Topic: Erik Voorhees: SegWit should be activated - page 2. (Read 2219 times)
Uh oh watch out Erik, now BU is going to abandon you as an oracle.
Too bad, neither SegWit nor Unlimited will reach their target support %.
I could see BU reaching 51% though, where if they forked at that point, it wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.
BU was looking good about 2 weeks ago, after the antpool news. Since then they lost some support and slowed down, they won't win unless they persuade (pay?) another big pool to join their cause.I could see BU reaching 51% though, where if they forked at that point, it wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.
I think SegWit is a good option, much better and than BU and it wouldn't divide the community as much as BU would.
segwit would divide the community. but while you are in the cesspit of pruned no witness nodes being reliant on upper tier blockstream nodes, you will be told to go back to sleep and everything is alright
I guess any implementation will divide the community. May it be Segwit by BCore or Bigger Block size by BU. I cannot see any solution that will not split the community the way I see the reaction of individual. Though I hope if ever BC's segwit or BU's larger block size is implemented, would have a minimal negative effect to Bitcoin in its entirety.
segwit thinks if it just has the pools making the nodes and about 100 FIBRE network nodes validating the data.. and then filtering STRIPPED data downstream to second layer lite, prunned, no-witness nodes is a good thing..
other implementations want the dozen different brands of thousands of nodes to all be on an equal playing field where no one is a upper/lower control. no different levels of importance. and no power house.
where nodes themselves show the settings they prefer in their user agents and the majority count is what pools then follow below. only moving beyond the minority, which the minority can adjust their preferences.
Too bad, neither SegWit nor Unlimited will reach their target support %.
I could see BU reaching 51% though, where if they forked at that point, it wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.
BU was looking good about 2 weeks ago, after the antpool news. Since then they lost some support and slowed down, they won't win unless they persuade (pay?) another big pool to join their cause.I could see BU reaching 51% though, where if they forked at that point, it wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.
I think SegWit is a good option, much better and than BU and it wouldn't divide the community as much as BU would.
segwit would divide the community. but while you are in the cesspit of pruned no witness nodes being reliant on upper tier blockstream nodes, you will be told to go back to sleep and everything is alright
I guess any implementation will divide the community. May it be Segwit by BCore or Bigger Block size by BU. I cannot see any solution that will not split the community the way I see the reaction of individual. Though I hope if ever BC's segwit or BU's larger block size is implemented, would have a minimal negative effect to Bitcoin in its entirety.
Too bad, neither SegWit nor Unlimited will reach their target support %.
I could see BU reaching 51% though, where if they forked at that point, it wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.
BU was looking good about 2 weeks ago, after the antpool news. Since then they lost some support and slowed down, they won't win unless they persuade (pay?) another big pool to join their cause.I could see BU reaching 51% though, where if they forked at that point, it wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.
I think SegWit is a good option, much better and than BU and it wouldn't divide the community as much as BU would.
segwit would divide the community. but while you are in the cesspit of pruned no witness nodes being reliant on upper tier blockstream nodes, you will be told to go back to sleep and everything is alright
Too bad, neither SegWit nor Unlimited will reach their target support %.
I could see BU reaching 51% though, where if they forked at that point, it wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.
BU was looking good about 2 weeks ago, after the antpool news. Since then they lost some support and slowed down, they won't win unless they persuade (pay?) another big pool to join their cause.I could see BU reaching 51% though, where if they forked at that point, it wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.
I think SegWit is a good option, much better and than BU and it wouldn't divide the community as much as BU would.
Well I support and prefer SegWit as well.
But I give a damn what Vorhees has to say. That guy is shady as f*** and in no way any better than Ver!
When he tweets something like that, altough mostly belonging to the Ver camp, then he has an agenda going.
But I give a damn what Vorhees has to say. That guy is shady as f*** and in no way any better than Ver!
When he tweets something like that, altough mostly belonging to the Ver camp, then he has an agenda going.
Too bad, neither SegWit nor Unlimited will reach their target support %.
I could see BU reaching 51% though, where if they forked at that point, it wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.
I could see BU reaching 51% though, where if they forked at that point, it wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.
Why is bitcoin about specific central individuals?
Yahhhn
Yahhhn
mention say 100 people to appear like its not 10 people with puppetstrings.
but then call millions of people things like
'but the well ESTABLISHED .. TRUSTED ..TEAM"
"not smart"
"shills"
"altcoiners"
Why is bitcoin about specific central individuals?
Yahhhn
Yahhhn
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
im not surprised
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#s
oh look shapeshift
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#b
oh look blockstream
oh look btcc
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#c
oh look coinbase
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#s
oh look shapeshift
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#b
oh look blockstream
oh look btcc
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#c
oh look coinbase
Erik, dissapointing bro to see
you support segwit.
Are these millions in VC influencing you?
Why segwit? Why not speak the truth
about core?
Being a early adopter will not shift people's ideas about this whole issue, but some people might value his opinion. He is after all very
knowledgeable on the subject, so normal non-technical followers will definitely follow his example. The most important factor to weigh in here is,
early adaptors have loads of coins and they will go with the implementation that would be the safest option for their hoard. Erik should still have
a massive amount of bitcoins.
knowledgeable on the subject, so normal non-technical followers will definitely follow his example. The most important factor to weigh in here is,
early adaptors have loads of coins and they will go with the implementation that would be the safest option for their hoard. Erik should still have
a massive amount of bitcoins.
