That is a late comment that was retracted after announcement of the Seg Wit proposal. Nice try though.
This comment was made after the SW proposal, do you have a link to this statement being retracted? 
Topic: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud) - page 7. (Read 378991 times)
That is a late comment that was retracted after announcement of the Seg Wit proposal. Nice try though.
This was literally 2 days ago.
Quote
core block size limit should be made dynamic, put in the realm of software, outside of human hands
This might be the single most obvious statement ever and Blockstreamers aren't buyin' it.
Not that it really matters but the only one who's put forward any kind of sensible dynamic cap proposal is a guy from Blockstream so as usual you don't know wtf you're talking about.
That is a late comment that was retracted after announcement of the Seg Wit proposal. Nice try though.
While they do bring up some good points, authoritarian statists Jeff Garzik and Gavin Andresen write:
Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom.
That should be voluntaryism, you statist shill. When was the last time you had a thought that was your own?Problem is core power Rangers think bitcoin rely one them whilst in reality people are free to implement crafted bitcoin clients to meet their needs.
I do applaud the effort of enabling a référence client but because network effect pushing a contentious fork is likely to fail because decentralization
When faced with irreconcilable differences in the vision of Bitcoin, we can either compromise or split. It is that simple. There is no need to insult me, I stand by my convictions and I am not a statist shill. Decentralization and financial freedom for all is my war cry in this battle of ideas. I stand by the original vision of Satoshi and we can all choose our own destiny.
Yep, you are something worse than a statist shill. You are a highly intelligent and educated statist shill 
I stand by the original vision of Satoshi and Bitcoin needs to remain unchanged and ungoverned. It should be like gold, not some stupid populist currency.
Quote from: tsontar
In my discussions with various members of Core, I have reached the conclusion that most of them simply disagree with the design of Bitcoin, which by design allows the consensus rules to be changed by a sufficient majority of miners and users, independent of what any group of technocrats wish.
It is important to remember not to attribute malice where ignorance is equally explanatory. All of the devs I engage with are very strong in cryptography and computer science, which may make them less accepting of the fact that at its core, Bitcoin relies in the economic self-interest of the masses to govern consensus, not a group of educated technocrats. As an educated technocrat myself I can understand the sentiment. It would be better if math and only math governed Bitcoin. But that's not how Bitcoin is actually governed.
At the end of the day, if social engineering and developer manipulation can kill Bitcoin, well then we're all betting on the wrong horse.
It is important to remember not to attribute malice where ignorance is equally explanatory. All of the devs I engage with are very strong in cryptography and computer science, which may make them less accepting of the fact that at its core, Bitcoin relies in the economic self-interest of the masses to govern consensus, not a group of educated technocrats. As an educated technocrat myself I can understand the sentiment. It would be better if math and only math governed Bitcoin. But that's not how Bitcoin is actually governed.
At the end of the day, if social engineering and developer manipulation can kill Bitcoin, well then we're all betting on the wrong horse.
Please do not pervert my poetry, it is not a very nice thing to do.
When faced with irreconcilable differences in the vision of Bitcoin, we can either compromise or split. It is that simple. There is no need to insult me, I stand by my convictions and I am not a statist shill. Decentralization and financial freedom for all is my war cry in this battle of ideas. I stand by the original vision of Satoshi and we can all choose our own destiny.
Yep, you are something worse than a statist shill. You are a highly intelligent and educated statist shill I stand by the original vision of Satoshi and Bitcoin needs to remain unchanged and ungoverned. It should be like gold, not some stupid populist currency.
Bitcoin Unlimited is transcending this entire debate, a synthesis. A paradigm shift, a new awakening. A discovery of something that was already there. Something old and something new. I am exited to step into this new frontier, a new dawn. Bitcoin is growing up, it needs to shake itself lose from the paternalism of its past. It needs to realize itself and evolve into what it is meant to become. We are a part of this, humanity is a part of this great machine. The truth lights our path forward and exposes those that wish to block the stream of our future. Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom. The road of our salvation has been illuminated, as we travel towards our destiny and touch the stars, remember our history and our unlimited possibility.
What's that? Dictator speech?You stand no chance against Blockstream's wrath! Resistance is futile!
Quote
Statist Empire Unlimited is transcending this entire debate, a synthesis. A paradigm shift, a new awakening. A discovery of something that was already there. Something old and something new. I am exited to step into this new frontier, a new dawn. The empire is growing up, it needs to shake itself lose from the paternalism of its past. It needs to realize itself and evolve into what it is meant to become. We are a part of this, humanity is a part of this great machine. The truth lights our path forward and exposes those that wish to block the stream of our future. Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom. The road of our salvation has been illuminated, as we travel towards our destiny and touch the stars, remember our history and our unlimited possibility.
When faced with irreconcilable differences in the vision of Bitcoin, we can either compromise or split. It is that simple. There is no need to insult me, I stand by my convictions and I am not a statist shill. Decentralization and financial freedom for all is my war cry in this battle of ideas. I stand by the original vision of Satoshi and we can all choose our own destiny.
While they do bring up some good points, authoritarian statists Jeff Garzik and Gavin Andresen write:
Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom.
That should be voluntaryism, you statist shill. When was the last time you had a thought that was your own?
Quote
core block size limit should be made dynamic, put in the realm of software, outside of human hands
This might be the single most obvious statement ever and Blockstreamers aren't buyin' it.
Except that this is practically some pipe dream utopia if not completely irrelevant.
Forkers are free to fork into some altcoin with whatever parameter they want tho.
Even though Bitcoin core is highly infiltrated with Blockstream agents, it doesnt mean your vision of centralized offchain solution as the main Bitcoin function will be accepted by most Bitcoiners, and even though your Bitcoin core infiltration is impressive and the proposed Bitcoin roadmap succesfully removes any hardfork possibility from 2016 *, it doesnt mean your sure longterm winner with your centralized offchain Bitcoin vision.
* for acceptable hardfork no one needs to fear (or make argue of fear to prevent hardfork), you need the change in Bitcoin client long time preferrably a year before most nodes naturally updates to this version of the Bitcoin client unless you want create emergency hardfork with the havoc associated
Bitcoin Unlimited is transcending this entire debate, a synthesis. A paradigm shift, a new awakening. A discovery of something that was already there. Something old and something new. I am exited to step into this new frontier, a new dawn. Bitcoin is growing up, it needs to shake itself lose from the paternalism of its past. It needs to realize itself and evolve into what it is meant to become. We are a part of this, humanity is a part of this great machine. The truth lights our path forward and exposes those that wish to block the stream of our future. Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom. The road of our salvation has been illuminated, as we travel towards our destiny and touch the stars, remember our history and our unlimited possibility.
Great post! Poetic too.
To me it seems the Bitcoin Unlimited is waking people up to the fact that they are in control of Bitcoin's destiny. That the block size limit is just a figment of our collective imagination. That it only exists if we agree it exists.
It is great to see individual nodes talking matters into their own hands by running Bitcoin Unlimited. They are saying "I don't need to wait for the permission of the Blockstream Core Central Planning Committee!"
Bitcoin Unlimited is transcending this entire debate, a synthesis. A paradigm shift, a new awakening. A discovery of something that was already there. Something old and something new. I am exited to step into this new frontier, a new dawn. Bitcoin is growing up, it needs to shake itself lose from the paternalism of its past. It needs to realize itself and evolve into what it is meant to become. We are a part of this, humanity is a part of this great machine. The truth lights our path forward and exposes those that wish to block the stream of our future. Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom. The road of our salvation has been illuminated, as we travel towards our destiny and touch the stars, remember our history and our unlimited possibility.
Great post! Poetic too.
To me it seems the Bitcoin Unlimited is waking people up to the fact that they are in control of Bitcoin's destiny. That the block size limit is just a figment of our collective imagination. That it only exists if we agree it exists.
It is great to see individual nodes talking matters into their own hands by running Bitcoin Unlimited. They are saying "I don't need to wait for the permission of the Blockstream Core Central Planning Committee!"
Quote
core block size limit should be made dynamic, put in the realm of software, outside of human hands
This might be the single most obvious statement ever and Blockstreamers aren't buyin' it.
Except that this is practically some pipe dream utopia if not completely irrelevant.
Forkers are free to fork into some altcoin with whatever parameter they want tho.
Quote
core block size limit should be made dynamic, put in the realm of software, outside of human hands
This might be the single most obvious statement ever and Blockstreamers aren't buyin' it.
Bitcoin Unlimited is transcending this entire debate, a synthesis. A paradigm shift, a new awakening. A discovery of something that was already there. Something old and something new. I am exited to step into this new frontier, a new dawn. Bitcoin is growing up, it needs to shake itself lose from the paternalism of its past. It needs to realize itself and evolve into what it is meant to become. We are a part of this, humanity is a part of this great machine. The truth lights our path forward and exposes those that wish to block the stream of our future. Technological empowerment of volunteerism leading us towards freedom. The road of our salvation has been illuminated, as we travel towards our destiny and touch the stars, remember our history and our unlimited possibility.
http://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-21-million-seed-capital/ Linkedin, Airbnb, Google, Yahoo ... many of the software heavy weights are backing blockstream, no doubt there are so much slides from that direction, they have been preparing for over one year with all these solutions
Its funny how ice and brg construe any connection with yahoo and google on Mike or Gavins part as "Gubmint", but seem happy to take the feds sheckles when it is paid via Blockstream...
I still think any devs that have commit access should at least own 10000 bitcoins to make sure they can do R&D independently. Having large enterprise backing is politically disadvantage in a decentralized system, it reduces the trust
The reason we end up here is because there was not enough incentive for the core devs. I still remember during mining frenzy, many miners were donating bitcoins to mining software designer and even mining rig designer. But for core devs? Almost none from average user, so that vacuum is spotted by enterprises quickly. First Gavin went to TBF, and then several others into Blockstream. We could avoid this if there is a mechanism to incentivize core devs
http://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-21-million-seed-capital/ Linkedin, Airbnb, Google, Yahoo ... many of the software heavy weights are backing blockstream, no doubt there are so much slides from that direction, they have been preparing for over one year with all these solutions
Its funny how ice and brg construe any connection with yahoo and google on Mike or Gavins part as "Gubmint", but seem happy to take the feds sheckles when it is paid via Blockstream...
Jump to: