Satoshis Original Vision | Bitcointalksearch.org

pinkflower

sr. member

Activity: 868

Merit: 259

Quote from: Minecache on August 17, 2017, 02:35:23 PM

Anyone else sick and tired to their back teeth of hearing this phrase pumped out endlessly by the BCC/BCH trolls as they try to justify their sickcoin?

For any BCH troll here is the nub, you have no idea what Satoshis original vision is because you cannot understand his Bitcoin whitepaper.

Now piss off.

Its a BCC marketing push by Roger Ver himself to use on the noobs who dont know any better. But I will say this, BCC will be better than Segwit2x, and I respect the developers of BCC than I would Jeff Garzik.

The developers behind Segwit2x arent including replay protection.

Soros Shorts

donator

Activity: 1617

Merit: 1012

Quote from: DooMAD on August 21, 2017, 07:27:06 AM

Satoshi's original vision is that whichever chain creates the most proof of work is Bitcoin. It's in the abstract of the whitepaper to summarise the entire concept. You can't get much more clear on what Satoshi meant:

Quote

The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of
hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing
the proof-of-work. The longest chain not only serves as proof of the sequence of
events witnessed, but proof that it came from the largest pool of CPU power. As
long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to
attack the network, they'll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers.

So how about everyone, that's both bigblockers and smallblockers included, stops bickering over which "side" has best interpreted Satoshi's original vision and just roll with it. The only thing that matters in the end is the longest chain, providing it has an adequate quantity of nodes and sustainable economic activity to continue propagating. BitcoinCash has fallen 900 blocks behind, so clearly that isn't Bitcoin according to the above definition.

The corollary of this argument is that Bitcoin Cash nodes and miners are the attackers. Grin

DooMAD

legendary

Activity: 3948

Merit: 3193

Leave no FUD unchallenged

Satoshi's original vision is that whichever chain creates the most proof of work is Bitcoin. It's in the abstract of the whitepaper to summarise the entire concept. You can't get much more clear on what Satoshi meant:

Quote

The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of
hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing
the proof-of-work. The longest chain not only serves as proof of the sequence of
events witnessed, but proof that it came from the largest pool of CPU power. As
long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to
attack the network, they'll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers.

So how about everyone, that's both bigblockers and smallblockers included, stops bickering over which "side" has best interpreted Satoshi's original vision and just roll with it. The only thing that matters in the end is the longest chain, providing it has an adequate quantity of nodes and sustainable economic activity to continue propagating. BitcoinCash has fallen 900 blocks behind, so clearly that isn't Bitcoin according to the above definition.

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: Grrizz on August 20, 2017, 07:31:58 AM

Blockchain/bitcoin is a technology and in the world of technology 8 years is a really, really long time. IMO the whitepaper should be viewed as a guide/foundation to be built apon, not taken for gospel. It was an incredibly forward thinking idea but that doesn't make it flawless and other proposed improvements/criticisms shouldn't be written off just because they weren't included in a 9 page whitepaper.

Sure, improvements are great. Improvements are for example going from a Samsung S6 phone to a S8 phone, But you don't "improve" an Android phone into an iPhone and still call it Android. You'd call it what it is, an iPhone.

Once you change the entire ideology of what Satoshi created, and what many of us from 2010-2011 era signed up for. It can hardly be called Bitcoin anymore.

Also, when Satoshi left, he gave the "key to the kingdom" to Gavin Andresen, meaning to have Gavin to lead the development of Bitcoin further.

Guess which Bitcoin implementation Gavin Andresen would support now? hint: it's not Bsegwit

Grrizz

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Blockchain/bitcoin is a technology and in the world of technology 8 years is a really, really long time. IMO the whitepaper should be viewed as a guide/foundation to be built apon, not taken for gospel. It was an incredibly forward thinking idea but that doesn't make it flawless and other proposed improvements/criticisms shouldn't be written off just because they weren't included in a 9 page whitepaper.

thejaytiesto

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1014

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on August 19, 2017, 05:26:30 PM

Quote from: thejaytiesto on August 19, 2017, 08:34:31 AM

the blocks would become full at 8MB, and it would be a mess for you to run a node, you simply couldn't.

obviously you're talking out of your ass. 8mb is still a tiny amount of data. It takes me about 1.3 seconds to download 8MB.

Wrong, there's more than that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2941&v=iFJ2MZ3KciQ

Sorry, no big blocks for you, Tim. You can bitch and moan all you want, but the real Bitcoin will not have 8MB anytime soon. You can stick to Bitcoin Trash if that makes you sleep at night. Enjoy your 15 seconds of fame while this pump lasts. Im glad I didn't dump all of my BCash myself, I will be able to get some extra free real BTC when I can be arsed to get them set in the wallet (reason BCC has a big marketcap is most people are still too lazy to get their coins or didn't even realize they received any coins). Also im sure the big big whales didn't even dump 1% of their wealth yet.

rizzlarolla

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on August 19, 2017, 05:26:30 PM

Quote from: thejaytiesto on August 19, 2017, 08:34:31 AM

the blocks would become full at 8MB, and it would be a mess for you to run a node, you simply couldn't.

obviously you're talking out of your ass. 8mb is still a tiny amount of data. It takes me about 1.3 seconds to download 8MB.

All part of the Blockstream-Core-Bitcointalk-Theymos propaganda machine.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: thejaytiesto on August 19, 2017, 08:34:31 AM

the blocks would become full at 8MB, and it would be a mess for you to run a node, you simply couldn't.

obviously you're talking out of your ass. 8mb is still a tiny amount of data. It takes me about 1.3 seconds to download 8MB.

thejaytiesto

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1014

Quote from: kokojie on August 18, 2017, 08:36:24 PM

Quote from: pereira4 on August 18, 2017, 11:13:15 AM

Quote from: kokojie on August 17, 2017, 06:24:30 PM

Quote from: pereira4 on August 17, 2017, 06:19:23 PM

Quote from: xskl0 on August 17, 2017, 06:09:52 PM

Maybe you sold your BCH and you are scared now. The rational scalation solution was simply increase block size. Segwit don't allow transactions with 0 fee for example. People don't want to pay to open a Lightning channel, they want cheap transactions and total control of their money. Instant transactions (offchain) are possible too with Bitcoin Cash so I'm sure that Bitcoin Segwit will fail.

When will big blockers understand the fact that you can't have "total control of your money" when you are handling the full validating nodes into the hands of corporations that will be validating everything for you because the blocks are too big to do it yourself?

BCash was DOA. They raised the blocksize limit and they can't even fill 1MB blocks because no one uses it, laughable.

We don't need to rush any hardforks anytime soon, if you support a hardfork you will lose your money every time.

I don't understand, does corporations have some kind of magical hard drive that the regular user can't obtain? I have six 10TB drive sitting on my desk right now, I can run 500 redundant copies of Bitcoin blockchain on them. Why do I need corporation to run a node?

It's not only about the storage, which would be growing exponentially and you would end up pissed off yourself eventually too, but about latency. Check this explanation of 3 minutes of why big blocks are stupid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2941&v=iFJ2MZ3KciQ

Except full 8MB blocks Bitcoin current exists and works just fine, kinda defeats his argument right there. I run an abc node for BCash, my node works just fine, why should I be pissed off again?

It works fine because nobody is using it. If everyone was using Bitcoin ABC (AsicBoostCash) then the blocks would become full at 8MB, and it would be a mess for you to run a node, you simply couldn't. Also you aren't taking into consideration the latency issue.

Big blocks just don't work, but big blockers live on Willy Wonka's world and stay delusional to the technical realities.

GreenBits

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1048

Quote from: kokojie on August 19, 2017, 07:46:09 AM

It's exactly your line of thinking has led Bitcoin down this path, price is everything you care. But you don't understand, without Satoshi's vision, there is no Bitcoin. What you will have is another bank/paypal, it may work better than Satoshi's Bitcoin due to centralization, it may worth a lot, but it's not the Satoshi's Bitcoin we signed up for.

Quote from: error08 on August 18, 2017, 08:54:38 PM

Honestly, it doesn't matter what is the Satoshis original vision as he was disappeared long time ago and let it to core developers to handle bitcoin nodes. People don't care about original vision as bitcoin price is the best thing right now, and time will reveal the best coin among all of those coins, but bitcoin still far ahead from bitcoin cash or other altcoins. As long as people trust bitcoin and always use it, then it will always lead the market which the most important thing is usability.

Amen. This was a social experiment that was going right. All of this, lately, this isn't what he wanted. We are chasing what other alt coins have instead of maintaining the casual nature it was intended for. In the end, we will indeed be efficient, but we will just be another alt.

Pretty much PayPal by another name, I concur.

We spent all the damned time building this trust, folks. Years of obscurity, and we are finally just seeing the light. We need to slow down. No matter what protocol emerges the winner in all this, if we lose the trust, we don't have anything Sad

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

It's exactly your line of thinking has led Bitcoin down this path, price is everything you care. But you don't understand, without Satoshi's vision, there is no Bitcoin. What you will have is another bank/paypal, it may work better than Satoshi's Bitcoin due to centralization, it may worth a lot, but it's not the Satoshi's Bitcoin we signed up for.

Quote from: error08 on August 18, 2017, 08:54:38 PM

Honestly, it doesn't matter what is the Satoshis original vision as he was disappeared long time ago and let it to core developers to handle bitcoin nodes. People don't care about original vision as bitcoin price is the best thing right now, and time will reveal the best coin among all of those coins, but bitcoin still far ahead from bitcoin cash or other altcoins. As long as people trust bitcoin and always use it, then it will always lead the market which the most important thing is usability.

coolcoinz

legendary

Activity: 2814

Merit: 1192

Quote from: pooya87 on August 18, 2017, 10:07:47 PM

Quote from: kokojie on August 18, 2017, 08:36:24 PM

~
Except full 8MB blocks Bitcoin current exists and works just fine, kinda defeats his argument right there. I run an abc node for BCash, my node works just fine, why should I be pissed off again?

i think you need to check the blocks before saying things like this Cheesy

what exists are the blocks that are barely 100 kB and with any transaction inside. of course your node is just fine, it should be more than fine because you are currently running a node which has a ~2.25 GB smaller blockchain than bitcoin blockchain.

let them mine full 8 MB blocks for a year then come back and let us see how your node is doing.

Good point. I very much doubt it's going to be better than Bitcoin in any way and even if it proves to be fast and stable what's there to make people switch from widely accepted and known Bitcoin to some forked altcoin? They don't even have their own lightweight wallet but had to borrow electrum code.

The price has gone up quite a bit in the last 2 days. Fanboys must be in heaven Wink

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Minecache on August 17, 2017, 02:35:23 PM

Anyone else sick and tired to their back teeth of hearing this phrase pumped out endlessly by the BCC/BCH trolls as they try to justify their sickcoin?

For any BCH troll here is the nub, you have no idea what Satoshis original vision is because you cannot understand his Bitcoin whitepaper.

Now piss off.

What exactly do you think is difficult to understand about the whitepaper?

Many of us have had years to read it, re-read it, study it, think about it...and its pretty short too.

The only thing slightly complicated is the mathematical description of the probabilities, which
quite frankly really are not necessary to decode.... because intuitively, everyone understands that
the 51% hash power sooner or later becomes the longest chain.

So, what's hard again??

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

Quote from: kokojie on August 18, 2017, 08:36:24 PM

~
Except full 8MB blocks Bitcoin current exists and works just fine, kinda defeats his argument right there. I run an abc node for BCash, my node works just fine, why should I be pissed off again?

i think you need to check the blocks before saying things like this Cheesy

what exists are the blocks that are barely 100 kB and with any transaction inside. of course your node is just fine, it should be more than fine because you are currently running a node which has a ~2.25 GB smaller blockchain than bitcoin blockchain.

let them mine full 8 MB blocks for a year then come back and let us see how your node is doing.

error08

hero member

Activity: 1036

Merit: 514

Honestly, it doesn't matter what is the Satoshis original vision as he was disappeared long time ago and let it to core developers to handle bitcoin nodes. People don't care about original vision as bitcoin price is the best thing right now, and time will reveal the best coin among all of those coins, but bitcoin still far ahead from bitcoin cash or other altcoins. As long as people trust bitcoin and always use it, then it will always lead the market which the most important thing is usability.

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: pereira4 on August 18, 2017, 11:13:15 AM

Quote from: kokojie on August 17, 2017, 06:24:30 PM

Quote from: pereira4 on August 17, 2017, 06:19:23 PM

Quote from: xskl0 on August 17, 2017, 06:09:52 PM

Maybe you sold your BCH and you are scared now. The rational scalation solution was simply increase block size. Segwit don't allow transactions with 0 fee for example. People don't want to pay to open a Lightning channel, they want cheap transactions and total control of their money. Instant transactions (offchain) are possible too with Bitcoin Cash so I'm sure that Bitcoin Segwit will fail.

When will big blockers understand the fact that you can't have "total control of your money" when you are handling the full validating nodes into the hands of corporations that will be validating everything for you because the blocks are too big to do it yourself?

BCash was DOA. They raised the blocksize limit and they can't even fill 1MB blocks because no one uses it, laughable.

We don't need to rush any hardforks anytime soon, if you support a hardfork you will lose your money every time.

I don't understand, does corporations have some kind of magical hard drive that the regular user can't obtain? I have six 10TB drive sitting on my desk right now, I can run 500 redundant copies of Bitcoin blockchain on them. Why do I need corporation to run a node?

It's not only about the storage, which would be growing exponentially and you would end up pissed off yourself eventually too, but about latency. Check this explanation of 3 minutes of why big blocks are stupid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2941&v=iFJ2MZ3KciQ

Except full 8MB blocks Bitcoin current exists and works just fine, kinda defeats his argument right there. I run an abc node for BCash, my node works just fine, why should I be pissed off again?

pereira4

legendary

Activity: 1610

Merit: 1183

Quote from: kokojie on August 17, 2017, 06:24:30 PM

Quote from: pereira4 on August 17, 2017, 06:19:23 PM

Quote from: xskl0 on August 17, 2017, 06:09:52 PM

Maybe you sold your BCH and you are scared now. The rational scalation solution was simply increase block size. Segwit don't allow transactions with 0 fee for example. People don't want to pay to open a Lightning channel, they want cheap transactions and total control of their money. Instant transactions (offchain) are possible too with Bitcoin Cash so I'm sure that Bitcoin Segwit will fail.

When will big blockers understand the fact that you can't have "total control of your money" when you are handling the full validating nodes into the hands of corporations that will be validating everything for you because the blocks are too big to do it yourself?

BCash was DOA. They raised the blocksize limit and they can't even fill 1MB blocks because no one uses it, laughable.

We don't need to rush any hardforks anytime soon, if you support a hardfork you will lose your money every time.

I don't understand, does corporations have some kind of magical hard drive that the regular user can't obtain? I have six 10TB drive sitting on my desk right now, I can run 500 redundant copies of Bitcoin blockchain on them. Why do I need corporation to run a node?

It's not only about the storage, which would be growing exponentially and you would end up pissed off yourself eventually too, but about latency. Check this explanation of 3 minutes of why big blocks are stupid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2941&v=iFJ2MZ3KciQ

xskl0

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 260

Bitcoin SV is Bitcoin

Quote from: kokojie on August 17, 2017, 06:11:40 PM

I don't think you understand, Satoshi's Bitcoin is the Bitcoin we signed up for, I was here, back in 2011 for a P2P Electronic Cash System, as titled by Satoshi's whitepaper. Not a BSegwit coin that will require 3rd party service and permission to transact. I can just use banks/paypal for that.

The blockchain is just a distributed database. Without Satoshi's original vision, it's no different from any other database, eg. a bank's database.

Yep

cybersofts

copper member

Activity: 658

Merit: 284

The satoshis original idea was for digital currency that is full decentralized, fast, secure with lower transaction fee... For me, i see nothing wrong with what other guys are doing which forking bitcoin or other cryptos. Everybody saw the opportunity in bitcoin and other cryptos, let everybody do what they want because there's enough space of all. Only the future can decide which coin is the best for the masses.

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: pereira4 on August 17, 2017, 06:19:23 PM

Quote from: xskl0 on August 17, 2017, 06:09:52 PM

Maybe you sold your BCH and you are scared now. The rational scalation solution was simply increase block size. Segwit don't allow transactions with 0 fee for example. People don't want to pay to open a Lightning channel, they want cheap transactions and total control of their money. Instant transactions (offchain) are possible too with Bitcoin Cash so I'm sure that Bitcoin Segwit will fail.

When will big blockers understand the fact that you can't have "total control of your money" when you are handling the full validating nodes into the hands of corporations that will be validating everything for you because the blocks are too big to do it yourself?

BCash was DOA. They raised the blocksize limit and they can't even fill 1MB blocks because no one uses it, laughable.

We don't need to rush any hardforks anytime soon, if you support a hardfork you will lose your money every time.

I don't understand, does corporations have some kind of magical hard drive that the regular user can't obtain? I have six 10TB drive sitting on my desk right now, I can run 500 redundant copies of Bitcoin blockchain on them. Why do I need corporation to run a node?

Topic: Satoshis Original Vision (Read 1210 times)