>90% Core full nodes
it will be hard to explain that in fact 90% support BU
Actually miners are still supporting unlimited. http://xtnodes.com/it will be hard to explain that in fact 90% support BU
Bitcoin Unlimited blocks: 388 ( 38.8% )
Bitcoin Classic blocks: 2 ( 0.2% )
SegWit blocks: 281 ( 28.1% )
But within next few months they may move towards segwit. Bitcoin users don't like to have network split with hard fork but miners seem to have different motivation to support hard fork.
Ask yourself this:
Who created the divide in the community?
Core or BU?
BU is not the cause, BU is the result of what Core caused.
im not surprised
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#s
oh look shapeshift
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#b
oh look blockstream
oh look btcc
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#c
oh look coinbase
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#s
oh look shapeshift
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#b
oh look blockstream
oh look btcc
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#c
oh look coinbase
Erik Voorhees: SegWit should be activated, the sooner the better, and I'll support any plan that moves it forward.
Source?His reddit post: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/duplicates/6385il/erik_voorhees_segwit_should_be_activated_the/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6385il/erik_voorhees_segwit_should_be_activated_the/dfsj7km/
Basically, like everybody said: Bitcoin need to advance in a way or another. The money flow bottleneck should be eliminated as soon as possible to help everybody benefit of it.
The technical details everybody fights over are the most insignificant for the business men and the end user. Only the result is important: the bottleneck is not acceptable.
Let's compare some 2011-2013 early Bitcoin entrepreneurs
Charlie Shrem
Charlie ran a legally registered, known entity business in the US. The basis of that business (BitInstant) was 100% legal according to US and NY law (BitInstant was based in New York).
Charlie did something foolish: he accepted large informal BTC buy orders from someone who got the BTC from the original Silk Road website (or maybe one of the others, but basically from some online drug marketplace). Charlie got prosecuted when the dude selling to him was caught. Charlie did jailtime for that.
Erik Voorhees
Erik ran an unregistered gambling business called SatoshiDice, while apparently living in the US and definitely accepting US customers. This is all 0% legal in the US, gambling websites serving US citizens is a criminal offence according to US federal law.
Erik did a mysterious business transaction whereby he sold SatohiDice.com (and it's source code) to an unknown buyer. SatoshiDice.com closed very soon afterwards.
Erik then opened Shapeshift.io sohortly after that, from the well known Central American CIA vassal state, Panama. Erik apparently has lived in Panama ever since, and continues to run Shapeshift.io from Panama, presumably with zero interference from the political force that runs Panama, the CIA. And also without interference from the US government, despite his committing criminal offenses publicly while running Satoshi Dice (and in a legal gray area with respect to running Shapeshift.io)
When one considers the gravity of Shrem's crime (small illegal deals in an otherwise legal exchange business) with the gravity of Voorhees' crimes (entirely legal business models from the top downwards), it's difficult not to wonder what exactly it is that makes Erik Voorhees immune to prosecution.
Charlie Shrem
Charlie ran a legally registered, known entity business in the US. The basis of that business (BitInstant) was 100% legal according to US and NY law (BitInstant was based in New York).
Charlie did something foolish: he accepted large informal BTC buy orders from someone who got the BTC from the original Silk Road website (or maybe one of the others, but basically from some online drug marketplace). Charlie got prosecuted when the dude selling to him was caught. Charlie did jailtime for that.
Erik Voorhees
Erik ran an unregistered gambling business called SatoshiDice, while apparently living in the US and definitely accepting US customers. This is all 0% legal in the US, gambling websites serving US citizens is a criminal offence according to US federal law.
Erik did a mysterious business transaction whereby he sold SatohiDice.com (and it's source code) to an unknown buyer. SatoshiDice.com closed very soon afterwards.
Erik then opened Shapeshift.io sohortly after that, from the well known Central American CIA vassal state, Panama. Erik apparently has lived in Panama ever since, and continues to run Shapeshift.io from Panama, presumably with zero interference from the political force that runs Panama, the CIA. And also without interference from the US government, despite his committing criminal offenses publicly while running Satoshi Dice (and in a legal gray area with respect to running Shapeshift.io)
When one considers the gravity of Shrem's crime (small illegal deals in an otherwise legal exchange business) with the gravity of Voorhees' crimes (entirely legal business models from the top downwards), it's difficult not to wonder what exactly it is that makes Erik Voorhees immune to prosecution.
>90% Core full nodes
it will be hard to explain that in fact 90% support BU
Actually miners are still supporting unlimited.it will be hard to explain that in fact 90% support BU
That's why he said nodes instead of miners
>90% Core full nodes
it will be hard to explain that in fact 90% support BU
Actually miners are still supporting unlimited. http://xtnodes.com/it will be hard to explain that in fact 90% support BU
Bitcoin Unlimited blocks: 388 ( 38.8% )
Bitcoin Classic blocks: 2 ( 0.2% )
SegWit blocks: 281 ( 28.1% )
But within next few months they may move towards segwit. Bitcoin users don't like to have network split with hard fork but miners seem to have different motivation to support hard fork.
>90% Core full nodes
it will be hard to explain that in fact 90% support BU
let's activate segwit
miners do their job or users will do UASF
it will be hard to explain that in fact 90% support BU
let's activate segwit
miners do their job or users will do UASF
Erik Voorhees: SegWit should be activated, the sooner the better, and I'll support any plan that moves it forward.
Source?
His reddit post: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/duplicates/6385il/erik_voorhees_segwit_should_be_activated_the/
Jump to: