Topic: Decentralized, but very slow adoption OR centralized, but mass adoption happened - page 2. (Read 1565 times)

Franky, the very fact that you are, and have always been, the sole source of this information about Luke-jr wanting to start an independent fork of Bitcoin makes me suspicious. It can't be as significant as you're projecting it as if it's just not surfacing anywhere except in your posts. You're the only one shouting about it at the top of your voice, and you're not very reliable.

Not only that, but you only ever feel the need to beat me with this particular stick. It smells strongly of your story-twisting personal attack tactics.

simple question will you shun luke JR in a REKT campaign due to 2mb CORE TEAM code he will release?
just like you REKT others who released code with the same rule..

come on grow some balls and answer.
unless you fear your answer destroys your rhetoric of the "trust of core team" and reveals its the centralization control that your actually advocating

Listen, you've been rambling on about "Luke-jr's fork this" and "Luke-jr's fork that" for months, and no-one knows what your talking about, even now. Spare us the incoherent explanation, I'm not sure I can brave it for the umpteenth time

(you do realise that I only skim-read your posts, don't you? I am abundantly aware that you practically commit my posts to memory )

bitcoin is not a house. bitcoin is a land. and everyone on the land should have equal voice to come to a majority to decide the rules of the land. and then they can decide if they want a pink, blue or orange house to live on while following the rules of the majority everyone decided on.

simple question will you shun luke JR in a REKT campaign due to 2mb CORE TEAM code?
edit, will you kick lukeJR out your leaders house?

No, you're advocating the equivalent of kicking in the door to an someone elses house, moving your preferred householders into the house, crowing "free-market competition, bitches!"

you think its a war.
because you dont want your king to let the community to live freely. you defend such a king to make people hate neighbouring villages rather then enlighten your king that he should be trading and communicating with the whole community.

edit:
Except the only people prosecuting a war have been the "segwit or fuck off to an altcoin"(hoping they join you on monero), unless you want to roll out that "core is king" canard

by the way.. luke JR is releasing a 2mb version of core
will you accept that a core team has 2mb code.. or shun luke JR in a REKT campaign? and shout doomsdays to tell people not to download it? even if a core team wrote it?

simple question will you shun luke JR in a REKT campaign due to 2mb CORE TEAM code?

It's hard to be complete decentralized. Just look recent ETH drama.

I think its better to have slow adoption and decentralization. However i don't think country trying to adopt bitcoin and regulate its exchanges makes bitcoin centralized because if you don't reveal that you own this much bitcoin than even those authority couldn't calculate how much tax they should collect from you. If you don't exchange those bitcoin for fiat than you can do normal anonymous, decentralized and tax free transaction with bitcoin like before.

Adoption over bitcoin will surely come in future and for sure adoption will be in slower rate, bitcoin is supported by large community and citizens will surely use it even when government try to stop its uses in their country.

Yeah Franky. Except the only people prosecuting a war have been the 2MB-or-die shills, unless you want to roll out that "Core started it" canard again

art of war!
opposite to the art of peace and community and agreement

after all bankers know how money creation works.. lets leave our finances managed and controlled by bankers.. lets let them choose negative interest rates and freezing accounts, lets continue letting a single group decide everything for us.

This is a very Sun Tzu thing to do, in The Art of War Sun Tzu recommends that politicians stay away and let the generals take the decisions related to war. We must let the engineers take the decisions they are the ones that know what they are doing.

one rule runs..
based on the consensus agreement of the majority (activation parameter of a high majority)
where the consensus is not reach by biased belief of which team is best. but by what rule is best because ALL TEAMS have a version to allow free unbiased choose of the rules they want without worrying about the team.

EG core fanboys can happily vote for 2mb because they are downloading a core version with 2mb. without having to sacrifice their ideology of core.
EG non core fans can happily vote for segwit because they are downloading bitcoinknot with segwit. without having to sacrifice their ideology of bitcoinknot.
EG non core fan can happily vote for segwit because they are downloading bitcoinj version with segwit. without having to sacrifice their ideology of bitcoinj.

---

EG core fanboys can happily vote for segwit because they are downloading a core version with segwit. without having to sacrifice their ideology of core.
EG non core fan can happily vote for 2mb because they are downloading bitcoinknot version with 2mb. without having to sacrifice their ideology of bitcoinknot.
EG non core fan can happily vote for 2mb because they are downloading bitcoinj version with 2mb. without having to sacrifice their ideology of bitcoinj.

Ok, you can't really expect me to believe that you understood 5 minutes ago that more than one set of rules can't operate at once, and now you're pretending as if that particular logic has been disappeared using your magic sentence? Um, not sure what to say exactly. Keep taking the tablets?

its their software (GUI) but the rules should not belong to core alone, especialy if they only offer one option

but hey screw bitcoin, you can just go play with your monero, right?

No that's idiotic. You cannot expect computer illiterates to make good choices about engineering decisions for a cutting edge peer to peer network. They will make foolish decisions sooner or later, like electorates typically do.

It's far better to let the crypto coding teams work without interference, and then the public can pick which cryptocoin is exhibiting the best perfromance in the real world, after the decisions have been made. If Bitcoin Core screw it up, so be it. It's their software project, not mine, yours or anyone elses.

there will be one set of rules running at once.. but allowing nodes to flag if they want something new.
and consensus deciding if the rule should change

EG
if core had 2 versions. one with 2mb base block, one with 1mb base block and 4mb blockweight.
if bitknots had 2 versions. one with 2mb base block, one with 1mb base block and 4mb blockweight.
if BU had 2 versions. one with 2mb base block, one with 1mb base block and 4mb blockweight.
if classic had 2 versions. one with 2mb base block, one with 1mb base block and 4mb blockweight.
if XT had 2 versions. one with 2mb base block, one with 1mb base block and 4mb blockweight.
if BITCOINJ had 2 versions. one with 2mb base block, one with 1mb base block and 4mb blockweight.

then its upto the users to decide with no biases
EG some core fanboys love core the team, but want 2mb capacity instead of 1mb
EG some non-core fanboys hate core the team, but want segwit..

then bitcoin wont care which GUI signalled a majority.. because they all released a version that the majority can happily choose

both people can use the GUI(team) they like, while also having the level playing field and no control over who gets to set/control the rules

we shouldnt be at a point where core slips in a soft rule change requiring no nodes to upgrade to activate.. and then saying people need to run only core to be fully validating nodes or be left as out of date nodes not validating segwit signatures (no longer full nodes)

Yes Franky, except it's IMPOSSIBLE to have more than one set of rules running at once, in any system. Duhhhhhhhhh. Because different sets of rules will CONFLICT with one another. Duuuuuuuuh. There can be only one set of rules at once. It's plain and simple logic.

we are already developed so much and bitcoin is already so cool and perfect but many people have many diffrent opinions with the btc so it is not getting exacyly to a point that what will be the best option and according to me i like slow adoption as bcause everyone knows actully what they are using

your statement is about the social choice of GUI, and or the chances of bugs.

im talking about the decisions of the rules..
NO SINGLE TEAM should make that decision

you only want core to make the rule decisions and then anyone free to choose the fluffy front end GUI

I still don't get how Core is centralized. Again, people are freely choosing to use their software instead of Classic/XT or whatever it's out there nowadays, to validate transactions. People is free to use other software, the majority wants Core because they are the best developers, is that simple.