The more the mods tighten their grip, the more nodes will slip through their fingers...
Said the guy who rage quit the forum because XT posed zero threat to Core and became a laughingstock....
Topic: ELI5 about Bitcoin XT (Read 2147 times)
Said the guy who rage quit the forum because XT posed zero threat to Core and became a laughingstock....
Someone forgot about checkpoints that will ignore the longest chain. - Hearn 
That post pretty much misses some information. Also nobody mentioned the damage that the split is going to cause. 75% vs 25% is a big split; this should not be considered as consensus.
That post pretty much misses some information. Also nobody mentioned the damage that the split is going to cause. 75% vs 25% is a big split; this should not be considered as consensus.
Running Core means that you will be left behind if a 75% majority is reached.
Lol, define "behind".
What will happen to the exchange rate of Bitcoin XT if it becomes a surveillance based, non-fungible nightmare? Say hello to your new benevolent dictator, XT fans...
why should that happen?
it's just Bitcoin Core but with ability to have larger blocks, a bug fix, and two minor things that are useful for app developers.
LiteCoinGuy 5 years later:
Quote
it's just Bitcoin with ability to censor illegitimate transactions (why care if you're not a pedophile), a bug fix and two minor things that are useful for our tax agency.
I wonder if you actually reviewed their code. Why didn't that 'bug fix' get into Core if there was actually a bug? 
Running Core means that you will be left behind if a 75% majority is reached.
Lol, define "behind".
What will happen to the exchange rate of Bitcoin XT if it becomes a surveillance based, non-fungible nightmare? Say hello to your new benevolent dictator, XT fans...
why should that happen?
it's just Bitcoin Core but with ability to have larger blocks, a bug fix, and two minor things that are useful for app developers.
The reason is because Mike Hearn will become the new lead developer. He has expressed his desire to censor transactions before, and he didn't change his mind about that belief. He simply accepted that the majority disagreed with him.
Now, Mike is proposing XT that has the appearance of looking after user's interests. But it needs that same majority (the majority he couldn't get before) to agree and roll out his version of the client.
It's basically a way for Mike to stage a coup d'etats on the leadership of Bitcoin. You will get bigger blocks and higher tx rates. You will also get any other changes that he decides on in future. I don't trust him to give him that level of control over my money.
@Carlton Banks, at bitcoin.org the core developers are listed as Wladimir J. van der Laan, Gavin Andresen, Jeff Garzik, Gregory Maxwell and Pieter Wuille.
Was Mike Hearn ever an official core developer for Bitcoin Core? Was he dismissed and now has a grudge, or is Bitcoin XT just an attempt by Hearn to gain power and influence? Thanks.
Mike will not be the new leader.
That's not what Mike is saying.
in my view this update is good and valuable. so i support it. i want bitcoin to scale, to be the worldwide free and open transactions system without a centralised service like blockstream.
I agree with all of that, except:
- XT isn't the only possible way to do it
- Blockstream isn't a centralised service, sidechains will be mined by miners, not by Greg Maxwell giving each transaction royal assent
I don't know where you got that idea about sidechains being centralised, that's a totally bizarre assertion
Running Core means that you will be left behind if a 75% majority is reached.
Lol, define "behind".
What will happen to the exchange rate of Bitcoin XT if it becomes a surveillance based, non-fungible nightmare? Say hello to your new benevolent dictator, XT fans...
why should that happen?
it's just Bitcoin Core but with ability to have larger blocks, a bug fix, and two minor things that are useful for app developers.
The reason is because Mike Hearn will become the new lead developer. He has expressed his desire to censor transactions before, and he didn't change his mind about that belief. He simply accepted that the majority disagreed with him.
Now, Mike is proposing XT that has the appearance of looking after user's interests. But it needs that same majority (the majority he couldn't get before) to agree and roll out his version of the client.
It's basically a way for Mike to stage a coup d'etats on the leadership of Bitcoin. You will get bigger blocks and higher tx rates. You will also get any other changes that he decides on in future. I don't trust him to give him that level of control over my money.
Mike will not be the new leader. There should be no leader at all. and it is not only Mikes work, gavin and jeff support that idea too.
you have the same choice with every software update - use it or now.
in my view this update is good and valuable. so i support it. i want bitcoin to scale, to be the worldwide free and open transactions system without a centralised service like blockstream.
