Topic: If you want to know why I hate the dev team and how they treat Bitcoin... (Read 8751 times)
July 04, 2018, 10:50:31 PM
I think this is very difficult to solve. Everything has its own shortcomings. Sometimes we have to accept at the present time. Because it takes time to perfect.
June 07, 2018, 11:11:08 AM
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/10wlva/so_how_long_until_the_bitcoinqt_diskio_tipping/
It's shit like this. They want every user to be a verifying node regardless of their technical proficiency and what the end user wants out of Bitcoin.
When a user complains about the program using excess resources while being verifying node, the devs and some others often strikeback with a sense of entitlement "You should help out. If you don't like it, leave. Come back when the tech is better."
The tech IS better guys. There are thin clients and ewallets that resolve this but you deride them and continue to work on a vision of software nobody wants. It's rather limiting for Bitcoin as a whole. Can you imagine how many people have dumped Bitcoin because Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind continues to be a slow, overburdened pain in the ass?
It's very clear: This desktop-based vision for Bitcoin is one of Autism and general lack of ingenuity.
I read the reddit thread and did not see any Bitcoin developers post on it. How to balance the need for fully verifying nodes and the need for users to be on fast implementations is a topic we've discussed many times It's shit like this. They want every user to be a verifying node regardless of their technical proficiency and what the end user wants out of Bitcoin.
When a user complains about the program using excess resources while being verifying node, the devs and some others often strikeback with a sense of entitlement "You should help out. If you don't like it, leave. Come back when the tech is better."
The tech IS better guys. There are thin clients and ewallets that resolve this but you deride them and continue to work on a vision of software nobody wants. It's rather limiting for Bitcoin as a whole. Can you imagine how many people have dumped Bitcoin because Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind continues to be a slow, overburdened pain in the ass?
It's very clear: This desktop-based vision for Bitcoin is one of Autism and general lack of ingenuity.
May 28, 2018, 09:53:33 PM
there is a point of difficulty where Bitcoin may be difficult to develop, so there are some people who want Bitcoin to stay like this.
and maybe they're afraid there will be a hacker when the new update opens. but trust me someday Bitcoin will be a unifying nation with its own digital currency itself.
and maybe they're afraid there will be a hacker when the new update opens. but trust me someday Bitcoin will be a unifying nation with its own digital currency itself.
May 24, 2018, 09:52:16 AM
Interesting post! There is information to think about. It's a pity you faced such an issue. Personally I have been working with a development team for several months already and haven't regretted my choice. Of course, it took me much time to find a good company, but I was recommended to check the article on https://diceus.com/software-development-companies-ukraine/. It persuaded me to choose one of the Ukrainian vendors. I should say, the Ukrainian developers have a big experience, high education and perfect English-speaking and writing skills. I shared this information in the hope it will be useful for someone.
December 26, 2012, 07:01:50 PM
What makes you think we're not working very hard to deal with the increasing load?
Yes, we are conservative when it comes to modifying the reference code, and I think we should be.
That said, I've also spent more than a few weeks time already on rewriting the reference client's validation engine to be much more efficient. Without any compensation, by the way. I understand the decreasing performance is rapidly becoming an issue, and not seeing improvement must be frustrating. But please don't think we're ignorant. I'm not alone, of course. Mike helped by making Bitcoin run on top of LevelDB (instead of ancient BDB), which has much better performance, in particular on slow disks.
All this is finished and works. It just requires a massive amount of testing - we can't just switch to some faster code and hope that it behaves the same way. Even if it deviates from the old one in the tiniest way, we have a serious problem. This will take time to merge, and time is critical now. We're also just volunteers.
Anyway, expect 0.8 to be significantly faster than 0.7. I'm not talking about a few percent improvement. How much improvement will depend on a lot of factors, but I've done test runs (in idealized conditions) with full syncs in less than half an hour. In practice for most it will probably still be hours, but it shouldn't be days anymore.
Please, patience.
PS: I'm not on reddit.
Yes, we are conservative when it comes to modifying the reference code, and I think we should be.
That said, I've also spent more than a few weeks time already on rewriting the reference client's validation engine to be much more efficient. Without any compensation, by the way. I understand the decreasing performance is rapidly becoming an issue, and not seeing improvement must be frustrating. But please don't think we're ignorant. I'm not alone, of course. Mike helped by making Bitcoin run on top of LevelDB (instead of ancient BDB), which has much better performance, in particular on slow disks.
All this is finished and works. It just requires a massive amount of testing - we can't just switch to some faster code and hope that it behaves the same way. Even if it deviates from the old one in the tiniest way, we have a serious problem. This will take time to merge, and time is critical now. We're also just volunteers.
Anyway, expect 0.8 to be significantly faster than 0.7. I'm not talking about a few percent improvement. How much improvement will depend on a lot of factors, but I've done test runs (in idealized conditions) with full syncs in less than half an hour. In practice for most it will probably still be hours, but it shouldn't be days anymore.
Please, patience.
PS: I'm not on reddit.
Thanks! I look forward to it.
October 12, 2012, 07:29:50 PM
As I read a few times, updating bitcoin code is like fixing a car while it's on the highway, without the option to stop it, so I abide by de Dev to be carefull, and expect them to behave carefully.
I'm sure that they are aware of ressources usage issue and those issue will be fixed sometimes. For now, I concider bitcoin are still in it's infancy.
I also agree that by the P2P nature of the bitcoin protocol, the more verifying nodes exists, the better it is !
Keep in mind that the hardware capability are growing really fast, and there are some new technologies that are about to be availlable in the store, that will made exponential gains in hardware capacity : just look for graphene stuff (processor, screen, batteries).. when those graphene made hardware will be on the shelves... watch out !
was my 2 satoshi !
I'm sure that they are aware of ressources usage issue and those issue will be fixed sometimes. For now, I concider bitcoin are still in it's infancy.
I also agree that by the P2P nature of the bitcoin protocol, the more verifying nodes exists, the better it is !
Keep in mind that the hardware capability are growing really fast, and there are some new technologies that are about to be availlable in the store, that will made exponential gains in hardware capacity : just look for graphene stuff (processor, screen, batteries).. when those graphene made hardware will be on the shelves... watch out !
was my 2 satoshi !
October 12, 2012, 06:39:43 PM
Atlas you boggle me, sometimes you whine about taxation and other items normally complained about by the lets call them "1%" as occupy calls them. Other threads like this one, you purport to be a person who would be out there complaining about the "1%" holding you down. You do realize you are talking about bitcoin here and not the federal government right?
The federal government started out small at one point as well.Litecoin: So what do you want to do tonight Bitcoin?
Bitcoin: The same thing we do every night litecoin, try to take over the world.
October 12, 2012, 05:28:52 PM
Atlas you boggle me, sometimes you whine about taxation and other items normally complained about by the lets call them "1%" as occupy calls them. Other threads like this one, you purport to be a person who would be out there complaining about the "1%" holding you down. You do realize you are talking about bitcoin here and not the federal government right?
The federal government started out small at one point as well.Litecoin: So what do you want to do tonight Bitcoin?
Bitcoin: The same thing we do every night litecoin, try to take over the world.
October 12, 2012, 05:11:00 PM
Atlas you boggle me, sometimes you whine about taxation and other items normally complained about by the lets call them "1%" as occupy calls them. Other threads like this one, you purport to be a person who would be out there complaining about the "1%" holding you down. You do realize you are talking about bitcoin here and not the federal government right?
The federal government started out small at one point as well.Litecoin: So what do you want to do tonight Bitcoin?
Bitcoin: The same thing we do every night litecoin, try to take over the world.
October 12, 2012, 03:27:52 PM
Atlas you boggle me, sometimes you whine about taxation and other items normally complained about by the lets call them "1%" as occupy calls them. Other threads like this one, you purport to be a person who would be out there complaining about the "1%" holding you down. You do realize you are talking about bitcoin here and not the federal government right?
The federal government started out small at one point as well. October 12, 2012, 03:18:51 PM
Atlas you boggle me, sometimes you whine about taxation and other items normally complained about by the lets call them "1%" as occupy calls them. Other threads like this one, you purport to be a person who would be out there complaining about the "1%" holding you down. You do realize you are talking about bitcoin here and not the federal government right?
October 12, 2012, 02:56:01 PM
All I see is lots of whining.
Do these look like whiners to you?
October 12, 2012, 02:51:11 PM
Yes, because the Fed will never be ended without a "civil" war. In the meantime, evil protects evil at any cost.
October 12, 2012, 02:45:51 PM
All I see is lots of whining.
Do these look like whiners to you?
October 12, 2012, 02:44:03 PM
All I see is lots of whining.
October 12, 2012, 02:43:20 PM
It won't be known until it happens and it's pushed down our throats by a large number of supporters and the establishment. It's best to make such a change impossible.
I don't get it. If its a change that has a large number of supporters, it's what should happen for them. Those people should get the currency which they desire.
I will continue to use the currency which I desire.
What's the problem? Freedom to choose is a good thing.
October 12, 2012, 01:03:14 PM
I don't even seek different properties. I like what we have now but I am afraid of future change proposed by a trusted and central developer.
What are the specific changes that you are afraid are coming?
The only specific complaint I've seen is, "core dev team shouldn't promote the (more secure, trustless) core dev client over thin wallets or webwallets."
It won't be known until it happens and it's pushed down our throats by a large number of supporters and the establishment. It's best to make such a change impossible.
It's getting confusing guys...
October 12, 2012, 01:01:16 PM
I don't even seek different properties. I like what we have now but I am afraid of future change proposed by a trusted and central developer.
What are the specific changes that you are afraid are coming?
The only specific complaint I've seen is, "core dev team shouldn't promote the (more secure, trustless) core dev client over thin wallets or webwallets."
It won't be known until it happens and it's pushed down our throats by a large number of supporters and the establishment. It's best to make such a change impossible.
October 12, 2012, 12:58:44 PM
I don't even seek different properties. I like what we have now but I am afraid of future change proposed by a trusted and central developer.
What are the specific changes that you are afraid are coming?
The only specific complaint I've seen is, "core dev team shouldn't promote the (more secure, trustless) core dev client over thin wallets or webwallets."
EDIT: Sorry about misformatted quote.
October 12, 2012, 12:20:18 PM
Who doesnt enjoy a good forking though?
A fork isn't effective if only a small number of people are using it. It's like seceding from the United States -- but you're only a single man in a apartment. No, I'm for one currency with many competing developers.
Then you have only a fantasy about how software development works in reality.
-=yawn=-
Jump to: