

To me, the devs are nothing but power trippers looking for something to do, to establish their usefulness.
Gavin's just another thoughtless brain dead liberal trying to play follow the leader.
Just like union cock suckers, no one matters to them but themselves and their skin flute orchestra.

GO USE OTHER COINS!!!  BITCOIN IS TOO FUCKING SLOW!!!!
Then you will see that the Btcoin block size is fine the way it is and that Bitcoin really sucks as a crypto.

common misconception:

"20MB is too big of a jump"



answer:

It's just a maximum block-size limit. It does not mean we are going to instantly start making 20mb blocks. Blocks will continue growing at their current pace. This is perhaps the biggest misconception that we will somehow suddenly start seeing 20mb blocks just because the limit is raised.

Voting ends today

Some miners comment here:
http://cointelegraph.com/news/114481/chinese-exchanges-reject-gavin-andresens-20-mb-block-size-increase

That would be cool, but at the end of the day the miners and node providers are those that make Bitcoin viable. Without them the rest of the votes wouldn't mean anything. I would still like to know both sides.

You have been had.

As if, heh.  Running XT at the moment is a token gesture unless you're interested in it for other reasons.  The update for the increased blocksize hasn't gone live yet.  I'm sure you'd like the current numbers to be representative of support for the fork, but they aren't.  I can assure you this topic isn't going anywhere.

So 18 nodes are running XT's latest version

That's less than 1% of the network. So what's the fuss about ?

At this point, we should stop talking about Gavin's project to fork Bitcoin to increase blocksize, because it doesn't look like it's gonna happen.

Let's move on to more relevant topics.

I think this is the page you're looking for: https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/nodes/?q=/Bitcoin%20XT:0.10.0/

I don't know how they ever expect to get 90% when +18% are running a version older than 9.3.

So by now not even 16% of the network updated to Gavins' altcoin.

https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/dashboard/?days=90

There won't be two chains when voting occurs, it happens after the fork. The voting happens before the fork to determine whether to fork or not. Thus, this is not a valid way to vote since the fork will only happen after consensus is reached.

When it comes to software upgrade, the newbie users are always eager to upgrade to the latest version, while the service and infrastructure providers are the least eager to upgrade due to stability and compatibility concerns

The vote is quite straight forward: You just dump the coins on the chain that you don't support, and send the coin value on that chain to dust 

Has this system actually been implemented into Bitcoin yet? I think that would be a great way to vote, except instead of having more weight for more coins, everyone should have only one vote and that they all be equally weighted (not sure how this would be implemented though). This could ensure consensus.

Bitcoin has the technical capability to have a provably fair stakeholder voting on its very block chain itself. I can sign my vote with the private key to my X% of bitcoins and publish the vote with the signature. If everyone did it then we could come to a consensus with decentralized and provably fair means. I wonder why hasn't this been put up very much. Who gives a shit what miners and companies think. It's the number of bitcoins that you have which should count as a vote. If a miner wants to vote then they should use their coins to vote. If a company X wants to vote for Bitcoin XT then they should buy some bitcoins to make their vote count.

I just didn't see any connection or relation between elite super rich and bitcoin XT. and yes, I thought that major diff is just switch of block size. Is there some official announcement or discussion? It seems that, that nobody knows what exactly is happening.)