Bitcoin Forum>Bitcoin>Bitcoin Discussion
Pages:
Author

Topic: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already. (Read 9367 times)

RawDog
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1026
Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
October 06, 2016, 05:30:02 AM
#250
Quote from: davis196 on October 05, 2016, 06:34:26 AM
Quote from: RawDog on September 14, 2016, 08:43:14 AM
Hard forks are good.  Stop crying.  They allow two discrete paths to flourish and see which works best.  Too freaking bad if some of your juice gets stuck on the 'bad' chain.  On fork day, you've got equal action on both chains.  Make good decisions thereafter.  No harm, no foul.  

Let's do it NOW!!!!

Fork it already.
Who`s crying?I don`t understand.
Folks are saying a hard fork is 'dangerous'.  It is only dangerous for the undesirable prong. 
davis196
hero member
Activity: 3192
Merit: 939
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
October 05, 2016, 06:34:26 AM
#249
Quote from: RawDog on September 14, 2016, 08:43:14 AM
Hard forks are good.  Stop crying.  They allow two discrete paths to flourish and see which works best.  Too freaking bad if some of your juice gets stuck on the 'bad' chain.  On fork day, you've got equal action on both chains.  Make good decisions thereafter.  No harm, no foul.  

Let's do it NOW!!!!

Fork it already.

Who`s crying?I don`t understand.

Are there people who complain about the hard fork?

What`s the point of this thread?
RawDog
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1026
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
October 05, 2016, 01:17:21 AM
#248
Quote from: franky1 on September 26, 2016, 05:10:54 PM
Quote from: Lauda on September 26, 2016, 04:55:30 PM
Quote from: franky1 on September 26, 2016, 04:53:00 PM
Quote from: franky1 on September 24, 2016, 11:27:53 AM
the current ACTUAL debate is consensual '2base-4mbweight' buffer increase by EVERYONE in the community releasing an implementation. so that fans of any implementation can all happily stick with their favourites and still have the open choice to decentrally vote in or out of a safe increase of capacity, while not hindering segwit either, or having to change to another "brand"
yes this means the quadratics doomsday is also a moot point because segwit still gets to work
I honestly have read this post three times by now, and still fail to understand what you've wanted to say with it. Not because of "technicalities", but because the flawed construct of all those sentences. You should really rephrase everything.
in short
core releasing 0.13.2a with 1base 4weight AND releasing 0.13.2b with 2base 4weight

that way core fanboys dont have to defect away from core to get real capacity, they can choose freely while remaining with core dream team
that way the community as a whole have an open choice without having any bias
that way you can finally be happy of your dream team having code for all the features the community have been requesting.
that way you can chill out your doomsdays because core is no longer vetoing the 2mb base option, to cause controversy

now with change of guard at Blockstream, maybe the pro fork people can get a little more momentum going and
'get 'er done'
franky1
legendary
Activity: 4424
Merit: 4794
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 26, 2016, 05:10:54 PM
#247
Quote from: Lauda on September 26, 2016, 04:55:30 PM
Quote from: franky1 on September 26, 2016, 04:53:00 PM
Quote from: franky1 on September 24, 2016, 11:27:53 AM
the current ACTUAL debate is consensual '2base-4mbweight' buffer increase by EVERYONE in the community releasing an implementation. so that fans of any implementation can all happily stick with their favourites and still have the open choice to decentrally vote in or out of a safe increase of capacity, while not hindering segwit either, or having to change to another "brand"
yes this means the quadratics doomsday is also a moot point because segwit still gets to work
I honestly have read this post three times by now, and still fail to understand what you've wanted to say with it. Not because of "technicalities", but because the flawed construct of all those sentences. You should really rephrase everything.
in short
core releasing 0.13.2a with 1base 4weight AND releasing 0.13.2b with 2base 4weight

