Topic: Theymos made a statement (Read 974 times)
Bitcoin specialists and developers should do an online stream debate in order to get all the pros and cons. We need an informational and logical debate in order to make a decisions. It's either BTC XT or BTC, we as a bitcoin community need to decide what is the best for bitcoin.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h9cq4/its_time_for_a_break_about_the_recent_mess/cu5ki4j
This.
Quote
Please change this sub to /r/bitcoincore if that's all that will be discussed here.
Calling it /r/bitcoin but banning discussions about alternative clients and consensus rules is misleading.
There will be a lot of new clients in the coming years and one would expect /r/bitcoin to be the place where cross client issues would be discussed.
Calling it /r/bitcoin but banning discussions about alternative clients and consensus rules is misleading.
There will be a lot of new clients in the coming years and one would expect /r/bitcoin to be the place where cross client issues would be discussed.
This.
I wish everyone would just pick one way or the other and go with it. I could care less which way it goes TBH. I just want all the fighting to stop 
iirc, theymos was in favour of lifting the block size to 2mb.
So how the hell lifting to 2mb is OK, but lifting to 8mb is a "diverge from bitcoin"?
Shot in the foot imo.
Edit. Anyone knows who's mod on bitcoin on Voat? Looks like a good alternative.
So how the hell lifting to 2mb is OK, but lifting to 8mb is a "diverge from bitcoin"?
Shot in the foot imo.
Edit. Anyone knows who's mod on bitcoin on Voat? Looks like a good alternative.
I think democracy is the thing of the past. Now we have dictatorship on r/bitcoin. Theymos said "If majority of the people disagree they can go".
This is hard statement. Bitcoin supposed to led by majority of users and now we are starting to have regime of the strong leaders.
This is hard statement. Bitcoin supposed to led by majority of users and now we are starting to have regime of the strong leaders.
You just have to read the comments.People are pissed how he handles the whole situation. This way he is pushing people more to XT than to avoid it. Censorship can not be a solution.
This post by Theymos seems to be very anti the reddit mindset, I don't think it will go so well and I expect a competing subreddit to appear shortly and that isn't a bad thing.
Agreed. It's ironic that so much regulation and rule and control is being placed on a topic that essentially is the banking and currency antithesis of regulation and rule and control.
If Theymos is trying to create a pure alternative to Bitcointalk (and I'm not certain that this is at all the intent) it can be done on Reddit, and the purest club can exist, the elitest club can exist, and this Project can continue in private, secrecy, with control for the few, the powerful....wait, that sounds like something I know...what does that sound like? Damn, I know it will come to me....
I think democracy is the thing of the past. Now we have dictatorship on r/bitcoin. Theymos said "If majority of the people disagree they can go".
This is hard statement. Bitcoin supposed to led by majority of users and now we are starting to have regime of the strong leaders.
This is hard statement. Bitcoin supposed to led by majority of users and now we are starting to have regime of the strong leaders.
XT allows two people to decided what happends to bitcoin..
WHAT
IN
THE
FUCK
IS
WRONG
WITH
YOU
PEOPLE?!
How are you running this node? Go eat out yellen.. fuck.
WHAT
IN
THE
FUCK
IS
WRONG
WITH
YOU
PEOPLE?!
How are you running this node? Go eat out yellen.. fuck.
Bitcoin isn't like iphone where consumer whores rush out and queue up to get the latest polished turd apple have shat out. Just because someone chooses to run a client, it doesn't give the developers of that client any special powers or privileges. If the developers of that client introduce changes in future that users don't agree with, the users aren't under any obligation to run the new version that contains the changes they don't approve of.
It doesn't allow two people to decided (sic) anything. Research more.
XT allows two people to decided what happends to bitcoin..
WHAT
IN
THE
FUCK
IS
WRONG
WITH
YOU
PEOPLE?!
How are you running this node? Go eat out yellen.. fuck.
WHAT
IN
THE
FUCK
IS
WRONG
WITH
YOU
PEOPLE?!
How are you running this node? Go eat out yellen.. fuck.
And Core let's 3?
You miss the entire point of CHOICE. People choose to use the client (XT or CORE) not Gavin and Mike.
Don't get it twisted.
XT allows two people to decided what happends to bitcoin..
Two people can offer it. It's up to everyone else to decide what they actually do with it.
This post by Theymos seems to be very anti the reddit mindset, I don't think it will go so well and I expect a competing subreddit to appear shortly and that isn't a bad thing.
There are already a few options for that, also a competing reddit entirely with its own bitcoin section https://voat.co/v/bitcoin.
I say we have more options, not thought much about the issues though at all. good luck to all.
NM, point inncorrect.
I wonder who is using Satoshi's account to post his comment online?
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html
But we all know which side that person is
Dirty tactics at best.
that person seems to be on the 10% side
I wonder who is using Satoshi's account to post his comment online?
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html
But we all know which side that person is
Dirty tactics at best.
I wonder who is using Satoshi's account to post his comment online?
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html
Interesting development.
" I have been following the recent block size debates through the mailing list. I had hoped the debate would resolve and that a fork proposal would achieve widespread consensus. However with the formal release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely to happen, and so I am forced to share my concerns about this very dangerous fork.
The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth. When I designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near unanimous agreement. Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, even if their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto. Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it without being forced or pressured into it. By doing a fork in this way, these developers are violating the "original vision" they claim to honour.
They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to be. However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions. For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network. Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution. I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.
If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin a failed project. Bitcoin was meant to be both technically and socially robust. This present situation has been very disappointing to watch unfold.
Satoshi Nakamoto "
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html
Interesting development.
" I have been following the recent block size debates through the mailing list. I had hoped the debate would resolve and that a fork proposal would achieve widespread consensus. However with the formal release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely to happen, and so I am forced to share my concerns about this very dangerous fork.
The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth. When I designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near unanimous agreement. Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, even if their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto. Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it without being forced or pressured into it. By doing a fork in this way, these developers are violating the "original vision" they claim to honour.
They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to be. However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions. For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network. Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution. I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.
If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin a failed project. Bitcoin was meant to be both technically and socially robust. This present situation has been very disappointing to watch unfold.
Satoshi Nakamoto "
---Snip Image---
Same Implies ON bitcointalk.org
I wonder why people make such appeals , even on Knowing that to whom they are suggesting change ,want to persists change.
This may stop all the crap on Reddit but most likely won't do anything for Bitcointalk , as you can see threads about the fork (not on the right section , some gets moved , others dosen't ) and people attacking moderators and theymos himself so ... those should measures should be taken on the forums aswell
Jump to: