Satoshi Roundtable Retreat - 70 top Techies & CEOs - What should be covered? - page 10.

bargainbin

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Quote from: BruceFenton on February 22, 2016, 12:57:01 PM

...
Just to be clear there are two different roundtables.....the one earlier this week and the one coming up this weekend.
...

Ah, my apologies. Two Round Tables. Perhaps a snappier moniker? Satoshi's Last Supper?

BruceFenton

sr. member

Activity: 404

Merit: 250

Quote from: bargainbin on February 22, 2016, 11:01:44 AM

Go down the whole list, and you'll find that there is nothing in it that anyone could ever say "whoa, hold on, that's not what we agreed on" to Sad

Just to be clear there are two different roundtables.....the one earlier this week and the one coming up this weekend.
They have different organizers.
The one a few days ago wrote the letter.
The one coming up hasn't written anything yet.

Jet Cash

legendary

Activity: 2828

Merit: 2472

https://JetCash.com

Quote from: franky1 on February 22, 2016, 12:27:57 PM

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 22, 2016, 12:11:48 PM

Oh well - it looks as if my 5 minute block interval suggestion is a bummer.

good in theory of speed and customer experience.. bad in practical, logic and economics

Bit like 2Mb blocks then.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 22, 2016, 12:11:48 PM

Oh well - it looks as if my 5 minute block interval suggestion is a bummer.

good in theory of speed and customer experience.. bad in practical, logic and economics

even i thought about the same thing as you a couple years ago, but the more i played with it in scenarios and weighed up the pros and cons the more reality persuaded me that its not a great idea

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8188336

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: Lauda on February 22, 2016, 11:44:50 AM

Quote from: BruceFenton on February 22, 2016, 10:56:57 AM

When meetings are covered by media then people tend to play to the press -- they also often focus more on "winning" looking good or will avoid saying things that they can say privately.

-snip-

People have concerns with investors, potential partners and so on.
Just like private conversations in a hallway...lots of advantages of privacy.

I understand. What about some public statements, or live-tweets of what is currently being discussed? You don't have to go in-depth though.

Quote from: VeritasSapere on February 22, 2016, 11:01:34 AM

Quote from: Lauda on February 22, 2016, 10:18:27 AM

My transactions have never taken more than 10 minutes to confirm, unless there was unusual block timing.

I am seriously starting to question your knowledge of Bitcoin. Transactions never take longer then ten minutes to confirm? How often do you even use Bitcoin? Most people with some experience or at least some theoretical knowledge of Bitcoin should know that this is not true.

Either you are trying to attack me (in a polite way) or a unable to properly read what was written. Unless there is unusual block timing (i.e. no blocks in the last 10 minutes), a confirmation has never taken me more than 10 minutes. This is because I include a higher fee than unusual. This is true and you can't change that. This is off-topic, stop thread hijacking.

lesson 1.
lets say block 400,000 has just been solved at 12:00:00
you send a transaction at 12:04:00..now then due to your generous fee, you are now added to the very next available block..
but guess what.. its not going to be included in 400,0001 because thats in the middle of being hashed, your too late for that boat.
so 400,001 gets solved at 12:10:00
woo hoo now your tx is part of 400,002..
so 400,0012 gets solved at 12:20:00

so you have waited 16 minutes.. even though your high fee promised you to get into the very next block.. there is no logical physical or theoretical way that you would have got into 400,001..

secondly. there are people that pay a huge fee that are still not promised into the very next block. so paying a fee is not a guarantee, its just a no strings attached bribe with the hopes that the miner will make room for you

Jet Cash

legendary

Activity: 2828

Merit: 2472

https://JetCash.com

Oh well - it looks as if my 5 minute block interval suggestion is a bummer.

BruceFenton

sr. member

Activity: 404

Merit: 250

Quote from: Karartma1 on February 22, 2016, 10:27:30 AM

Where are the twins? Did they get a ticket?
There's Micah Winkelspecht but the list misses Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss. Cool

too bad

Yes, they were invited, said they would have liked to attend but have a commitment and thanked us for the invite and asked to be invited next time

BruceFenton

sr. member

Activity: 404

Merit: 250

Quote from: Kprawn on February 22, 2016, 10:22:15 AM

Where is Wladimir J. van der Laan and Pieter Wuille ? ..... These guys has contributed the most to the code and they not there? ... What am I missing?

These meetings behind closed doors again... like the Island weekend? The exclusion of vital Core developers when Bitcoin stuff is discussed is something we

should worry about? Huh

They were both invited and unfortunately did not even reply.

I hear through the grapevine that they want to avoid "politics" - no idea if this is the case, I don't know either of them...but, if so, there is nothing noble about avoiding politics when an important key discussion is going on.

Leaders in this space should not abdicate - everyone should either be working on bringing people together and increasing understand or should be working on explaining their position to others.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 3000

Terminated.

Quote from: BruceFenton on February 22, 2016, 10:56:57 AM

When meetings are covered by media then people tend to play to the press -- they also often focus more on "winning" looking good or will avoid saying things that they can say privately.

-snip-

People have concerns with investors, potential partners and so on.
Just like private conversations in a hallway...lots of advantages of privacy.

I understand. What about some public statements, or live-tweets of what is currently being discussed? You don't have to go in-depth though.

Quote from: VeritasSapere on February 22, 2016, 11:01:34 AM

Quote from: Lauda on February 22, 2016, 10:18:27 AM

My transactions have never taken more than 10 minutes to confirm, unless there was unusual block timing.

I am seriously starting to question your knowledge of Bitcoin. Transactions never take longer then ten minutes to confirm? How often do you even use Bitcoin? Most people with some experience or at least some theoretical knowledge of Bitcoin should know that this is not true.

Either you are trying to attack me (in a polite way) or a unable to properly read what was written. Unless there is unusual block timing (i.e. no blocks in the last 10 minutes), a confirmation has never taken me more than 10 minutes. This is because I include a higher fee than unusual. This is true and you can't change that. This is off-topic, stop thread hijacking.

bargainbin

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Quote from: BruceFenton on February 22, 2016, 10:49:28 AM

Quote from: bargainbin on February 22, 2016, 10:04:23 AM

do you see any points in that list that could be construed as legally binding? Other than block size limit won't be > 4MB when/if it happens?

I don't think any legally binding agreement is likely or even possible.

What we can do is work on things with broad industry buy in and can self enforce them.

For example -- if we agree to a code of conduct that agrees to not trash other tech opinions in the press and some a does....that violator can expect a call from half a dozen other participants saying "whoa, hold on, that's not what we agreed on" .... repeated and willful violations could result in many members of the industry working to reduce the influence of the violator

I'm talking about the wording of what was "signed." And how it's completely open to interpretation.
In other words, going down the list, point-by-point, starting with the first:

Quote

--We understand that SegWit continues to be developed actively as a soft-fork and is likely to proceed towards release over the next two months, as originally scheduled.

How can this be construed as ....well, anything? As long as it's "likely" that Core changes readme.txt once in a while, everything's copacetic.
I mean, it doesn't say anything about Core actually releasing anything in two months, merely "proceed towards release over the next two months."

Go down the whole list, and you'll find that there is nothing in it that anyone could ever say "whoa, hold on, that's not what we agreed on" to Sad

VeritasSapere

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: Lauda on February 22, 2016, 10:18:27 AM

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 22, 2016, 10:00:38 AM

Look at the 10 minute block time restriction. Whatever you do with SegWit ( which is brilliant ), or with blocksize changes, you will still be looking at up to 30 minutes for a confirmation. That's a long time for an on-line service these days.

Wrong, this does not usually happen. My transactions have never taken more than 10 minutes to confirm, unless there was unusual block timing.

I am seriously starting to question your knowledge of Bitcoin. Transactions never take longer then ten minutes to confirm? How often do you even use Bitcoin? Most people with some experience or at least some theoretical knowledge of Bitcoin should know that this is not true.

BruceFenton

sr. member

Activity: 404

Merit: 250

Quote from: Lauda on February 22, 2016, 10:18:27 AM

How about a livestream and/or recording of the whole meeting? Bitcoin should not be about closed meetings.

When meetings are covered by media then people tend to play to the press -- they also often focus more on "winning" looking good or will avoid saying things that they can say privately.

Examples:

"Hey, I suggest John Doe could lead this project."
In private someone could say "No way, that guy is a scammer" -- one might resist saying an accusation in public because they don't want the fight or are not 100% sure

In private I can say "Hey, Jane, you've really upset a lot of the developers with the tweets you made accusing BIP 200 of being of bad intent...lets talk about your concerns now and try to avoid that in the future"
In private I may not want to embarrass Jane or may want to avoid an unproductive flame war

In private a CEO can say "If XYZ doesn't change in the code we are going to have to pivot and fire 14 employees and focus on project 123 instead."
Saying so in public can cause employee panic etc.

People have concerns with investors, potential partners and so on.
Just like private conversations in a hallway...lots of advantages of privacy.

LiteCoinGuy

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1014

In Satoshi I Trust

Quote from: franky1 on February 22, 2016, 10:09:57 AM

Quote from: Redrose on February 22, 2016, 10:07:25 AM

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 22, 2016, 10:00:38 AM

Look at the 10 minute block time restriction. Whatever you do with SegWit ( which is brilliant ), or with blocksize changes, you will still be looking at up to 30 minutes for a confirmation. That's a long time for an on-line service these days.

The 10 minutes blocktime is good. Segregated Witness, if this is ever combined with the 2 MB blocksize increase, will greatly improve confirmation times. Even alone it could greatly help us.

i agree 2mb+segwit would be great. but a 16 month rollout period.. not so great

they talked about bigger than 2MB but smaller than 4MB blocks. maybe we have 3mb+segwit in the end. but i agree with you, they should distribute the patch faster.

BruceFenton

sr. member

Activity: 404

Merit: 250

Quote from: bargainbin on February 22, 2016, 10:04:23 AM

do you see any points in that list that could be construed as legally binding? Other than block size limit won't be > 4MB when/if it happens?

I don't think any legally binding agreement is likely or even possible.

What we can do is work on things with broad industry buy in and can self enforce them.

For example -- if we agree to a code of conduct that agrees to not trash other tech opinions in the press and some a does....that violator can expect a call from half a dozen other participants saying "whoa, hold on, that's not what we agreed on" .... repeated and willful violations could result in many members of the industry working to reduce the influence of the violator

Karartma1

legendary

Activity: 2310

Merit: 1422

Where are the twins? Did they get a ticket?
There's Micah Winkelspecht but the list misses Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss. Cool

too bad

Kprawn

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1074

Where is Wladimir J. van der Laan and Pieter Wuille ? ..... These guys has contributed the most to the code and they not there? ... What am I missing?

These meetings behind closed doors again... like the Island weekend? The exclusion of vital Core developers when Bitcoin stuff is discussed is something we

should worry about? Huh

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 3000

Terminated.

How about a livestream and/or recording of the whole meeting? Bitcoin should not be about closed meetings.

Quote from: Redrose on February 22, 2016, 09:58:42 AM

A written contract that confirm that you all agree for a same direction, handsigned by everyone would a good idea I think. I least we would know that tommorow another new idea will pop up and create again a big mess.

I'm pretty sure that it would be very hard to reach an agreement with 70 parties involved (in a limited amount of time), especially when there is some support for the other side of the argument (political debate - power grab).

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 22, 2016, 10:00:38 AM

Look at the 10 minute block time restriction. Whatever you do with SegWit ( which is brilliant ), or with blocksize changes, you will still be looking at up to 30 minutes for a confirmation. That's a long time for an on-line service these days.

Wrong, this does not usually happen. My transactions have never taken more than 10 minutes to confirm, unless there was unusual block timing.

onlinedragon

hero member

Activity: 1036

Merit: 501

That's a big list with important people in the Bitcoin world. I wonder what there will change after they have done there meeting.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: Redrose on February 22, 2016, 10:07:25 AM

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 22, 2016, 10:00:38 AM

Look at the 10 minute block time restriction. Whatever you do with SegWit ( which is brilliant ), or with blocksize changes, you will still be looking at up to 30 minutes for a confirmation. That's a long time for an on-line service these days.

The 10 minutes blocktime is good. Segregated Witness, if this is ever combined with the 2 MB blocksize increase, will greatly improve confirmation times. Even alone it could greatly help us.

i agree 2mb+segwit would be great. but a 16 month rollout period.. not so great

Redrose

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: Jet Cash on February 22, 2016, 10:00:38 AM

Look at the 10 minute block time restriction. Whatever you do with SegWit ( which is brilliant ), or with blocksize changes, you will still be looking at up to 30 minutes for a confirmation. That's a long time for an on-line service these days.

The 10 minutes blocktime is good. Segregated Witness, if this is ever combined with the 2 MB blocksize increase, will greatly improve confirmation times. Even alone it could greatly help us.

Topic: Satoshi Roundtable Retreat - 70 top Techies & CEOs - What should be covered? - page 10. (Read 9215 times)