Pages:
Author

Topic: Blockstream is nothing more than a $70M blockchain takeover attempt - page 3. (Read 2856 times)

legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
Just take Ton Vays and do a little scam show about this...

I believe Tone Vays is for Core and the Segwit and LN solution, I do not know if he likes Blockstream though.

He may have missed some of his "Bitcoin oracle predictions" but he is with the scene long enough to know what is going on somehow.
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2520
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
Just take Ton Vays and do a little scam show about this...
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1004
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

I wish I knew what the answer was, I just know the answer is not centralized mining with BU.

How does BU make mining more centralized in your view? 

legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
How can a privately funded entity organize themselves by hiring Core devs with the intention of driving the future rules of the network?  Doesn't this bother most of you free loving bitcoiners?

Time to organize a new group of honest core devs having no paycheck affiliation with anyone. 

Whatever. You know know the Core developers do not have total power on Bitcoin. The people supporting bigger blocks and the Gavinistas can always campaign to fork the network away from Core. If you think there was someone at fault it is the mining pools for not supporting what you want.
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 263
The devil is in the detail.
  a few "elite" miners can still block any improvement they don't like.  This is something that really needs to change.
 

According to the original bitcoin whitepaper:

Quote
They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them.  Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism.

Are you saying this needs to change?  If so, how?

Are you serious? Oh wait, of course you, you support BU  Roll Eyes

The current consensus mechanism is failing due to centralized mining. When only a handful of people can give the yay or naw on improvements despite what the majority may want, it is a problem. I know you don't see it that way and you are ok with centralized mining and control in the hands of a few. We have argued this over multiple threads already.

We need a new consensus mechanism for Bitcoin improvements.

politics aside, i'm asking you:  If not this mechanism described in the white paper, what's the alternative?  Do you have a better idea?   Or you just wish you had one?

I wish I knew what the answer was, I just know the answer is not centralized mining with BU. I am open to suggestions, hopefully some people smarter and more technically inclined than I am can find one before it is too late.

We need a new consensus mechanism for Bitcoin improvements.

consensus works

the problem is. CORE BYPASSED consensus and INTENTIONALLY only gave pools the vote. rather than nodes then pools.

Maybe we need to go back to this then.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1004
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
  a few "elite" miners can still block any improvement they don't like.  This is something that really needs to change.
 

According to the original bitcoin whitepaper:

Quote
They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them.  Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism.

Are you saying this needs to change?  If so, how?

Are you serious? Oh wait, of course you, you support BU  Roll Eyes

The current consensus mechanism is failing due to centralized mining. When only a handful of people can give the yay or naw on improvements despite what the majority may want, it is a problem. I know you don't see it that way and you are ok with centralized mining and control in the hands of a few. We have argued this over multiple threads already.

We need a new consensus mechanism for Bitcoin improvements.

politics aside, i'm asking you:  If not this mechanism described in the white paper, what's the alternative?  Do you have a better idea?   Or you just wish you had one?
legendary
Activity: 4214
Merit: 4458
We need a new consensus mechanism for Bitcoin improvements.

consensus works

the problem is. CORE BYPASSED consensus and INTENTIONALLY only gave pools the vote. rather than nodes then pools.
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 263
The devil is in the detail.
  a few "elite" miners can still block any improvement they don't like.  This is something that really needs to change.
 

According to the original bitcoin whitepaper:

Quote
They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them.  Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism.

Are you saying this needs to change?  If so, how?

Are you serious? Oh wait, of course you, you support BU  Roll Eyes

The current consensus mechanism is failing due to centralized mining. When only a handful of people can give the yay or naw on improvements despite what the majority may want, it is a problem. I know you don't see it that way and you are ok with centralized mining and control in the hands of a few. We have argued this over multiple threads already.

We need a new consensus mechanism for Bitcoin improvements.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1004
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
  a few "elite" miners can still block any improvement they don't like.  This is something that really needs to change.
 

According to the original bitcoin whitepaper:

Quote
They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them.  Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism.

Are you saying this needs to change?  If so, how?
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 263
The devil is in the detail.
How can a privately funded entity organize themselves by hiring Core devs with the intention of driving the future rules of the network?  Doesn't this bother most of you free loving bitcoiners?

Time to organize a new group of honest core devs having no paycheck affiliation with anyone. 

I can get behind a new group of developers with no outside agendas, only what's best for Bitcoin. However, even with a neutrally funded group of developers, a few "elite" miners can still block any improvement they don't like. This is something that really needs to change.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1004
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
I remember everyone complaining before about the bitcoin foundation which funded developers.

But that was better than this.
legendary
Activity: 4214
Merit: 4458
If the fork does not happen, I predict there will be an organized alt-coin with a new genesis block created and a lot of financial backing to market it.

blockstreamers love their monero and zcash as the alternative.

oh a blockstream investor thats cartel'd companies like bitpay, bitpesa, coinbase, xapo, purse, shapeshift. also loves zcash

full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 107
If the fork does not happen, I predict there will be an organized alt-coin with a new genesis block created and a lot of financial backing to market it.

I suspect however the fork will happen.

http://nodecounter.com/#bitcoin_classic_blocks

BU is gaining momentum.
hero member
Activity: 2968
Merit: 913
I'm more interested about how to organize a new group of honest core devs and make sure they still honest even if big company offer them lots of money Roll Eyes

All this "bitcoin is free and open source" idealism will be stopped sooner or later. Sad
I quess that those honest core devs are big bitcoin holders and big miners, so they can`t be bribed by some big company.
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 7490
Crypto Swap Exchange
I'm more interested about how to organize a new group of honest core devs and make sure they still honest even if big company offer them lots of money Roll Eyes
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1026
How can a privately funded entity organize themselves by hiring Core devs with the intention of driving the future rules of the network?  Doesn't this bother most of you free loving bitcoiners?

Time to organize a new group of honest core devs having no paycheck affiliation with anyone. 
Pages:
Jump to: