Bitcoin Core or XT, you dont have to choose NOW. Dont bother with the poll.... - page 2.

BitUsher

legendary

Activity: 994

Merit: 1035

Quote from: canth on June 26, 2015, 07:43:44 PM

BitcoinXT is open source - the same as Bitcoin Core. Every change committed change is subject to review and comment, so there would be no way for a developer even if they were the sole committer to make some sort of change that would be implemented without review.

If BitcoinXT becomes the majority and then something needs to be changed, it'll take months to move between soft or hard forks. It'll be planned and we'll know the level of consensus amongst nodes months in advance.

In short, there's no easy option for bitcoin devs to just make a fickle or odd change to the network without a chance for other devs to review and users to reject.

As Far as I am aware there are only 2 developers that are giving approval to the blocksize update in XT, while at least 5 developers have to come to consensus with Bitcoin core. XT could certainly continue merging contributions made from the ~304 developers who work on core, but there would be a new precedent set that we should ignore the consensus process with BIP on core and simply fork the main repository if we cannot get agreement.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with Gavin and Hearn's ability or right to fork core as that is how open source works and ultimately the miners and full nodes will decide which fork to use. I do find it revealing that Gavin decided to discuss the XT solution to bypass consensus before he submitted a BIP proposal. He must have expected disagreement and is using XT to leverage for a change to core.

From the looks of it we may see a few developers walk away when consensus is reached which will be bad for everyone because all of them have made great contributions in the past.

I look forward to adjustments in the proposed BIP's or new ones that we all can rally behind. We need to start listening to each other a bit more and addressing each others concerns. Perhaps if Gavin's proposal could be merged with Garziks and there are other changes proposed that address some of the concerns with centralization or giving to much control to the miners.

canth

legendary

Activity: 1442

Merit: 1001

Quote from: SebastianJu on June 26, 2015, 07:32:59 AM

Quote from: canth on June 25, 2015, 08:06:45 AM

Quote from: SebastianJu on June 23, 2015, 07:23:24 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

How about not forking Bitcoin at all since this is not an imminent issue. IF transaction numbers per block keep increasing at the rapid speed they have been recently it will take 2 years to start hitting 1 mb per block. No reason to implement a fork that will cause people to lose Bitcoins until it is absolutely necessary, keep the code on the side until then. Why is there so much haste to make a change that isn't needed for 2 years Huh

The majority of Bitcoin developers agree with this statement, the developer of XT decided to make his own version of Bitcoin so he could control Bitcoin's code without needing consent from anyone else.

http://cointelegraph.com/news/114426/andresen-will-shift-efforts-to-bitcoin-fork-if-no-consensus-reached-on-block-size

Exactly... your last paragraph is what i dont get in this whole discussion. Why are bitcoiners so fast in giving away "their" cryptocurrency to a private company? Its interesting to see but somehow strange when you know the libertarian ideas of bitcoin in the beginning.

How is it giving anything away? Whether it's Bitcoin Core or a fork of Bitcoin Core everyone has access to github, everyone can review the source code and any changes introduced. If BitcoinXT code ends up being more popular, do you think that the existing Bitcoin Core devs will stick to their guns and maintain a platform no one uses? No way, they'll merge the desired features into Bitcoin Core and that will be the end of the argument, back to square one again.

Really? I think the whole point of gavin extorting his will is that he can decide what will be done. So you are sure that the bitcoin xt wallet, and so the bitcoin blockchain, will not be decided by him and his friends? You know he wanted tainting and other things before, now he might see his chance to take over the development. I mean bitcoiners has chosen then. And there was a thread about his milestone plans where users wrote that they really dont like what he is planning. I didnt understand what it was about and didnt want to spend so much time in it. But i think even the way how he will switch shows what he wants.

Yes, of course people can switch back. Though im not sure what will happen if he implemented something and a couple blocks with a bad change were running. How many users will switch away from his blockchain then? I mean its a financial instrument and getting back coins you spent is nice, but not getting coins you got in these blocks is no fun.

Let me know where im wrong, its not that im a pro in that area.

BitcoinXT is open source - the same as Bitcoin Core. Every change committed change is subject to review and comment, so there would be no way for a developer even if they were the sole committer to make some sort of change that would be implemented without review.

If BitcoinXT becomes the majority and then something needs to be changed, it'll take months to move between soft or hard forks. It'll be planned and we'll know the level of consensus amongst nodes months in advance.

In short, there's no easy option for bitcoin devs to just make a fickle or odd change to the network without a chance for other devs to review and users to reject.

coinut

full member

Activity: 253

Merit: 100

was trying to catch up with the bitcoin core / xt situation and this blog post was a good read check it out

BitTorrent protocol creator Bram Cohen wrote in a blog post titled Bitcoin's Ironic Crisis

https://medium.com/@bramcohen/bitcoin-s-ironic-crisis-32226a85e39f

I share his opinion on this one.

i will quote his conclusion here -

Conclusion
What should happen, in short, is nothing. There should be no increase to the block size limit. There should be no attempt to keep transaction fees from hitting a market rate. The block size limit is a good thing. Real transaction fees will be a good thing. Any changes to the block size limit will hurt both of those, create a significant risk of major disaster, and damage the credibility of Bitcoin as a reliable system. The best thing for everybody involved would be for the proposed changes to be simply dropped, and Bitcoin developers to get on with making proper technical solutions rather than hacky patches.

The current proposals for raising the block size are reckless, unnecessary, and potentially disastrous. Perhaps it is not nice of me to put it this way, but this is not a game. There is real money and real business on the line, and the people who are affected and have say in the matter should know what’s going on.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 3000

Terminated.

Quote from: anderson00673 on May 31, 2015, 06:50:35 PM

Thanks guys, there is an awful lot of FUD out there and we need more posts like this. I was very alarmed at first but after reading more details about what is going on I have come to understand that the issue is not as nuclear as I first thought.

Actually no and this post won't accomplish anything.

Quote

You can sell your coins of weaker chain : NO you WONT, i can tell you no exchange will support a weaker chain and risking their business

I don't think that it is incorrect. First you assume that no individuals are going to want to buy coins, secondly you just generalized something.
I've actually seen a list of businesses that reject the fork, which included an exchange or two(?).

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

Quote from: canth on June 25, 2015, 08:06:45 AM

Quote from: SebastianJu on June 23, 2015, 07:23:24 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

How about not forking Bitcoin at all since this is not an imminent issue. IF transaction numbers per block keep increasing at the rapid speed they have been recently it will take 2 years to start hitting 1 mb per block. No reason to implement a fork that will cause people to lose Bitcoins until it is absolutely necessary, keep the code on the side until then. Why is there so much haste to make a change that isn't needed for 2 years Huh

The majority of Bitcoin developers agree with this statement, the developer of XT decided to make his own version of Bitcoin so he could control Bitcoin's code without needing consent from anyone else.

http://cointelegraph.com/news/114426/andresen-will-shift-efforts-to-bitcoin-fork-if-no-consensus-reached-on-block-size

Exactly... your last paragraph is what i dont get in this whole discussion. Why are bitcoiners so fast in giving away "their" cryptocurrency to a private company? Its interesting to see but somehow strange when you know the libertarian ideas of bitcoin in the beginning.

How is it giving anything away? Whether it's Bitcoin Core or a fork of Bitcoin Core everyone has access to github, everyone can review the source code and any changes introduced. If BitcoinXT code ends up being more popular, do you think that the existing Bitcoin Core devs will stick to their guns and maintain a platform no one uses? No way, they'll merge the desired features into Bitcoin Core and that will be the end of the argument, back to square one again.

Really? I think the whole point of gavin extorting his will is that he can decide what will be done. So you are sure that the bitcoin xt wallet, and so the bitcoin blockchain, will not be decided by him and his friends? You know he wanted tainting and other things before, now he might see his chance to take over the development. I mean bitcoiners has chosen then. And there was a thread about his milestone plans where users wrote that they really dont like what he is planning. I didnt understand what it was about and didnt want to spend so much time in it. But i think even the way how he will switch shows what he wants.

Yes, of course people can switch back. Though im not sure what will happen if he implemented something and a couple blocks with a bad change were running. How many users will switch away from his blockchain then? I mean its a financial instrument and getting back coins you spent is nice, but not getting coins you got in these blocks is no fun.

Let me know where im wrong, its not that im a pro in that area.

canth

legendary

Activity: 1442

Merit: 1001

Quote from: SebastianJu on June 23, 2015, 07:23:24 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

How about not forking Bitcoin at all since this is not an imminent issue. IF transaction numbers per block keep increasing at the rapid speed they have been recently it will take 2 years to start hitting 1 mb per block. No reason to implement a fork that will cause people to lose Bitcoins until it is absolutely necessary, keep the code on the side until then. Why is there so much haste to make a change that isn't needed for 2 years Huh

The majority of Bitcoin developers agree with this statement, the developer of XT decided to make his own version of Bitcoin so he could control Bitcoin's code without needing consent from anyone else.

http://cointelegraph.com/news/114426/andresen-will-shift-efforts-to-bitcoin-fork-if-no-consensus-reached-on-block-size

Exactly... your last paragraph is what i dont get in this whole discussion. Why are bitcoiners so fast in giving away "their" cryptocurrency to a private company? Its interesting to see but somehow strange when you know the libertarian ideas of bitcoin in the beginning.

How is it giving anything away? Whether it's Bitcoin Core or a fork of Bitcoin Core everyone has access to github, everyone can review the source code and any changes introduced. If BitcoinXT code ends up being more popular, do you think that the existing Bitcoin Core devs will stick to their guns and maintain a platform no one uses? No way, they'll merge the desired features into Bitcoin Core and that will be the end of the argument, back to square one again.

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

Quote from: ?? on ??

How about not forking Bitcoin at all since this is not an imminent issue. IF transaction numbers per block keep increasing at the rapid speed they have been recently it will take 2 years to start hitting 1 mb per block. No reason to implement a fork that will cause people to lose Bitcoins until it is absolutely necessary, keep the code on the side until then. Why is there so much haste to make a change that isn't needed for 2 years Huh

The majority of Bitcoin developers agree with this statement, the developer of XT decided to make his own version of Bitcoin so he could control Bitcoin's code without needing consent from anyone else.

http://cointelegraph.com/news/114426/andresen-will-shift-efforts-to-bitcoin-fork-if-no-consensus-reached-on-block-size

Exactly... your last paragraph is what i dont get in this whole discussion. Why are bitcoiners so fast in giving away "their" cryptocurrency to a private company? Its interesting to see but somehow strange when you know the libertarian ideas of bitcoin in the beginning.

BitUsher

legendary

Activity: 994

Merit: 1035

Quote from: F2Pool admin Wang Chung

"We do not necessarily consider an 8 MB block size limit a temporary solution, as we cannot predict what will happen years into the future. But we do think 8 MB is enough for the foreseeable future, presumable at least for the next three years. An increase to 20 MB however, is too risky, and we do not like the proposed Bitcoin-Xt alternative either. We do, on the other hand, support BIP 100 as proposed by Jeff Garzik."

tvbcof

legendary

Activity: 4760

Merit: 1283

Quote from: MicroGuy on May 31, 2015, 08:26:08 PM

Quote from: ronald98 on May 31, 2015, 07:12:44 PM

Quote from: ChosenSeller on May 31, 2015, 07:03:29 PM

Moving to the new fork does this mean the 21 million coins are raised?

No the 21 million coins limit stays exactly the same whatever happens. Nothing's going to change that limit.

Actually, the 21 million coin limit can be raised at any time, and most probably will be in the future.

The whole point of Gavincoin is to subsidize the indigent users in order to build a 'critical mass.' A very good follow-up to free transactions for the welfare spenders would be to produce more coins and spread the wealth around more fairly. The idea of getting 'free money' for mining was key to popularizing Bitcoin in the first place. If every user (who properly registered) were given some of the current inflation it would be quite effective in further popularizing the solution.

Just like it the real world, it is more politically palatable to do this re-distribution through inflation than through theft. Theft is, however, possible as well and both will be much more practical when there is a single 'benevolent dictator' at the helm. It is possible that 'tainted' coins (which has been something of a fixation on the part of the XT developer) could be re-distributed. In that case there need not be inflation or theft (depending on how theft is defined.)

extrabyte

legendary

Activity: 840

Merit: 1000

Quote from: thejaytiesto on June 01, 2015, 09:47:15 AM

Quote from: MicroGuy on May 31, 2015, 08:26:08 PM

Quote from: ronald98 on May 31, 2015, 07:12:44 PM

Quote from: ChosenSeller on May 31, 2015, 07:03:29 PM

Moving to the new fork does this mean the 21 million coins are raised?

No the 21 million coins limit stays exactly the same whatever happens. Nothing's going to change that limit.

Actually, the 21 million coin limit can be raised at any time, and most probably will be in the future.

That would be a instant nail in the coffin for Gavincoin.
Look, I think we need to do something about the blocksize, and maybe unless someone comes up with something better, we'll need to modify the blocksize, but forking it to 20MB does shit nothing, we'll meet the same dead end in the future. What we need is doing something scalable. A fork for 20MB is not scalable. Staying 1MB is equally stupid.
But the total supply will always be 21, unless you want an instant dump of epic proportions.

Agreed; people are overreacting every bit of news bitcoin is associated with, especially over this fork

rocoro

legendary

Activity: 938

Merit: 1000

Quote from: seriouscoin on May 31, 2015, 05:02:05 PM

Look at how many confused members on here, i think it works already.

Not sure if joking, or serious.
At some point people WILL have to choose, so might as well be now.

Tobo

hero member

Activity: 763

Merit: 500

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on June 21, 2015, 05:48:52 AM

Quote from: Tobo on June 21, 2015, 05:45:27 AM

what will happen next week? I heard that something regarding the xt fork will be done during next week.

https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoinxt/commit/821e223ccc4c8ab967399371761718f1015c766b
https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoinxt/commit/c81898ec46e4962daf975e352931b848026fdc34

Thanks. If I read correctly, it seems the XT will raise the block size to 8mb and double it up every 2 years. This seems a compromise with the Chinese miners. Is it next week the XT will be released for real?

ammy009

sr. member

Activity: 304

Merit: 250

PUSS Lover

awesome post!!!
everyone should read it Grin

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 509

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: Tobo on June 21, 2015, 05:45:27 AM

what will happen next week? I heard that something regarding the xt fork will be done during next week.

https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoinxt/commit/821e223ccc4c8ab967399371761718f1015c766b

https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoinxt/commit/c81898ec46e4962daf975e352931b848026fdc34

Tobo

hero member

Activity: 763

Merit: 500

what will happen next week? I heard that something regarding the xt fork will be done during next week.

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

Quote from: Tobo on June 18, 2015, 11:54:17 AM

what is the progress? how many nodes are using XT?

still a few, but bears in mind that the changes are not done yet in the client, it is just pure testing, so there isn't any reason to change for now, better to wait at least the end of this year

but you can check it here https://blockchain.info/it/connected-nodes

Tobo

hero member

Activity: 763

Merit: 500

what is the progress? how many nodes are using XT?

thejaytiesto

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1014

Quote from: SebastianJu on June 02, 2015, 04:00:53 AM

Quote from: seriouscoin on May 31, 2015, 05:02:05 PM

God damn this forums must be all newbies or what? I had to log in to make this thread to stop all the nonsense from you newbies for the past few days. Let me break it down to you what is happening, and why a fork might not be a fork!

+ You currently dont have to choose Core or XT, both are just wallet clients using the same database (blockchain)

+ You can run both wallet clients if you dont know to support blocksize increase or not

+ Gavin and Dev core using 2 clients to sort out the consensus of the network, who will support blocksize increase and who wont.

+ As the XT becomes 90% of bitcoin nodes, Gavin will implement the blocksize increase. This is like soft fork, you will know by then because i'm sure all major bitcoin services will announce they will support the blocksize increase or not.

+ The Core will be obsoleted and the bitcoin network has reached the consensus.

Here is the BS being spread around here:

- You can sell your coins of weaker chain : NO you WONT, i can tell you no exchange will support a weaker chain and risking their business
- Price will be halved because you now have doubled your coins: No it wont, because you cant sell coins on the weaker change on any exchanges. Unless you can find some retard on the forums to sell to, and if you can, you should fork your own bitcoins now and be rich.

Gavin's proposal is to increase pressure on decision making of the Core team. As at the current pace, we will not have enough time left and bitcoin network will face bottleneck. The damages might be too great then and risk all investors involved.

I think this is a brilliant idea. Everyone (bitcoiners) will learn about this and start voting. Look at how many confused members on here, i think it works already.

Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT would not use the same database once the fork happened. Only the same base database. But once the fork happened all blocks will be different.

How do you know the Core will be obsoleted? Are there really so many in advantage of raising now? Gavin is so loud as if we need to do it next week, otherwise bitcoin will crash. Though we have way than enough time to act. The prediction says past 2016.

It seems you very clear believe that one chain will die. For sure, at some point. But this is not some alternative Cryptocurrency then. What if there are around 50% fans on both sides? Each side will believe that their coins will survive and that their coins will be worth the 222$ actually. They WILL sell the other coins to those fans of the other chain. And what does that mean? Right, halving of the price. Of course, if youre right and there are only a couple fans on one chain, then this wont happen.

The fork only happens past 90%. Therefore all coins on the non-majority blockchain become automatically obsolete, and you keep your coins safe automatically in the blockchain. It's pretty smooth.

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

Quote from: ?? on ??

Do you have trouble comprehending simple English?

Why quote me when you didnt even read?

Oh, now i remember you name. And your posts often have an attacking and wording tendency.

Whatever. You dont need to explain where im wrong. Its surely better to insult others. Roll Eyes

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: pereira4 on June 02, 2015, 12:36:06 PM

If the hard fork happens only past 90% of nodes in one side as it should, then what you say it's not a problem. The real fork only happens past 90%, yes or no? thats what I read once here.

That is true. Once >90% of the last 1000 blocks mined that have been accepted by the network and are of the new version yet still conform to the old rules will the hard fork happen. Anything before that will just be two clients on the same network, mining valid blocks for everyone.

Topic: Bitcoin Core or XT, you dont have to choose NOW. Dont bother with the poll.... - page 2. (Read 4030 times)