Topic: The Real Problem isn't XT... (Read 3730 times)

Yes, his words. I don't await him coming out publicly showing his face.

But i think you made a good point why he won't say anything. He most probably knows that every agency in the world is interested in his identity. Him speaking now would be way too risky. The NSA or so could find out who he is pretty easy probably. And i'm sure he will avoid that at all costs. Since he doesn't trust banks and probably not the governments too.

Dictator? You realize that it is more like a democracy? Gavin and Hearn can't take away bitcoin. Every user of bitcoin votes what he wants to use. Core or XT. That sounds more like a democracy to me than a dictatorship.

And even when XT would win, for some reason, then 99% of the users would switch back to core when core implements bigger blocks. Because the ideas hearn has are simply too dangerous.

It's democracy...

Only his words would be listened to and considered. You've seemingly totally missed the point of the whole anonymous act.

Before you misunderstand my other post... it was ironically. I don't see him as a god. But i think if he came out and would say his opinion that his word really would be some kind of law. Because he is the one who brought bitcoin to life. And i really think that there would be not much resistance against what he claims to be right. He is simply so very much trusted.

I think there will never be a consensus since the other part of the core developers seems to be involved in blockstream and the lightning network. The thing is, when bitcoins gets unreliable, expensive and slow, then that sidechain will get more transactions, which translates to more fees.

The developers already would have said they will 8 MB blocks if they would want them. Though they, for the most part, don't want to. There is no reason to believe they will change their view anytime soon.

I'm sorry but this ideology is why Satoshi is never coming back and an example of how dangerous for Bitcoin it would be.

This is not your religion.

There is no Satoshi.

There is no God.

Satoshi can't die. And even if he dies he will resurrect. There are enough bitcoiners that see him as some form of holy being or god at all. Maybe it's a joke but he is a mysterious figure that no one can see, he only lives in stories from the past. I wonder if there will be a sect like "Fraternity of Satoshi" or so at one point.

I think you are right. When Satoshi would speak up then his word would be a law. No one would speak against without surviving it because bitcoiners love satoshi till death.

Though i think this is the biggest real crisis for the community and the development of bitcoin. Before crisis were only scams or drop of price. That is nothing with the technology. But now satoshi really could start to say a word in order to safe bitcoin. It's his child at the end.

I think he still takes part in the community. Maybe we wrote with him already without knowing it. I really don't think he is not here anymore.

maybe so.  it was just an experiment back then and they were worth nothing.  then again...... he was Satoshi. 

You still have your first toys? I'd say that he lost most of his private keys too.

One would assume he has his keys to his coins and can sign them or move them to prove it is him.

I agree with you,no collaboration between main devs,and lack of informations,no basic transparency
I fSatoshi will appear,peoplewill not believe it is real Satoshi

Will anybody lesson him after years

What is he thinking about bitcoin now
will be great to hear

I would call it a divorce, since the winner are not able to prevent the other chain from grow, while in an election, the loser must follow the lead of winner

At first, the winner vs loser would look like bitcoin vs litecoin, however, since both chains have same algorithm, miners are free to switch between these two different chains: When A chain is not profitable, they will go to B chain, thus make B chain stronger, thus B chain regain popularity if someone is pumping up the price of B chain. This kind of situation will drag along for many years to come

Vote is not a way to solve the problem in a decentralized system

Thats true for one good reason, there is no good soution, both have advantages and disadvantages. I want Bitcoin to become global payment network so it must be increased from 1 MB to 8MB minimum.

he did, but everyone is calling it a fake.

FTFY.

The Admins of the pools are irrelevant.  It's the people with mining hardware who matter and the people who will buy their bitcoins from them so they can pay their electricity bills.  It takes a miner a few minutes to switch pools.

It is a vote.  Gavin just called for an election.  People need to stop freaking out.  It isn't over throwing the ways or a revolution.  Right now XT has about 10% of the node votes and 0% of miner votes.  http://xtnodes.com/index.php

But per the whole vote thing, really, it is kind of silly and bitcoin is broken.  There are only 20 people in all of bitcoin that matter.  Those are the 20 admins of the 20 biggest pools.  Together they control more than 95% of the bitcoin hash.  And technically Gavin only needs 75% of the vote, which is actually only the top 6 guys he needs to convince. https://blockchain.info/pools

It is a vote and it is an election, but really only among 20 delegates that are being supported by their constituencies of miners.  

Good question! I believe that it is very difficult to decide even if you have enough knowledge (The more you know the more question you have). In fact I constantly change sides if I consider it from a different view: Maybe Gavin is right in using some force to brake the current deadlock status?

But eventually I prefer the least risky approach when facing uncertainty. Maybe those guys sitting at the top can see far beyond what I can see, but I can not blindly trust anybody, but only take the most conservative approach

Dictatorship is using power to control others, the power does not limit to physical force or political influence, but more and more appeared as knowledge. This kind of dictatorship is very common in Git hosted open source software projects: Anyone who submit a code change in Git would have to be approved by the code reviewer and core devs, e.g. a group of core devs have the right to decide what should be accepted in bitcoin code and what should not. And when they could not reach agreement, there will be a fork

Since bitcoin now have so much influence, there are many people who want to push in some code that is of their interest and reach millions of users around the world by an update of bitcoin protocol. Thus you see Mike wants to push in some code that is useful for Lighthouse project, while Peter wants to push in some code for Lightning network, and someone else might wait in some lines to get bitcoin work with Etherium, and so on... Who should decide what should be included and what should not be? It is better no one should be allow to change the protocol unless in a clear and real crisis that is understandable for everyone. This is similar to that no one should be allowed to change IP protocol while everyone can freely built their own application upon it