8MB blocks are no problem.
maybe this will help us all but i would not bet on it:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/2015-08-16-crucial-btc-scalability-topics-to-be-discussed-in-a-workshop-1154033
Running Core means that you will be left behind if a 75% majority is reached.
Lol, define "behind".
What will happen to the exchange rate of Bitcoin XT if it becomes a surveillance based, non-fungible nightmare? Say hello to your new benevolent dictator, XT fans...
why should that happen?
it's just Bitcoin Core but with ability to have larger blocks, a bug fix, and two minor things that are useful for app developers.
The reason is because Mike Hearn will become the new lead developer. He has expressed his desire to censor transactions before, and he didn't change his mind about that belief. He simply accepted that the majority disagreed with him.
Now, Mike is proposing XT that has the appearance of looking after user's interests. But it needs that same majority (the majority he couldn't get before) to agree and roll out his version of the client.
It's basically a way for Mike to stage a coup d'etats on the leadership of Bitcoin. You will get bigger blocks and higher tx rates. You will also get any other changes that he decides on in future. I don't trust him to give him that level of control over my money.
Running Core means that you will be left behind if a 75% majority is reached.
Lol, define "behind".
What will happen to the exchange rate of Bitcoin XT if it becomes a surveillance based, non-fungible nightmare? Say hello to your new benevolent dictator, XT fans...
why should that happen?
it's just Bitcoin Core but with ability to have larger blocks, a bug fix, and two minor things that are useful for app developers.
Running Core means that you will be left behind if a 75% majority is reached.
Lol, define "behind".
What will happen to the exchange rate of Bitcoin XT if it becomes a surveillance based, non-fungible nightmare? Say hello to your new benevolent dictator, XT fans...
valuable post because i guess alot of new members will be confused about that debate.
From what i understood:
- Until it's at 75% of the network, it's virtually the same
- Even after 75% coverage, it's still the same until a block >1mb in size comes.
So what happens then, when the forks start ignoring one another ?! How will services agree on what chain is the real one?
Even tho it seams that you're safest on the XT fork (<75% it's same, >75%..well 2/3 network is then on that fork) , i still doubt that there really will be 2/3 supporters.
- Until it's at 75% of the network, it's virtually the same
- Even after 75% coverage, it's still the same until a block >1mb in size comes.
So what happens then, when the forks start ignoring one another ?! How will services agree on what chain is the real one?
Even tho it seams that you're safest on the XT fork (<75% it's same, >75%..well 2/3 network is then on that fork) , i still doubt that there really will be 2/3 supporters.
Chinese miners have already declared their support to 8mb. So, they probably already have declared support from 2/3 of the network. Though, I heard, Core might increase the block size a little bit as well, probably 2mb. In that case, I dunno, whether XT will be able to gain 75% or not.
Chinese pools have not declared support for XT. They understand the need to increase block size but want consensus among Bitcoin Core developers. They are opposed to Bitcoin XT which they call an "altcoin" see the article at CoinTelegraph.
At least the mods did not take that post down. Someone else tried to explain it and their comment was gone within 10 minutes.
I think only THERMOS (LOL) and GMAX do this censorship now.
It backfired them so badly.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h424p/why_is_bitcoin_forking/cu43w4a
Quote
Running XT at this time is equivalent with running Core. It's the same network, and the same Bitcoins. At some point in the future, if 75% mining majority is reached (but not before January 2016), the network will split whenever a miner creates a block larger than 1MB. This will not be accepted by Core unless they adopt a large blocks patch, but will be accepted by XT, and at this point there will effectively be two chains.
Running XT means that you will always be on the largest (75%+) chain, regardless of whether the fork actually happens or not. Running Core means that you will be left behind if a 75% majority is reached. Regardless of which version you run, coins will be safe (on both chains) as long as you acquired them prior to the fork, and for some time the chains will largely mirror each other, but eventually they will diverge due to different coinbases (mining rewards).
Running XT means that you will always be on the largest (75%+) chain, regardless of whether the fork actually happens or not. Running Core means that you will be left behind if a 75% majority is reached. Regardless of which version you run, coins will be safe (on both chains) as long as you acquired them prior to the fork, and for some time the chains will largely mirror each other, but eventually they will diverge due to different coinbases (mining rewards).
