Boycott 0.8.2 - page 9. | Bitcointalksearch.org

Buffer Overflow

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1016

Quote from: Bitcoinpro on June 12, 2013, 05:35:37 AM

why block a 1 satoshi transation when it could be used to by a can of soda by the end of the year

Because at the present time, Bitcoin network and the Litecoin network cannot cope with it. Also 1 satoshi is expensive for the miner to put in a block.

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: kjj on June 11, 2013, 08:33:41 PM

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 07:35:36 PM

Quote from: worldinacoin on June 11, 2013, 07:30:09 PM

Don't have to boycott, for those who don't want it, just don't install. Or better still fork your own coin.

It isn't that simple, cause with at least one miner on board, we can't do anything. Also why would we fork our own coin, there is enough wasted alt coins that just change one thing, that would just push people away from the cause.

If you can't convince even one single solitary miner to join your cause, shouldn't you begin to consider that maybe the problem is you?

LMAO well since most miners are greedy and looking for money, and this would allow them to net more money, it is kinda hard right? So how would the problem be me?

Bitcoinpro

legendary

Activity: 1344

Merit: 1000

why block a 1 satoshi transation when it could be used to by a can of soda by the end of the year

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: TaxReturn on June 12, 2013, 03:40:03 AM

Litecoin differences to Bitcoin:
Scrypt insted of SHA256
Average block time 2.5 minutes

Somebody enlighten me how this solves any of Bitcoin's fundamental problems with micro-transactions or blockchain bloat. As a matter of fact Litecoin has all the same basic design problems Bitcoin has, they are just not as visible yet because the total transaction volume is much lower.

It does not and never will solve those problems before Bitcoin solves them.

Bitcoin will always have more human and financial capital available to apply towards finding solutions to these problems.

TaxReturn

member

Activity: 67

Merit: 10

Litecoin differences to Bitcoin:
Scrypt insted of SHA256
Average block time 2.5 minutes

Somebody enlighten me how this solves any of Bitcoin's fundamental problems with micro-transactions or blockchain bloat. As a matter of fact Litecoin has all the same basic design problems Bitcoin has, they are just not as visible yet because the total transaction volume is much lower. Whatever the solution for micro-transactions might be, Litecoin isn't it.

solex

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1006

100 satoshis -> ISO code

Quote from: Buffer Overflow on June 12, 2013, 03:26:40 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Yes LTC will solve much of the problems that BTC has. 0.9 LTC should be significantly different from BTC and should be able to deal with micro transactions much better than BTC.

0.9? Jesus, still waiting for 0.7!

Watch it, or you'll be a marked man by the army-sized LTC dev team..."

Buffer Overflow

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1016

Quote from: ?? on ??

Yes LTC will solve much of the problems that BTC has. 0.9 LTC should be significantly different from BTC and should be able to deal with micro transactions much better than BTC.

0.9? Jesus, still waiting for 0.7!

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

I just have one question, why is everyone so angry that I think that we should be able to send any amount? It kinda makes bitcoin community bad when I voice an opinion and I get hateful responses. That is the saddest part of this, cause I have donated and done so much for the community and I get treated like this over an opinion. Guys grow up, it is an opinion don't worry, Gavin won't change it. LOL

virtualmaster

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

You are welcome to send micro-transactions in Namecoin.

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: justusranvier on June 11, 2013, 07:52:49 PM

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 07:44:19 PM

I forgot, that this is a dictatorship I will keep my opinions oppressed down in my mind sorry. I will get back in line now. LMAO

This isn't whining or drama, this is a view I have and others have. Also it is very difficult to convince a miner, since all mining pools don't care, they about profit and don't care about getting in the middle of an idea war.

No dictatorship - anyone is free to whine and I am free to point out their whining as pointless, unjustified and unproductive.

If you're opposed to the default policy in 0.8.2 there two relevant possibilities that affect which courses of action will achieve a result you desire: either it's possible to persuade miners to follow you (actual miners, not hashing subcontractors), or it's not possible to persuade them.

If it's not possible to persuade them then talking about a boycott is pointless because they won't listen to you.

If it is possible to persuade them then the best course of action is to convince them to upgrade to 0.8.2 and set their -mintxfee and -mintxrelayfee to values you consider to be better than the defaults.

Your right isn't a dictatorship it is Gavinship LMAO I have been talking to miner pools and some big pools but as I said before "They don't want to go against the core dev team." Cause they just want money and not actually go against the core dev team, more of not going against Gavin. So yeah.

Syke

legendary

Activity: 3878

Merit: 1193

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 06:25:59 PM

What is the reason not to send less that bitcoins to someone?

Because they wouldn't be able to spend it.

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 07:27:43 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Let me know what you think about the issue after watching this movie in full:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWvQekdrFUs

It should put you back on the right track, to see what it means when dominant short-seeing groups want more (freedom) in limited resources
environment.

But their isn't a limited resource environment.

Watch the movie in full, you fucking retarded shit. In your current pathetic state, I ain't gonna waste time debating with you or alikes because
you are obviously living in a dream world.

Yes a dream world where I can send 0.00000001 BTC to anyone! But thank you for voicing your opinion of me. I almost forgot how people here don't allow you have a different opinion of what is best.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: jaywaka2713 on June 11, 2013, 09:38:15 PM

Dude nice harddrive! What make and model is it? And what linux distro do you run?

LVM over mdraid-6 on eight LUKS-formatted 2TB hard drives of varying brands and manufacturing lots. Gentoo Linux.

Quote from: jaywaka2713 on June 11, 2013, 09:38:15 PM

On-Topic: Yes, almost any miner and bitcoin user is capable of storing the blockchain, however, it simply is not efficient for mobile devices.

Mobile devices and casual users will soon have better options that will not require them to attempt to store the entire blockchain or trust a central server.

jaywaka2713

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

aka 7Strykes

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on June 11, 2013, 10:18:44 PM

Quote from: jaywaka2713 on June 11, 2013, 10:02:56 PM

True. That wouldn't help too much. I still think the microtransaction thing needs to be revised. There was no vote, there was no community decision. The hard filter value of 0.00000539 BTC or whatever it is should have been voted on. Client development currently isn't democratic, and that's why I continue to run the 0.8.1 client and host that node version.

There is no hard value. You vote by setting the dust threshold for your node. 5430 satoshis is simply the default. If a significant minority of nodes make it 1000 instead then smaller tx will be relayed. So the framework for your "vote" is there right now. Staying on an obsolete version is just silly though. You do realize you can set the dust threshold to whatever you want in 0.8.2?

I will upgrade the node. What line needs to be added to the conf file to change the dust threshold?

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: justusranvier on June 11, 2013, 07:40:21 PM

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 07:36:07 PM

It isn't that simple, cause with at least one miner on board, we can't do anything.

Any miner you can convince to boycott 0.8.2 is a miner you can also convince to change a line in their bitcoin.conf file.

There's still no excuse for all the whining and drama.

I forgot, that this is a dictatorship I will keep my opinions oppressed down in my mind sorry. I will get back in line now. LMAO

This isn't whining or drama, this is a view I have and others have. Also it is very difficult to convince a miner, since all mining pools don't care, they about profit and don't care about getting in the middle of an idea war.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: jaywaka2713 on June 11, 2013, 10:02:56 PM

True. That wouldn't help too much. I still think the microtransaction thing needs to be revised. There was no vote, there was no community decision. The hard filter value of 0.00000539 BTC or whatever it is should have been voted on. Client development currently isn't democratic, and that's why I continue to run the 0.8.1 client and host that node version.

There is no hard value. You vote by setting the dust threshold for your node. 5430 satoshis is simply the default. If a significant minority of nodes make it 1000 instead then smaller tx will be relayed. So the framework for your "vote" is there right now. Staying on an obsolete version is just silly though. You do realize you can set the dust threshold to whatever you want in 0.8.2?

jaywaka2713

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

aka 7Strykes

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 10:06:32 PM

Quote from: jaywaka2713 on June 11, 2013, 10:02:56 PM

True. That wouldn't help too much. I still think the microtransaction thing needs to be revised. There was no vote, there was no community decision. The hard filter value of 0.00000539 BTC or whatever it is should have been voted on. Client development currently isn't democratic, and that's why I continue to run the 0.8.1 client and host that node version.

I run 0.8.2 but with the relay configs. Exactly that is all I am saying it is that no one voted, no lets us have a debate or talk about it. It was just done! Bitcoin development can't be like that.

I totally agree with you on that. The devs are letting their opinions rule development.

jaywaka2713

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

aka 7Strykes

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 10:00:03 PM

Quote from: jaywaka2713 on June 11, 2013, 09:58:24 PM

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 09:49:02 PM

Quote from: jaywaka2713 on June 11, 2013, 09:46:26 PM

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 09:41:12 PM

Quote from: BitcoinAshley on June 11, 2013, 09:38:09 PM

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 09:24:46 PM

Only one issue is that I am not forcing anyone to comply with this but everyone else is forcing me to comply with it. So yeah Part 2 can't be true at all for that reason.

Nobody's "forcing you" to do anything, they're just rejecting your potential transactions that don't meet certain requirements.

So they are forcing me to do what they want. LMAO I am done with this thread, cause it is just repeating.

Also it is just a cover up for the problems the core devs can't solve.

Well free markets are all about competition right? Why not code your own Bitcoin platform that can host Node code that you believe in, and promote it?

I been thru all this already, no you can't make a full node client that is 100% compatible with the reference client.

Does it really HAVE to be though? As long as your fixes work, and transactions get seen, there shouldn't be an issue right?

But then you would just be a "cancer node" not helping the network.

True. That wouldn't help too much. I still think the microtransaction thing needs to be revised. There was no vote, there was no community decision. The hard filter value of 0.00000539 BTC or whatever it is should have been voted on. Client development currently isn't democratic, and that's why I continue to run the 0.8.1 client and host that node version.

gweedo

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: justusranvier on June 11, 2013, 07:34:34 PM

If you don't like the default value that ships with 0.8.2 all you have to do is add a line to your bitcoin.conf file with a different threshold. You can even set it to zero if you want. That's much better than previous versions because with them you had to patch the source code and recompile to change these values.

Problem solved - there is absolutely no legitimate reason to keep whining about this.

It isn't that simple, cause with at least one miner on board, we can't do anything.

jaywaka2713

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

aka 7Strykes

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 09:49:02 PM

Quote from: jaywaka2713 on June 11, 2013, 09:46:26 PM

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 09:41:12 PM

Quote from: BitcoinAshley on June 11, 2013, 09:38:09 PM

Quote from: gweedo on June 11, 2013, 09:24:46 PM

Only one issue is that I am not forcing anyone to comply with this but everyone else is forcing me to comply with it. So yeah Part 2 can't be true at all for that reason.

Nobody's "forcing you" to do anything, they're just rejecting your potential transactions that don't meet certain requirements.

So they are forcing me to do what they want. LMAO I am done with this thread, cause it is just repeating.

Also it is just a cover up for the problems the core devs can't solve.

Well free markets are all about competition right? Why not code your own Bitcoin platform that can host Node code that you believe in, and promote it?

I been thru all this already, no you can't make a full node client that is 100% compatible with the reference client.

Does it really HAVE to be though? As long as your fixes work, and transactions get seen, there shouldn't be an issue right?

Topic: Boycott 0.8.2 - page 9. (Read 18974 times)