that way core fanboys dont have to defect away from core to get real capacity, they can choose freely while remaining with core dream team
that way the community as a whole have an open choice without having any bias
that way you can finally be happy of your dream team having code for all the features the community have been requesting.
that way you can chill out your doomsdays because core is no longer vetoing the 2mb base option, to cause controversy
Lauda
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 3000
Terminated.
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 26, 2016, 04:55:30 PM
#246
Quote from: franky1 on September 26, 2016, 04:53:00 PM
Quote from: franky1 on September 24, 2016, 11:27:53 AM
the current ACTUAL debate is consensual '2base-4mbweight' buffer increase by EVERYONE in the community releasing an implementation. so that fans of any implementation can all happily stick with their favourites and still have the open choice to decentrally vote in or out of a safe increase of capacity, while not hindering segwit either, or having to change to another "brand"
yes this means the quadratics doomsday is also a moot point because segwit still gets to work
I honestly have read this post three times by now, and still fail to understand what you've wanted to say with it. Not because of "technicalities", but because the flawed construct of all those sentences. You should really rephrase everything.
franky1
legendary
Activity: 4424
Merit: 4794
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 26, 2016, 04:53:00 PM
#245
Quote from: franky1 on September 24, 2016, 11:27:53 AM
the current ACTUAL debate is consensual '2base-4mbweight' buffer increase by EVERYONE in the community releasing an implementation. so that fans of any implementation can all happily stick with their favourites and still have the open choice to decentrally vote in or out of a safe increase of capacity, while not hindering segwit either, or having to change to another "brand"
yes this means the quadratics doomsday is also a moot point because segwit still gets to work
Lauda
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 3000
Terminated.
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 26, 2016, 04:01:47 PM
#244
Quote from: zimmah on September 26, 2016, 03:55:59 PM
Yeah it's a privately owned forum, but it's the main forum for bitcoin, and it would be good for the benefit of all bitcoin users if this forum remained neutral.   
I disagree with your view of "main forum" here. It surely is the most used forum, however you aren't creating any arguments for your case actually. If users wanted a more "neutral" environment (whatever this is supposed to mean), they'd simply start using one. That's how these things usually work, nobody is forcing you to stay nor leave.

Quote from: zimmah on September 26, 2016, 03:55:59 PM
The fact that this forum is not neutral is very worrying, is this is already a first step in centralizing bitcoin.   
No, it's not worrying at all. Besides, this isn't the thread here. You should probably keep this consistent to the thread that you've made in Meta.
This should be about a potential fork (although we drifted away from time to time).
zimmah
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1005
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 26, 2016, 03:55:59 PM
#243
Quote from: Lauda on September 24, 2016, 10:37:00 AM
Quote from: franky1 on September 24, 2016, 07:50:46 AM
C++
explicit limit vs consensus limit
consensual vs controversial
reading code not social distraction
definition of hypocrisy
who is spoon-feeding him and why they do it
You've nicely described yourself. Focusing on ad hominem won't do you any good nor win any arguments.

Quote from: zimmah on September 24, 2016, 09:01:11 AM
The main forums (this one, and /r/bitcoin) both support Core as the only 'official' bitcoin wallet. Most users probably don't even know about Classic/Unlimited/XT, and if they do, they don't know they are just as 'official' as Core.    
It is the main and most advanced Bitcoin implementation. There's nothing "official" regarding that.

Quote from: zimmah on September 24, 2016, 09:01:11 AM
Basically, this header needs to be more neutral, and also include links to the latest Classic, Unlimited and XT clients. As well as a link to a page that explains the difference in a fair and factual way.      
No. This is a privately owned forum, and as such, does not "need" to do anything.

Yeah it's a privately owned forum, but it's the main forum for bitcoin, and it would be good for the benefit of all bitcoin users if this forum remained neutral.   

The fact that this forum is not neutral is very worrying, is this is already a first step in centralizing bitcoin.   

and then they claim Core is trying to keep bitcoin decentralized. What a joke.
franky1
legendary
Activity: 4424
Merit: 4794
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 24, 2016, 11:27:53 AM
#242
seems someone preferred to avoid the topic to adhom about an adhom

now then.

the current ACTUAL debate is consensual '2base-4mbweight' buffer increase by EVERYONE in the community releasing an implementation. so that fans of any implementation can all happily stick with their favourites and still have the open choice to decentrally vote in or out of a safe increase of capacity, while not hindering segwit either, or having to change to another "brand"
yes this means the quadratics doomsday is also a moot point because segwit still gets to work
Lauda
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 3000
Terminated.
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 24, 2016, 10:37:00 AM
#241
Quote from: franky1 on September 24, 2016, 07:50:46 AM
C++
explicit limit vs consensus limit
consensual vs controversial
reading code not social distraction
definition of hypocrisy
who is spoon-feeding him and why they do it
You've nicely described yourself. Focusing on ad hominem won't do you any good nor win any arguments.

Quote from: zimmah on September 24, 2016, 09:01:11 AM
The main forums (this one, and /r/bitcoin) both support Core as the only 'official' bitcoin wallet. Most users probably don't even know about Classic/Unlimited/XT, and if they do, they don't know they are just as 'official' as Core.    
It is the main and most advanced Bitcoin implementation. There's nothing "official" regarding that.

Quote from: zimmah on September 24, 2016, 09:01:11 AM
Basically, this header needs to be more neutral, and also include links to the latest Classic, Unlimited and XT clients. As well as a link to a page that explains the difference in a fair and factual way.      
No. This is a privately owned forum, and as such, does not "need" to do anything.
zimmah
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1005
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 24, 2016, 09:01:11 AM
#240
Quote from: franky1 on September 23, 2016, 03:00:30 PM
Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
Quote from: franky1 on September 23, 2016, 09:59:25 AM
once you have researched what they all actually are.
-snip-
You yourself have no idea what they all actually are.

ive read the code of each. but find it funny that you dont know they all do the same basic function once you wash away the fluffy buzzwords.
you should have don yourself a favour last year and actually learned some C++ to actually actively engage in some real understanding of bitcoin.

but have a happy year with you subliminal mind programming set to:
BU=warewolves and Classic=vampire, kill kill kill.. core=king devote devote devote




I'm convinced most people support Core not because they actually think it's better, but because they don't know any better.

The main forums (this one, and /r/bitcoin) both support Core as the only 'official' bitcoin wallet. Most users probably don't even know about Classic/Unlimited/XT, and if they do, they don't know they are just as 'official' as Core.    

The thing about decentralization is, there isn't one official client. There are multiple.      

The 'official' client is the client that gets the most support from the users/miners/merchants/etc.      

I think it's wrong to have only Core being advertised on bitcointalk.org and /r/bitcoin. It gives the wrong impression and it's very centralized.      

Basically, this header needs to be more neutral, and also include links to the latest Classic, Unlimited and XT clients. As well as a link to a page that explains the difference in a fair and factual way.       

The way it is done now only leads to centralization of bitcoin.
franky1
legendary
Activity: 4424
Merit: 4794
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 24, 2016, 07:50:46 AM
#239
things lauda needs to learn

C++
explicit limit vs consensus limit
consensual vs controversial
reading code not social distraction
definition of hypocrisy
who is spoon-feeding him and why they do it

now then.
the current ACTUAL debate is not laudas meandered hypocrisy of the doomsdays of controversial forks of 16mb by groups of warewolves and vampires preventing linear.

but consensual '2base-4mbweight' buffer increase by EVERYONE in the community releasing an implementation. so that fans of kings, warewolves and vampires can all happily stick with their favourites and still have the open choice to decentrally vote in or out of a safe increase of capacity which still allows the kings to have their way too, and no one thinking they have to jump camps to get it.
yes this means the quadratics doomsday is also a moot point because segwit still works
again it does not mean segwit wont function by increasing the 2mb base, so relax lauda your kings still have a job and are not sacked
again this does not mean any excess bloat that kings are not also accepting as safe
Lauda
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 3000
Terminated.
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 24, 2016, 04:08:34 AM
#238
Quote from: jbreher on September 23, 2016, 01:32:33 PM
Does that make you honest? No - it makes you a liar that has been caught in a lie.
No. I was proving a point which you seem to have missed.