In that case why BTC community adopt Bitcoin XT? Just stick with Bitcoin Core.
Answer to XT = BIP 101 in Bitcoin Core.
Simple.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/2015-7-21-the-merkle-current-state-of-the-blocksize-debate-bip-100-vs-bip-101-1129548
Simple.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/2015-7-21-the-merkle-current-state-of-the-blocksize-debate-bip-100-vs-bip-101-1129548
From what i understood:
- Until it's at 75% of the network, it's virtually the same
- Even after 75% coverage, it's still the same until a block >1mb in size comes.
So what happens then, when the forks start ignoring one another ?! How will services agree on what chain is the real one?
Even tho it seams that you're safest on the XT fork (<75% it's same, >75%..well 2/3 network is then on that fork) , i still doubt that there really will be 2/3 supporters.
- Until it's at 75% of the network, it's virtually the same
- Even after 75% coverage, it's still the same until a block >1mb in size comes.
So what happens then, when the forks start ignoring one another ?! How will services agree on what chain is the real one?
Even tho it seams that you're safest on the XT fork (<75% it's same, >75%..well 2/3 network is then on that fork) , i still doubt that there really will be 2/3 supporters.
Chinese miners have already declared their support to 8mb. So, they probably already have declared support from 2/3 of the network. Though, I heard, Core might increase the block size a little bit as well, probably 2mb. In that case, I dunno, whether XT will be able to gain 75% or not.
I think it will. The "Core" project has already demonstrated that they are toxic.
From what i understood:
- Until it's at 75% of the network, it's virtually the same
- Even after 75% coverage, it's still the same until a block >1mb in size comes.
So what happens then, when the forks start ignoring one another ?! How will services agree on what chain is the real one?
Even tho it seams that you're safest on the XT fork (<75% it's same, >75%..well 2/3 network is then on that fork) , i still doubt that there really will be 2/3 supporters.
- Until it's at 75% of the network, it's virtually the same
- Even after 75% coverage, it's still the same until a block >1mb in size comes.
So what happens then, when the forks start ignoring one another ?! How will services agree on what chain is the real one?
Even tho it seams that you're safest on the XT fork (<75% it's same, >75%..well 2/3 network is then on that fork) , i still doubt that there really will be 2/3 supporters.
Chinese miners have already declared their support to 8mb. So, they probably already have declared support from 2/3 of the network. Though, I heard, Core might increase the block size a little bit as well, probably 2mb. In that case, I dunno, whether XT will be able to gain 75% or not.
From what i understood:
- Until it's at 75% of the network, it's virtually the same
- Even after 75% coverage, it's still the same until a block >1mb in size comes.
So what happens then, when the forks start ignoring one another ?! How will services agree on what chain is the real one?
Even tho it seams that you're safest on the XT fork (<75% it's same, >75%..well 2/3 network is then on that fork) , i still doubt that there really will be 2/3 supporters.
- Until it's at 75% of the network, it's virtually the same
- Even after 75% coverage, it's still the same until a block >1mb in size comes.
So what happens then, when the forks start ignoring one another ?! How will services agree on what chain is the real one?
Even tho it seams that you're safest on the XT fork (<75% it's same, >75%..well 2/3 network is then on that fork) , i still doubt that there really will be 2/3 supporters.
The more the mods tighten their grip, the more nodes will slip through their fingers...
different mining reward?
Yes. At some point a miner will mine 1mb+ block, the chains will be different. Because, at that point, the 1mb+ block will have different mining reward for the miner, which 1mb chain will not accept. From then on the amount of bitcoin held by different addresses will be different accrding the two chain.
No the reward will remain the same unless you mean they will get more transaction fees for accepting more transactions in a block.
Mining Reward = Block Reward (Coinbase) + Tx fees
different mining reward?
Yes. At some point a miner will mine 1mb+ block, the chains will be different. Because, at that point, the 1mb+ block will have different mining reward for the miner, which 1mb chain will not accept. From then on the amount of bitcoin held by different addresses will be different accrding the two chain.
No the reward will remain the same unless you mean they will get more transaction fees for accepting more transactions in a block.
Jump to: