https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/issues/65#issuecomment-314221337Developers are so incompetent that they propose a secret testnet, so it doesn't get attacked.
Fantastic! Just like Buggy Unlimited clowns resorted to closed source development to get a patch out, now these morons want to do closed source testing, for a totally realistic and robust test only to hardfork in a matter of a few months.
Anyone supporting this mess is losing it or is being paid to do so.
FFS.
Every software i've used always had bugs in them. Software gets updated all the time. Even the "mighty" Bill Gates' Windows had a long history of bugs.
Core had many bugs in the last 6 years. Bitcoin had bugs since the first version came out and Hal Finney helped Satoshi to fixed the bugs.
When Core makes bugs, Core fanboys stay silent (I didn't come on here attacking Core developers). When anyone else makes bugs, Core fanboys goes ballistic.
Now, if there is testing going on, bugs being fixed, then that's normal part of software development. When i made a game called Connect 4 for BBC Micro computer in the 1980s, i had a few bugs, and fixed them, before being released.
NO ONE IS INFALLIBLE.
This is not a good excuse. When you use buggy Microsoft software, you dont have thousands of dollars or hundreds of thousands or more invested in it. It might be easy for you to say that because you might only have a small investment in BTC, but make that investment large enough and you find yourself on the conservative side of things with development.
That's irrelevant as usual people miss the point. All software have bugs. There are bugs that are minor, sometimes "terrible bugs" that can be costly. It is the "terrible bugs" that bitcoin need to avoid. So long testing is being done, bugs fixed, more testing... i'm ok with it. No need to panic. Minor bugs are a fact of life when running softwares.
Good that you picking up that one.
Yes there are always bugs in every code line.
Most of the 'terrible' or 'show stoppers' you can find in UAT testing phases. But in bitcoin there is no bounty for attackers in testnets,
so in production you can be sure, any code line added is getting to increase the risk!
But I'm also very concerned about design 'bugs' like we have in SW -> e.g. moving the witnesses out of the blocks. This is next critical level nobody can tell you it works in production. It can be more terrible than your code bugs.
Finally we have economics working in Bitcoin > a Nash equilibrium to save
Look at SW- It is full of new code, other design, we hear it might change the Nash equilibrium - > RISK , RISK, RISK
A simple block increase is a no-brainer!
Cut the down side!
