Gavin Threatens to Quit Bitcoin Development and Join Hearn's Fork - page 5.

redsn0w

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1043

#Free market

Quote from: Lauda on May 31, 2015, 06:35:24 AM

Quote from: redsn0w on May 31, 2015, 06:03:25 AM

So are you saying that it is present a conflict of interest, because I do not see why the other core can vote or agree with the Gavin's proposal. A technology should be updated if it wants to stay alive.
However I will grab my popcorn and watch!

The thing is that these updates can't be just patched in to Bitcoin at will. The developers usually review/discuss changes and need to reach consensus when it is something big as the 20MB block size (even though it is not big).
Don't get me wrong. I do not support Gavin's Bitcoin XT fork at all. This will severely damage the whole ecosystem. I'm trying to say that the developers have hidden agendas (mostly financial) to why they're against the block size increase.
...

Like I said yesterday:

Quote from: redsn0w on May 30, 2015, 09:29:23 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on May 30, 2015, 09:25:43 AM

1. probably its just overblown drama. Consensus will
be reached.

2. I think the block size needs to increase, its
not "fuckery".

3. If a fork does happen, its bad for Bitcoin
but if you're HODLing , you'll have both
coins so you can wait and see what happens
when the dust settles.

This is so risky, if one of the chain will be abbandone you will lose all your coin Roll Eyes

and this why all the community is worried (it is only a question of money, and it is really a tall order for gavin).

I will go with XT, but I will also hold my actual bitcoin... let's see what it will happen. However I am also thinking, why few people should have the power to choose for us? Is it not against with the bitcoin philosophy?

Quote from: sintax on May 31, 2015, 06:47:25 AM

Quote from: redsn0w on May 31, 2015, 05:14:17 AM

Quote from: sintax on May 31, 2015, 05:02:28 AM

Isn't Hearn that dude who wanted to force proof of identity by having people verify their passports?

Bitcoin >> Gavcoin >> Fedcoin

The people don't understand that we are not obliged to follow his 'fork' so why are you complaining? If you don't want to follow or accept the Gavin's proposal, simple hold your coin or sell them for any FIAT currency.

Oh the illusion of choice, lol sure thing mate, keep increasing that post count

Is this a forum? Are you saying that I can't post Roll Eyes

?

Quote from: sintax on May 31, 2015, 06:47:25 AM

So we should just sit back and let Fed-friendly Gavin/Hearn turn Bitcoin into a centralized shitcoin, no thanks. Last thing I want to do is cash out to fiat...

What is your proposal to 'fight' against the Gavin's proposal? The unique thing that we can do is 'not update the client'... or maybe do you have something of better?

sintax

member

Activity: 83

Merit: 10

Quote from: redsn0w on May 31, 2015, 05:14:17 AM

Quote from: sintax on May 31, 2015, 05:02:28 AM

Isn't Hearn that dude who wanted to force proof of identity by having people verify their passports?

Bitcoin >> Gavcoin >> Fedcoin

The people don't understand that we are not obliged to follow his 'fork' so why are you complaining? If you don't want to follow or accept the Gavin's proposal, simple hold your coin or sell them for any FIAT currency.

Oh the illusion of choice, lol sure thing mate, keep increasing that post count

So we should just sit back and let Fed-friendly Gavin/Hearn turn Bitcoin into a centralized shitcoin, no thanks. Last thing I want to do is cash out to fiat...

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: redsn0w on May 31, 2015, 06:03:25 AM

So are you saying that it is present a conflict of interest, because I do not see why the other core can vote or agree with the Gavin's proposal. A technology should be updated if it wants to stay alive.
However I will grab my popcorn and watch!

The thing is that these updates can't be just patched in to Bitcoin at will. The developers usually review/discuss changes and need to reach consensus when it is something big as the 20MB block size (even though it is not big).
Don't get me wrong. I do not support Gavin's Bitcoin XT fork at all. This will severely damage the whole ecosystem. I'm trying to say that the developers have hidden agendas (mostly financial) to why they're against the block size increase.

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on May 31, 2015, 06:04:43 AM

One of the biggest problem of people is that they only accept what they were provided with. Medias exploit this easily.

BTW, where did Gavin threatens to quit Bitcoin development? And isn't this really Gavin's fork? The title is misleading.

Things are taking a turn. The problem is actually that every single dumdum in the world has the right to join Bitcoin and start spewing out nonsense. The developers will become exhausted and stressed out.
We've read thousands of different opinions, most of which are utter nonsense backed up only by the unicorns in my garden. Things are getting out of control. Look at the drama now.

Maxwell will potentially leave if Bitcoin XT rolls out:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/37vg8y/is_the_blockstream_company_the_reason_why_4_core/crqbd78

Don't tell me it is misleading or anything and just read his damn post.

Quote

If the Bitcoin community wants to go commit suicide, I'm confident that I can sell my most of my bitcoins before most of the public has realized things have gone wrong. .

redsn0w

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1043

#Free market

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on May 31, 2015, 06:04:43 AM

Quote from: Lauda on May 31, 2015, 05:44:43 AM

The core developers, Gregory, Pieter, Luke and Matt are involved in a company Blockstream: https://www.blockstream.com/team/ .
Obviously they want Blockstream to be successful. Please tell me how Gavin is biased and the others aren't. Roll Eyes

There are two sides to (almost) each story, and there definitely are hidden agendas involved here.

One of the biggest problem of people is that they only accept what they were provided with. Medias exploit this easily.

BTW, where did Gavin threatens to quit Bitcoin development? And isn't this really Gavin's fork? The title is misleading.

Yes the thread title is misleading, simply it is not a threat :

What do other people think? If we can't come to an agreement soon, then I'll ask for help reviewing/submitting patches to Mike's Bitcoin-Xt project that implement a big increase now that grows over time so we may never have to go through all this rancor and debate again. I'll then ask for help lobbying the merchant services and exchanges and hosted wallet companies and other bitcoind-using-infrastructure companies (and anybody who agrees with me that we need bigger blocks sooner rather than later) to run Bitcoin-Xt instead of Bitcoin Core, and state that they are running it. We'll be able to see uptake on the network by monitoring client versions. Perhaps by the time that happens there will be consensus bigger blocks are needed sooner rather than later; if so, great! The early deployment will just serve as early testing, and all of the software already deployed will ready for bigger blocks. But if there is still no consensus among developers but the "bigger blocks now" movement is successful, I'll ask for help getting big miners to do the same, and use the soft-fork block version voting mechanism to (hopefully) get a majority and then a super-majority willing to produce bigger blocks. The purpose of that process is to prove to any doubters that they'd better start supporting bigger blocks or they'll be left behind, and to give them a chance to upgrade before that happens. Because if we can't come to consensus here, the ultimate authority for determining consensus is what code the majority of merchants and exchanges and miners are running. -- -- Gavin Andresen

sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/

And there are also some interesting article on his ~~block~~

blog http://gavinandresen.ninja

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 509

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: Lauda on May 31, 2015, 05:44:43 AM

The core developers, Gregory, Pieter, Luke and Matt are involved in a company Blockstream: https://www.blockstream.com/team/ .
Obviously they want Blockstream to be successful. Please tell me how Gavin is biased and the others aren't. Roll Eyes

There are two sides to (almost) each story, and there definitely are hidden agendas involved here.

One of the biggest problem of people is that they only accept what they were provided with. Medias exploit this easily.

BTW, where did Gavin threatens to quit Bitcoin development? And isn't this really Gavin's fork? The title is misleading.

redsn0w

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1043

#Free market

Quote from: Lauda on May 31, 2015, 05:44:43 AM

The core developers, Gregory, Pieter, Luke and Matt are involved in a company Blockstream: https://www.blockstream.com/team/ .
Obviously they want Blockstream to be successful. Please tell me how Gavin is biased and the others aren't. Roll Eyes

There are two sides to (almost) each story, and there definitely are hidden agendas involved here.

So are you saying that it is present a conflict of interest, because I do not see why the other core can vote or agree with the Gavin's proposal. A technology should be updated if it wants to stay alive.

However I will grab my popcorn and watch!

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

The core developers, Gregory, Pieter, Luke and Matt are involved in a company Blockstream: https://www.blockstream.com/team/ .
Obviously they want Blockstream to be successful. Please tell me how Gavin is biased and the others aren't. Roll Eyes

There are two sides to (almost) each story, and there definitely are hidden agendas involved here.

redsn0w

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1043

#Free market

Quote from: sintax on May 31, 2015, 05:02:28 AM

Isn't Hearn that dude who wanted to force proof of identity by having people verify their passports?

Bitcoin >> Gavcoin >> Fedcoin

The people don't understand that we are not obliged to follow his 'fork' so why are you complaining? If you don't want to follow or accept the Gavin's proposal, simple hold your coin or sell them for any FIAT currency.

LiteCoinGuy

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1014

In Satoshi I Trust

21 MB - the new blocksize limit! Makes more sense Cheesy

!

Nancarrow

hero member

Activity: 492

Merit: 503

Quote from: Lauda on May 31, 2015, 04:34:00 AM

Quote from: Nancarrow on May 30, 2015, 03:32:43 PM

Quote from: achow101 on May 30, 2015, 01:55:41 PM

However, if it was the bottleneck, then we would see tons of 1 Mb blocks right now, and there aren't. The average blocksize right now is around 0.5 Mb.

Right. And I presented you with an either/or situation, and you have identified one of the branches does not apply. Therefore I contend the other one does. Since Bitcoin is not currently filling up 1MB blocks, there is no worry that block sizes will immediately become 20MB when the limit is raised. If and when they do it will be because it was NEEDED.

Stop. You are part of the group that is spewing out anti fork nonsense. It does not matter if it is filling up blocks now or not. Reaching consensus later will be very hard, we're even having problems right now.
Doing a hard fork will also be much harder.
Do you even have an idea what the media will do to Bitcoin once it stops including some transactions into blocks? It's better to prevent this from happening on time rather than having to fix it after it happens.

Some people just have big authority problems.

Er, dude, I'm PRO-fork and I was clarifying to someone why an ANTI-fork piece of reasoning ("The blocks will bloat immediately, we won't be able to keep up") was bogus. Maybe have some more coffee?

ETA: actually I can see where the problem arises - I was responding to someone who is also PRO-fork. But my point stands. Apologies, knightdk, for misinterpreting you in much the same way LaudaM misinterpreted me. Embarrassed

sintax

member

Activity: 83

Merit: 10

Isn't Hearn that dude who wanted to force proof of identity by having people verify their passports?

Bitcoin >> Gavcoin >> Fedcoin

iCEBREAKER

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1072

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on May 31, 2015, 12:35:38 AM

Bitcoin XT is a patch set on top of Bitcoin Core, with a focus on upgrades to the peer to peer protocol. By running it you can opt in to providing the Bitcoin network with additional services beyond what Bitcoin Core nodes provide.

This is 100% textbook Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.

Gavin is putting MasterNodes on the Bitcoin network. What could possibly go wrong?

iCEBREAKER

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1072

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

Quote from: connectthebots on May 30, 2015, 03:49:44 AM

Wow, so a developer has so much centralized influence that that him moving away is gonna decide an outcome?

Looks like Bitcoin's semi-decentralization is over. Onto the full centralization road people.

Yes, Gavin's coup is being greeted with thunderous applause from the cowed Redditards.

What a nightmare. I hope to wake up and find out Bitcoin XT was just a collaborative hoax between /buttcoin and Gavin.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: Nancarrow on May 30, 2015, 03:32:43 PM

Quote from: achow101 on May 30, 2015, 01:55:41 PM

However, if it was the bottleneck, then we would see tons of 1 Mb blocks right now, and there aren't. The average blocksize right now is around 0.5 Mb.

Right. And I presented you with an either/or situation, and you have identified one of the branches does not apply. Therefore I contend the other one does. Since Bitcoin is not currently filling up 1MB blocks, there is no worry that block sizes will immediately become 20MB when the limit is raised. If and when they do it will be because it was NEEDED.

Stop. You are part of the group that is spewing out anti fork nonsense. It does not matter if it is filling up blocks now or not. Reaching consensus later will be very hard, we're even having problems right now.
Doing a hard fork will also be much harder.
Do you even have an idea what the media will do to Bitcoin once it stops including some transactions into blocks? It's better to prevent this from happening on time rather than having to fix it after it happens.

Some people just have big authority problems.

RoadStress

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Pecunia non olet on May 31, 2015, 12:16:16 AM

I think it's good Gavin finally understood he needs to make an altcoin.
I just hope he'll leave Bitcoin alone then.

Hello MP puppet! How are you today?

tokeweed

legendary

Activity: 3976

Merit: 1421

Life, Love and Laughter...

Quote from: MicroGuy on May 29, 2015, 11:51:14 PM

"Today on the Sourceforge hosted Bitcoin-development mailing list Gavin Andresen has threatened to leave his present group of Bitcoin software developers over their objections to his demands for a rapid hardfork of the Bitcoin network. In the event his demands are not met Gavin plans to join Mike Hearn's Bitcoin-XT project which is a fork of the Bitcoin client where Hearn implements patches that Gavin's current affiliated developers find too risky to implement in any mainline Bitcoin client. If Gavin defects to Bitcoin-XT he plans to work with Hearn to lobby merchants, miners, and businesses to move to Bitcoin-XT. Previously Mike Hearn was responsible for the March 2013 Bitcoin network crisis."

Original post: http://qntra.net/2015/05/gavin-threatens-to-quit-bitcoin-development-and-join-hearns-fork/

See you all in Litecoin.

Vaccomondus

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

Kprawn

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1074

The ultimate authority for determining consensus is definitely not FORCING a situation, where you as a Core developer, create a situation, where you say... Either play the game, they way I want us to play, or I will destroy your ball, and me and my friends will play with another ball.

Is this the mentality of a Core developer? No wonder so many countries does not trust the WESTERN influence in the development scene. Angry

EternalWingsofGod

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

Quote from: MicroGuy on May 29, 2015, 11:51:14 PM

"Today on the Sourceforge hosted Bitcoin-development mailing list Gavin Andresen has threatened to leave his present group of Bitcoin software developers over their objections to his demands for a rapid hardfork of the Bitcoin network. In the event his demands are not met Gavin plans to join Mike Hearn's Bitcoin-XT project which is a fork of the Bitcoin client where Hearn implements patches that Gavin's current affiliated developers find too risky to implement in any mainline Bitcoin client. If Gavin defects to Bitcoin-XT he plans to work with Hearn to lobby merchants, miners, and businesses to move to Bitcoin-XT. Previously Mike Hearn was responsible for the March 2013 Bitcoin network crisis."

Original post: http://qntra.net/2015/05/gavin-threatens-to-quit-bitcoin-development-and-join-hearns-fork/

Based on this article it seems like a development choice to work on a second route without the full team behind it.
As it is I see no issue with following different routes
Consensus will be reached through multiple paths but until its needed people will use Core and if it proves to be a significant issue move to XT if this is a two route fork then it could become one of Bitcoins first splits.
We will see though if unity is kept or not.

Quote from: NorrisK on May 30, 2015, 01:37:20 AM

It is a bad thing that one person currently has so much influence on the bitcoin perception
him leaving should not cause more than a small dip on the news, otherwise it has become to centralized around him.

It is a bit concerning that Bitcoin is centralized in a sense on the reliance of one particular dev but that aside I can understand Gavins role and it does remain important.

ArticMine

legendary

Activity: 2282

Merit: 1050

Monero Core Team

Gavin has little choice but to take this course of action as Bitcoin cannot continue crippled by the 1 MB limit. This is not a new debate. As the following thread dating back to 2010 demonstrates. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.0;all Yes I have brought it back from the dead twice, but Bitcoin can not continue without dealing with the 1 MB limit for another two years, so I doubt I can do this a third time. Sad

Topic: Gavin Threatens to Quit Bitcoin Development and Join Hearn's Fork - page 5. (Read 9913 times)