Pages:
Author

Topic: Consensus Reached - page 6. (Read 5225 times)

legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
February 20, 2016, 01:57:33 PM
#47
You have provided no data and no calculations eighter, thus your argument has no merit as well by your logic.
Here's the data that I've read a month ago (albeit somewhat outdated by now I assume).
I am somewhat skeptical. Especially considering that the "promise" of core devs to only implement a HF that contains a larger maximum block size with "strong community support". Although I do not disagree that any HF needs to have strong community support to be implemented, however in my eyes it is the core devs that are preventing an immediate increase in the maximum block size today, and if they were to only half-heartedly (or not at all) support the HF then the community would not back it.
They aren't. Not everyone wants one, especially not when you have Segwit around the corner.

I am also confused as to why it would take so long to code a HF whose only change is to increase the maximum block size. I would think this would only involve changing a few lines of code, and see little reason why this code could not be released tomorrow
Because they might want to address other issues while the opportunity is here? You will see why soon enough though.
legendary
Activity: 992
Merit: 1000
February 20, 2016, 01:55:52 PM
#46
I hate to say it but it's not looking good for Bitcoin right now. You have a bunch of trojan horses at blockstream core controlling the direction of Bitcoin's development, the type of folks who only care about extracting as much profit from it as possible. It also appears that they are purposely hamstringing bitcoin so it will never be able to compete with mastercard/visa in terms of overall transaction volume.

Furthermore, they appear to be engaging in outright deception and even some intimidation tactics to get their way... which is incredibly childish & sinister behavior.

Not good anyway you slice it.



legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1016
February 20, 2016, 01:54:26 PM
#45
i dunno but consensus reached by few people it's not so different than a council in the senate deciding about a new law

i don't like it at all it look like a centralized consensus mechanics...but as long as it increase the capacity in some way i'm fine with it

Let me quote brg444 for what he wrote an hour ago on reddit.
That is what it's all about.

Quote
It's important to point out:

It's been specifically mentionned by Core representative that this is preliminary talk and that all they can agree on is a proposal to submit to the community who then form its own consensus around it.

Now let's continue to work together to achieve it.
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
February 20, 2016, 01:53:07 PM
#44
Always knew that the bitcoin community would reach a consensus,  i love Game Theory.   Grin

Game of Thrones ? Wink
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1070
February 20, 2016, 01:48:28 PM
#43
i dunno but consensus reached by few people it's not so different than a council in the senate deciding about a new law

i don't like it at all it look like a centralized consensus mechanics...but as long as it increase the capacity in some way i'm fine with it
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
February 20, 2016, 01:47:17 PM
#42
I am somewhat skeptical. Especially considering that the "promise" of core devs to only implement a HF that contains a larger maximum block size with "strong community support". Although I do not disagree that any HF needs to have strong community support to be implemented, however in my eyes it is the core devs that are preventing an immediate increase in the maximum block size today, and if they were to only half-heartedly (or not at all) support the HF then the community would not back it.

I am also confused as to why it would take so long to code a HF whose only change is to increase the maximum block size. I would think this would only involve changing a few lines of code, and see little reason why this code could not be released tomorrow
legendary
Activity: 992
Merit: 1000
February 20, 2016, 01:46:19 PM
#41
Quote
Consensus gets rid of these diseases.



Consensus my ass. There has never been more uncertainty in the Bitcoin space than there is right now.

Calling Classic a 'disease' is foolish. There are very real concerns surrounding the Blockstream people, and very real conflicts of interest which could be very detrimental to bitcoin in the long run.
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1070
February 20, 2016, 01:44:55 PM
#40
Given the current distribution of normal and multisig transactions, and given the fact not every one will use SegWit transactions even after 1 year of deployment. There will always be people who preffer high value transactions to be sent as normal ones and not as "anyone can spend" ones
You've provided no data, no calculations. You're basing everything on speculation and thus your argument has no merit.

Realistic 2 - 2.5 MB increase to 3 - 3.5 MB from 1 MB base just with SegWit ? Only in dream land...
I never said anything about "3 - 3.5 MB".


You have provided no data and no calculations eighter, thus your argument has no merit as well by your logic.

Realistic 2 - 2.5 MB increase means effective 3 - 3.5 MB blocksizes (1 MB + 2 - 2.5 MB signatures). But even effective  2 - 2.5 MB blocksizes (1 MB + 1 - 1.5 MB signatures) are unrealistic unless you increase multisig usage + everyone just using SegWit - which is unrealistic

in fact it will be only 1.8 as a effective increase, there is no 2.5 mb ever

segwit is not even a double of the limit currently implemented, they will need to increase it anyway to 2mb, in a non-distant future

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-January/012248.html
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
February 20, 2016, 01:42:03 PM
#39
Given the current distribution of normal and multisig transactions, and given the fact not every one will use SegWit transactions even after 1 year of deployment. There will always be people who preffer high value transactions to be sent as normal ones and not as "anyone can spend" ones
You've provided no data, no calculations. You're basing everything on speculation and thus your argument has no merit.

Realistic 2 - 2.5 MB increase to 3 - 3.5 MB from 1 MB base just with SegWit ? Only in dream land...
I never said anything about "3 - 3.5 MB".


You have provided no data and no calculations eighter, thus your argument has no merit as well by your logic.

Realistic 2 - 2.5 MB increase means effective 3 - 3.5 MB blocksizes (1 MB + 2 - 2.5 MB signatures). But even effective  2 - 2.5 MB blocksizes (1 MB + 1 - 1.5 MB signatures) are unrealistic unless you increase multisig usage + everyone just using SegWit - which is unrealistic
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
February 20, 2016, 01:38:07 PM
#38
let's just drop it, this a calibration  Grin
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
February 20, 2016, 01:36:18 PM
#37
this agreement is made possible by the credible threat classic represented

we NEED a competing impl
No. Things that I have anticipated have been 'officially' signed. The only thing that Classic might have influenced was the speed of this process, it was inevitable. The people behind Core are reasonable, the people being contentious HF's aren't. What could be useful is a real competing implementation with a real group of developers behind it. We don't need nonsense like Classic.

Can we finally kick Classic into a 6 foot deep hole & bury her?
It was DOA (dead on arrival). We've been saying this since the release of the implementation.

And how do you plan to rid the world of this
hideous menace, Herr Doktor?
Consensus gets rid of these diseases.
legendary
Activity: 996
Merit: 1013
February 20, 2016, 01:35:31 PM
#36
No. Diseases should be completely exterminated.

And how do you plan to rid the world of this
hideous menace, Herr Doktor?
hero member
Activity: 1106
Merit: 521
February 20, 2016, 01:34:43 PM
#35
Always knew that the bitcoin community would reach a consensus,  i love Game Theory.   Grin
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
February 20, 2016, 01:32:23 PM
#34
Given the current distribution of normal and multisig transactions, and given the fact not every one will use SegWit transactions even after 1 year of deployment. There will always be people who preffer high value transactions to be sent as normal ones and not as "anyone can spend" ones
You've provided no data, no calculations. You're basing everything on speculation and thus your argument has no merit.

Realistic 2 - 2.5 MB increase to 3 - 3.5 MB from 1 MB base just with SegWit ? Only in dream land...
I never said anything about "3 - 3.5 MB".

Classic should be OK with the agreement

It should stick around as a competing impl.
No. Diseases should be completely exterminated.

No

this agreement is made possible by the credible threat classic represented

we NEED a competing impl
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
February 20, 2016, 01:27:51 PM
#33
Given the current distribution of normal and multisig transactions, and given the fact not every one will use SegWit transactions even after 1 year of deployment. There will always be people who preffer high value transactions to be sent as normal ones and not as "anyone can spend" ones
You've provided no data, no calculations. You're basing everything on speculation and thus your argument has no merit.

Realistic 2 - 2.5 MB increase to 3 - 3.5 MB from 1 MB base just with SegWit ? Only in dream land...
I never said anything about "3 - 3.5 MB".

Classic should be OK with the agreement

It should stick around as a competing impl.
No. Diseases should be completely exterminated.
sr. member
Activity: 687
Merit: 269
February 20, 2016, 01:26:52 PM
#32
Final nail in Classic' coffin
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
February 20, 2016, 01:21:13 PM
#31
Can we finally kick Classic into a 6 foot deep hole & bury her?

what a wast

Classic should be OK with the agreement

It should stick around as a competing impl.
legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1016
February 20, 2016, 01:15:51 PM
#30
[HKmtg] Finally, the statement done! Will be uploaded to medium soon! 3m

Thanks for the info.
I'm really curious and excited to read it like a small kid awaits it's candy! Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 3556
Merit: 9709
#1 VIP Crypto Casino
February 20, 2016, 01:14:16 PM
#29
Can we finally kick Classic into a 6 foot deep hole & bury her?
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
February 20, 2016, 01:03:10 PM
#28
No. This is false. Calculations have been done and we are looking at a realistic 2 - 2.5 MB (forgot the exact number) increase. So it should be enough. The increase does not happen over night though, the growth will happen slowly over time. It's not "almost 2 years" it is 1 and a half year. Where is your data that proves the '0.5MB at best' claim?

Given the current distribution of normal and multisig transactions, and given the fact not every one will use SegWit transactions even after 1 year of deployment. There will always be people who preffer high value transactions to be sent as normal ones and not as "anyone can spend" ones

Edit:
Realistic 2 - 2.5 MB increase to 3 - 3.5 MB from 1 MB base just with SegWit ? Only in dream land...
Pages:
Jump to: