Bitcoin Core or XT, you dont have to choose NOW. Dont bother with the poll.... - page 3.

pereira4

legendary

Activity: 1610

Merit: 1183

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.

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.

dserrano5

legendary

Activity: 1974

Merit: 1030

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

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.

If there's a 50/50 split, the increase in block size won't reach the required support so it won't be enacted. We will remain with the same bitcoin we always had, only with two clients. Oh wait, just like now…

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

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.

anderson00673

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

Quote from: oblivi on June 01, 2015, 10:56:21 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.

Let me see if I get this. So the hard fork (actual split o the blockchain) will only happen once the nodes run in XT are 90%+? who did say 90%? Gavin? show me the quote.
In this case it would make sense, since running a XT client would be considered as 1 vote. 1 node = 1 vote. If you want to the fork, run the XT client, if you dont want the fork, run Core. It sounds cool, as soon as that majority is respected, in other words, 51% is not enough, and 90% would be obvious that a fork is preferred by people that actually care about BTC enough to run a node.

Hi, check this thread for a really good interview with Gavin. It helps explain some things and should make people feel a little more comfortable. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/2015-05-30-audio-lets-talk-bitcoin-217-the-bitcoin-block-size-discussion-1075510

Some good posts as well in that thread. I think you will see that everything is ok and this is just a bump in the road.

oblivi

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 501

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.

Let me see if I get this. So the hard fork (actual split o the blockchain) will only happen once the nodes run in XT are 90%+? who did say 90%? Gavin? show me the quote.
In this case it would make sense, since running a XT client would be considered as 1 vote. 1 node = 1 vote. If you want to the fork, run the XT client, if you dont want the fork, run Core. It sounds cool, as soon as that majority is respected, in other words, 51% is not enough, and 90% would be obvious that a fork is preferred by people that actually care about BTC enough to run a node.

Bizmark13

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

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.

I agree that a variable block size limit which scales according to the needs of the network would be preferable to one that is fixed since the latter is only really a temporary fix, as you said. Problem is, that's easier said than done and the proposals that we've seen so far have been shown to be far from perfect and tend to come with a host of problems of their own (e.g. miner collusion).

Gavin also touched briefly on this subject in one of his blog posts:

Quote from: Gavin Andresen

Dynamic limits

One very popular idea is to implement a dynamic limit, based on historical block sizes.

The details vary: how often should the maximum size be adjusted? Every block? Every difficulty adjustment? How much of an increase should be allowed? 50% bigger? Double?

If the block size limit is just a denial-of-service prevention measure (preventing a big, evil miner from producing an 11 gigabyte block that the rest of the network is forced to validate), then any of these proposals will work. Engineers could bike-shed the parameter choice to death, but I like the idea of a simple dynamic limit on the maximum allowed size.

There are more complicated proposals for a dynamic block size limit that (for example) involve proof-of-stake voting or linking the maximum block size to the mining reward and/or the amount of fees in a block. I like them less than a simple solution, because consensus-critical code must be absolutely correct, and every additional line of code is another opportunity for a chain-splitting bug to slip through code review and testing...

Link: http://gavinandresen.ninja/bigger-blocks-another-way

LiteCoinGuy

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1014

In Satoshi I Trust

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.

damn, i want to double my coins and want to be rich....NOW!

(good thread buddy Wink

)

fryarminer

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

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.

While it could be raised, consensus would never permit it. Nobody really suffers loss by making the blocks larger. However try to find consensus when the value of everyone's Bitcoin will drastically decrease due to wanting to increase the coin limit!

thejaytiesto

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1014

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.

Barney Stinson

newbie

Activity: 18

Merit: 0

I'll ber waiting for the dust to settle when this does take place that way I dont have to make a decision but keep my private keys and join the majority.

Anatidaephobia

newbie

Activity: 11

Merit: 0

Bitcoin limit should never be raised I don't understand why this keeps coming up and I think Gmaxwells alternative solution means adding in alt coins which would raise the amount which would get rid of the value by quite a bit I feel gavins approach would be the best.

Bizmark13

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Quote from: BitcoinEXpress on June 01, 2015, 08:52:42 AM

If Bitcoin XT is launched it will become the dominant one.

No pool, no exchange, no business or no person will keep any substantial amount of coins in any wallet which is outdated.

Further more as soon as the XT client is released, there will be an immediate fear of accepting any coin that was generated "post split".

If any one large pool and I suspect most will switch, the domino effect will be fast and furious.

This argument is over as a large majority will switch to any new client that is an update and endorsed by Gavin.

~BCX~

This. The distribution of Bitcoin nodes doesn't really reflect the distribution of the Bitcoin community since many (most?) users don't run full nodes nowadays and major exchanges and mining pools would hold most of the power in the event of a hard fork anyway.

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.

It's not really a fair comparison, although I understand what you're saying.

Virtually nobody would support a fork that increases the total number of coins. On the other hand, increasing the maximum block size isn't a question of "if" but "when". According to Satoshi, if Bitcoin is to ever reach the transaction volume that is expected of a major currency and scale as a payment system that can rival the current alternatives out there then it will need to accommodate a blockchain expansion rate that is much greater than today (the other alternative would be to increase dependence on centralized off-chain payment processing methods for smaller transactions which brings about a whole new set of problems):

Quote from: satoshi

Long before the network gets anywhere near as large as that, it would be safe for users to use Simplified Payment Verification (section eight) to check for double spending, which only requires having the chain of block headers, or about 12KB per day. Only people trying to create new coins would need to run network nodes. At first, most users would run network nodes, but as the network grows beyond a certain point, it would be left more and more to specialists with server farms of specialized hardware. A server farm would only need to have one node on the network and the rest of the LAN connects with that one node.

The bandwidth might not be as prohibitive as you think. A typical transaction would be about 400 bytes (ECC is nicely compact). Each transaction has to be broadcast twice, so lets say 1KB per transaction. Visa processed 37 billion transactions in FY2008, or an average of 100 million transactions per day. That many transactions would take 100GB of bandwidth, or the size of 12 DVD or 2 HD quality movies, or about $18 worth of bandwidth at current prices.

If the network were to get that big, it would take several years, and by then, sending 2 HD movies over the Internet would probably not seem like a big deal.

Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg09964.html

RoadStress

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1007

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

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.

+1. Very good idea. I hope that the bitseed/bitnodes will support and make it easy to change the client.

BitcoinEXpress

legendary

Activity: 1210

Merit: 1024

If Bitcoin XT is launched it will become the dominant one.

No pool, no exchange, no business or no person will keep any substantial amount of coins in any wallet which is outdated.

Further more as soon as the XT client is released, there will be an immediate fear of accepting any coin that was generated "post split".

If any one large pool and I suspect most will switch, the domino effect will be fast and furious.

This argument is over as a large majority will switch to any new client that is an update and endorsed by Gavin.

~BCX~

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

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.

you are continuing to repeat this, , why we should raise the limit? remember that bitcoin is divisible, and rare enough as it is right now, increasing its value will only damage these aspects

not to mention that you need to redefine the controlled supply/halving table

yumei

full member

Activity: 185

Merit: 100

Hi OP, its not really simple to find and install the Bitcoin XT, is there any plan to promote it. Maybe an official shout-out from Gavin to use Bitcoin XT as full node? Until now there is no announcement or something to use Bitcoin XT from Gavin, Hearn and c.o.

unamis76

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1012

Great post, thank you. Enough of FUD here and in the exchange charts Grin

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.

It would probably only happen on Gavin's exponential growth fork once the support infrastructure is so centralized that 'consensus' will be a relatively straightforward thing and nobody will be able to do jack shit about it. But those of us who are still using Bitcoin will have sold our Gavincoin long before that and forgotten all about this mutant evolutionary dead-end with a malignancy coded in.

MicroGuy

legendary

Activity: 2506

Merit: 1030