Quote from: franky1 on September 23, 2016, 03:00:30 PM
ive read the code of each.
What a nice joke. Roll Eyes

Quote from: DooMAD on September 23, 2016, 04:58:26 PM
Based on that, it sounds like you're not even remotely educated on what these alternative implementations are or how they work.  
I'm "educated" enough about BU to not be interested in their work at this time. The reason that I used the "16 MB" was because somebody was advocating that 16 MB blocks were safe, which is obviously false.

Quote from: DooMAD on September 23, 2016, 04:58:26 PM
You seemingly just regurgitate opinions you've read elsewhere without even bothering to check the legitimacy of it.
If that was the case, then I'd be supporting Bitcoin Classic and BU.

Quote from: DooMAD on September 23, 2016, 04:58:26 PM
It's precisely the point.  
No. That was a demonstration of the assertions being throw out by pro-BU members around here.

Quote from: DooMAD on September 23, 2016, 04:58:26 PM
Again with the garbage assumptions.  Perhaps you could explain why you're skeptical about the proposals and in the process prove that you actually understand them.  
You tell me to do research, and then afterwards want me to explain why e.g. header-first mining is a bad idea? How about you do the research this time?
Obviously we're long past any technical debate in this thread, and are at a point where the mindset being received is in the lines of "No, you're wrong. xx MB blocks are super safe. Core is evil".
DooMAD
legendary
Activity: 3948
Merit: 3191
Leave no FUD unchallenged
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 23, 2016, 04:58:26 PM
#237
Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 09:34:11 AM
Quote from: zimmah on September 23, 2016, 09:28:50 AM
It has been tested on testnet already. Stop spreading misinformation. There's nothing dangerous about bigger blocks.
The BU testing methodology is garbage and should not be used as 'evidence' for anything.

In fairness, you would sound far more convincing if you actually did a bit of research and didn't spurt out things like:

Quote from: Lauda on September 22, 2016, 02:32:27 AM
Not to mention that if we moved to BU today (to their block size limit setting which I at a weird number; 16 MB I think?), the network would likely end up useless due to DOS attacks.

Based on that, it sounds like you're not even remotely educated on what these alternative implementations are or how they work.  You seemingly just regurgitate opinions you've read elsewhere without even bothering to check the legitimacy of it.


Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
Quote from: jbreher on September 23, 2016, 01:01:12 PM
Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 12:38:05 AM
The problem is that these "other implementations" only have half-baked, horribly coded improvements.
Interesting assertion. I'd like to read your extensive code review of each such "other implementation".
There isn't an extensive code review of such an implementation by myself (probably not by anyone, as I haven't seen one). That's not the point though.

It's precisely the point.  You're slamming something you haven't even attempted to comprehend.  People are now falling over each other to point out that fact and you're making it very easy for them.


Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 10:03:05 AM
Quote from: franky1 on September 23, 2016, 09:59:25 AM
i think its time lauda goes spend a few hours to ask his friends the difference between xthin and headers first
Again, I have no "friends" to ask. Anyhow, both of those proposals are such garbage that looking into them is a waste of time.

Again with the garbage assumptions.  Perhaps you could explain why you're skeptical about the proposals and in the process prove that you actually understand them.  Or you could dismiss them as "garbage" and we'll all assume that you're just guessing again because you read something in passing and decided it must be true without questioning it.
franky1
legendary
Activity: 4424
Merit: 4794
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 23, 2016, 03:00:30 PM
#236
Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
Quote from: franky1 on September 23, 2016, 09:59:25 AM
once you have researched what they all actually are.
-snip-
You yourself have no idea what they all actually are.

ive read the code of each. but find it funny that you dont know they all do the same basic function once you wash away the fluffy buzzwords.
you should have don yourself a favour last year and actually learned some C++ to actually actively engage in some real understanding of bitcoin.

but have a happy year with you subliminal mind programming set to:
BU=warewolves and Classic=vampire, kill kill kill.. core=king devote devote devote


zimmah
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1005
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 23, 2016, 02:15:35 PM
#235
Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 09:57:21 AM


Quote from: zimmah on September 23, 2016, 09:44:04 AM
No one has the money to set up a several months long non-stop spam attack.
This got to be a bad joke, right? A fair amount of people have enough money to spam up the network for a very long time.



Right, I'm sorry.

Bill gates, would you please stop spamming the bitcoin? The Core team already caught up on it and they aren't falling for it.    


Quote from: Mr Felt on September 23, 2016, 01:34:24 PM
I haven't been following this thread, so excuse the question if it has already been asked and answered:

Setting aside areas of technical disagreement for a second, what are the issues/areas for which there is technical agreement?

1. 21M coins
2. What else?
3. etc. ?



Maybe 10 minute average block time.

But maybe some people disagree on that too.

Mr Felt
hero member
Activity: 493
Merit: 518
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 23, 2016, 01:34:24 PM
#234
I haven't been following this thread, so excuse the question if it has already been asked and answered:

Setting aside areas of technical disagreement for a second, what are the issues/areas for which there is technical agreement?

1. 21M coins
2. What else?
3. etc. ?

jbreher
legendary
Activity: 3080
Merit: 1688
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 23, 2016, 01:32:33 PM
#233
Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 12:38:05 AM
The problem is that these "other implementations" only have half-baked, horribly coded improvements.
Quote from: jbreher on September 23, 2016, 01:01:12 PM
Interesting assertion. I'd like to read your extensive code review of each such "other implementation".
There isn't an extensive code review of such an implementation by myself (probably not by anyone, as I haven't seen one).

Well, at least you admit when you are caught making shit up on order to influence a debate. Does that make you honest? No - it makes you a liar that has been caught in a lie.

Quote from: jbreher on September 23, 2016, 01:10:26 PM
Well, no. Segwit does absolutely nothing to make larger blocks safe.
Yes, it does actually, since there's no such thing as "The SegWit Omnibus Changeset".

Sure there is. You may not recognize it under that name. Hell, you may not recognize it at all. But there is certainly a difference between the feature 'Segregated Witness', and the bundled code release that includes several other features as well.

Oh - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15417685
Lauda
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 3000
Terminated.
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 23, 2016, 01:19:00 PM
#232
Quote from: jbreher on September 23, 2016, 01:16:32 PM
Bald assertion devoid of any supporting evidence is duly noted.
Fight fire-with-fire, or bald assertions-with bald-assertions when obviously reason isn't adequate.

Quote from: jbreher on September 23, 2016, 01:16:32 PM
Prove it? You can't even define it!
This is actually true. We don't even have a clear definition of 'spam', and yet some throw out the claims that blocks are filled with 'legit' transactions.

Quote from: jbreher on September 23, 2016, 01:16:32 PM
Your demonstrated pride in mastering this oh-so-advanced concept is simply adorable.
Sarcasm is pointless, and adorable is not an attribute worth pinning to this. A point has been made, and the point is correct.
jbreher
legendary
Activity: 3080
Merit: 1688
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
Re: Stop fuckin' around, fork the son-of-a-bitch already.
September 23, 2016, 01:16:32 PM
#231
Quote from: Lauda on September 23, 2016, 09:34:11 AM
Quote from: zimmah on September 23, 2016, 09:28:50 AM
It has been tested on testnet already. Stop spreading misinformation. There's nothing dangerous about bigger blocks.
The BU testing methodology is garbage and should not be used as 'evidence' for anything.

Bald assertion devoid of any supporting evidence is duly noted.

Quote from: zimmah on September 23, 2016, 09:28:50 AM
The blocks aren't full of spam
You can't prove this and you know it.

Prove it? You can't even define it!

Quote
I highly doubt you even understand the big O notation.

Your demonstrated pride in mastering this oh-so-advanced concept is simply adorable.
Pages:
Bitcoin Forum>Bitcoin>Bitcoin Discussion
Jump to: