Topic: The Barry Silbert segwit2x agreement with &gt;80% miner support. - page 68. (Read 120032 times)

Quote from: ImHash on May 26, 2017, 06:42:31 PM

But this is already the case. ... and some thick useless wall o' text.

We know that.

That's why we propose not UASF only but UASF + PoW change, what did you think... Current situation with the miners is problematic. Their power levels need to be re-adjusted.

Changing the POW.... at your own peril. You do not understand. You think there are 10 to 20 miners. Nope. A pool may have 1k to 30k workers (also miners) and do you think all these workers are going to support dippy twats from making their mining equipment useless.

No son, it is you who don't understand. When the PoW algo changes, their support will become meaningless, because they will be out of business and the whole game will be restarting from the ground zero. (except for the lucky gpu rig owners)

Changing POW without miners/workers support is a very bad idea. You will get a hardfork and who is going to mine the new chain without hashing power when difficulty is so high. Are you going to reset the difficulty to 1 ?

ComputerGenie

hero member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 552

Retired IRCX God

Quote from: ComputerGenie on May 26, 2017, 05:49:54 PM

Imagine that, the CEO of a billion dollar hardware company has better things to do than personally read through the trivial software change proposals of one random protocol client; who'da thunk it. Roll Eyes

You could also imagine where and how he'd become the CEO of a billion dollar hardware company, by not reading anything or caring for end users I assume. it was so random that I suspect they draw a number from random.org.

At it's center, Bitcoin is a protocol (a method of doing something),
Core is merely one client for Bitcoin (because Bitcoin is a protocol),
There are clients for Bitcoin that aren't Core (because Bitcoin is a protocol),
Core devs don't actually control Bitcoin (because Bitcoin is a protocol),
There are an infinite number of changes that can be made to/for Bitcoin that don't involve Core (because Bitcoin is a protocol),
If everyone in the world stopped giving a shit about Core, Bicoin would still go on as is (because Bitcoin is a protocol),
Unless we all allow Core to do so, Core BIPs don't control Bitcoin (because Bitcoin is a protocol), and
Most CEOs (chief executive officers) hire CTOs (chief technology officers) to read technical documents.

You do get that...right?

Did I mention that Bitcoin is a protocol?

ImHash

hero member

Activity: 924

Merit: 506

Quote from: ComputerGenie on May 26, 2017, 05:49:54 PM

Quote from: European Central Bank on May 26, 2017, 05:34:37 PM

... jihan wu has only today bothered to find out about bip148. this sure is a very relaxed guy when it comes to staying informed.

Imagine that, the CEO of a billion dollar hardware company has better things to do than personally read through the trivial software change proposals of one random protocol client; who'da thunk it. Roll Eyes

You could also imagine where and how he'd become the CEO of a billion dollar hardware company, by not reading anything or caring for end users I assume. it was so random that I suspect they draw a number from random.org.

mindrust

legendary

Activity: 3276

Merit: 2442

Quote from: chek2fire on May 26, 2017, 06:31:16 PM

Quote from: mindrust on May 26, 2017, 06:27:46 PM

Quote from: DooMAD on May 26, 2017, 06:37:38 PM

But this is already the case. ... and some thick useless wall o' text.

We know that.

That's why we propose not UASF only but UASF + PoW change, what did you think... Current situation with the miners is problematic. Their power levels need to be re-adjusted.

Changing the POW.... at your own peril. You do not understand. You think there are 10 to 20 miners. Nope. A pool may have 1k to 30k workers (also miners) and do you think all these workers are going to support dippy twats from making their mining equipment useless.

No son, it is you who don't understand. When the PoW algo changes, their support will become meaningless, because they will be out of business and the whole game will be restarting from the ground zero. (except for the lucky gpu rig owners)

he will be out of bissuness and someone else in the future will take his place. Changing the pow only to remove one miner is like a socialist government action and has no place to ancap, anarchist bitcoin system.
Bitcoin system must balance itself even with malicious miners. It has the utilities to do it. price drops etc.

Bitmain owns the patents of ASICBOOST and they will do whatever it takes to protect their investments, even if leads to miner centralization. Changing the PoW algo will simply prevent that happening and home mining will be available to everyone again. It is that simple.

Check this out: https://twitter.com/JihanWu/status/868157561488367616

Pathetic.

European Central Bank

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1087

Okay, but if we're being realistic for just a moment, UASF has got a long way to go before it comes close to being a viable option.

the majority of those nodes will be dreamers spending their pocket money. they don't count for anything. it'll need some publicly declared heavyweights to actually go places.

DooMAD

legendary

Activity: 3948

Merit: 3191

Leave no FUD unchallenged

Quote from: mindrust on May 26, 2017, 12:57:52 PM

you are having nightmares when you hear UASF and PoW change or anything which is going to make your hardware useless (or your precious ASICBOOST) but you should understand, this is for your own good, for all miners out there.

Okay, but if we're being realistic for just a moment, UASF has got a long way to go before it comes close to being a viable option.

Nodes expressing support are around the ~750 mark, which is only slightly higher than the current number of BU nodes, i.e. not that many in the grand scheme of things. You also have to consider what proportion of those signalling UASF only want SegWit, or whether they also agree with a change of algorithm. And lastly, some developers don't think UASF is a good idea.

UASF works if a sufficient number of participants are on board. Maybe save the talking down at people until you're a little bit closer to that distant goal.

chek2fire

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 1142

Ιntergalactic Conciliator

Quote from: mindrust on May 26, 2017, 06:27:46 PM

Quote from: chek2fire on May 26, 2017, 05:59:20 PM

But this is already the case. ... and some thick useless wall o' text.

We know that.

That's why we propose not UASF only but UASF + PoW change, what did you think... Current situation with the miners is problematic. Their power levels need to be re-adjusted.

Changing the POW.... at your own peril. You do not understand. You think there are 10 to 20 miners. Nope. A pool may have 1k to 30k workers (also miners) and do you think all these workers are going to support dippy twats from making their mining equipment useless.

No son, it is you who don't understand. When the PoW algo changes, their support will become meaningless, because they will be out of business and the whole game will be restarting from the ground zero. (except for the lucky gpu rig owners)

he will be out of bissuness and someone else in the future will take his place. Changing the pow only to remove one miner is like a socialist government action and has no place to ancap, anarchist bitcoin system.
Bitcoin system must balance itself even with malicious miners. It has the utilities to do it. price drops etc.

classicsucks

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 504

Quote from: European Central Bank on May 26, 2017, 05:34:37 PM

https://twitter.com/JihanWu/status/868157561488367616

so jihan wu has only today bothered to find out about bip148. this sure is a very relaxed guy when it comes to staying informed.

nice. In 6 months he will read and how segwit works Tongue

Alternately, and imminently more likely, you'll be reading about how Segwit "could've worked" in six months...

mindrust

legendary

Activity: 3276

Merit: 2442

But this is already the case. ... and some thick useless wall o' text.

We know that.

That's why we propose not UASF only but UASF + PoW change, what did you think... Current situation with the miners is problematic. Their power levels need to be re-adjusted.

Changing the POW.... at your own peril. You do not understand. You think there are 10 to 20 miners. Nope. A pool may have 1k to 30k workers (also miners) and do you think all these workers are going to support dippy twats from making their mining equipment useless.

No son, it is you who don't understand. When the PoW algo changes, their support will become meaningless, because they will be out of business and the whole game will be restarting from the ground zero. (except for the lucky gpu rig owners)

chek2fire

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 1142

Ιntergalactic Conciliator

But this is already the case. ... and some thick useless wall o' text.

We know that.

That's why we propose not UASF only but UASF + PoW change, what did you think... Current situation with the miners is problematic. Their power levels need to be re-adjusted.

Changing the POW.... at your own peril. You do not understand. You think there are 10 to 20 miners. Nope. A pool may have 1k to 30k workers (also miners) and do you think all these workers are going to support dippy twats from making their mining equipment useless.

Vertcoin has prove that changing pow means nothing. I prefer how pow game theory works right now in bitcoin.

The One

legendary

Activity: 924

Merit: 1000