They can have their blocks rejected despite any of that.
Time to change your underwear, off you scuttle
Topic: What happens if BU fails VS What happens if SegWit fails - page 5. (Read 6407 times)
You should break out the CarltonDance gif instead, as that's literally what I was actually doing 
Can you explain, lo-kicker, how the Unlimited pool will pay out 110% of anything when their blocks keep getting rejected? These people are going to have one nasty electricy bill to pay
Can you explain, lo-kicker, how the Unlimited pool will pay out 110% of anything when their blocks keep getting rejected? These people are going to have one nasty electricy bill to pay
Well You are Awful Stupid, But I will give it a shot.
They will only produce blocks that are accepted by the entire network, until they have enough % to Take over the Chain Permanently .
Read the above again, I know you are slow in the head.
BTU could take over the network with between 51% or more and their ain't jack you or the BTC core devs could do to stop it.
FYI:
BTU only needs ~25% more for the majority of the network to leave you and BTC Core Shenanigans behind forever.
Odds are the Chinese Miners will join them giving them ~70% of the network.
BTU will have the Longer & Stronger Chain , Segwit supporters will buckle like the Chicken Little they are or fork into oblivion!
LOL,
There has to be something like a power grab here.
Ya think?
Ask yourself: What company raised $71M in venture capital, wants to be "a leading provider of blockchain technologies", and hired many
of the prominent developers of the core bitcoin repository?
hint: It rhymes with "cock dream".
There's a company called Sock Bean?
If they're not making any BTC mining, they will have nothing to pay their bills.
The End.
The End.
You should break out the CarltonDance gif instead, as that's literally what I was actually doing
Can you explain, lo-kicker, how the Unlimited pool will pay out 110% of anything when their blocks keep getting rejected? These people are going to have one nasty electricy bill to pay
Can you explain, lo-kicker, how the Unlimited pool will pay out 110% of anything when their blocks keep getting rejected? These people are going to have one nasty electricy bill to pay
They will just add some more electricity costs (minor) soon running enough nodes... easy done.
You should break out the CarltonDance gif instead, as that's literally what I was actually doing
Can you explain, lo-kicker, how the Unlimited pool will pay out 110% of anything when their blocks keep getting rejected? These people are going to have one nasty electricy bill to pay
Can you explain, lo-kicker, how the Unlimited pool will pay out 110% of anything when their blocks keep getting rejected? These people are going to have one nasty electricy bill to pay
The look on your Face.
When you realized Bitcoin Unlimited was Paying out more to their Miners that Segwit Pools.
FYI: Also when I tricked you into Bumping this Topic for 30 Minutes.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18096423
https://news.bitcoin.com/new-unlimited-bitcoin-com-mining-pool-now-open/
Looks like someone is getting ready to help BTC Unlimited kicks Segwit virtual ass
Miners can earn 110% compared to other Mining Pools.
“We are paying more on Pay-Per-Share (PPS) than any other pool,” explains Oldenburg.
“We pay a 110% block reward, and charge 0% fees for PPS and Pay Per Last N Shares (PPLNS).
Bitcoin.com’s mining pool pays PPS directly instead of giving miners some fees after the blocks are mined.
Our reward scheme is simpler and is guaranteed to make the miner more money regardless of luck.”
A Unique Reward System, and an Aim to End Transaction Congestion
Bitcoin.com’s Mining Pool is also the world’s first large pool fully dedicated to Bitcoin Unlimited.
Oldenburg details the operations are global with servers in the U.S., China, and Europe.
Additionally, Bitcoin.com’s mining pool has fast block transmission times using a global relay network built on Bitcoin Unlimited Xthin and Xpedited blocks.
Today begins the first invite to the general public, offering a mining pool with a significant incentive for miners.
Moreover, Bitcoin.com’s Mining Pool is leading the change for bigger blocks by voting with hashpower to end congestion within the network.
In addition to the pool, Oldenburg reveals that a transaction accelerator platform is also coming in the near future.
Looks like someone is getting ready to help BTC Unlimited kicks Segwit virtual ass
Miners can earn 110% compared to other Mining Pools.
Quote
“We are paying more on Pay-Per-Share (PPS) than any other pool,” explains Oldenburg.
“We pay a 110% block reward, and charge 0% fees for PPS and Pay Per Last N Shares (PPLNS).
Bitcoin.com’s mining pool pays PPS directly instead of giving miners some fees after the blocks are mined.
Our reward scheme is simpler and is guaranteed to make the miner more money regardless of luck.”
A Unique Reward System, and an Aim to End Transaction Congestion
Bitcoin.com’s Mining Pool is also the world’s first large pool fully dedicated to Bitcoin Unlimited.
Oldenburg details the operations are global with servers in the U.S., China, and Europe.
Additionally, Bitcoin.com’s mining pool has fast block transmission times using a global relay network built on Bitcoin Unlimited Xthin and Xpedited blocks.
Today begins the first invite to the general public, offering a mining pool with a significant incentive for miners.
Moreover, Bitcoin.com’s Mining Pool is leading the change for bigger blocks by voting with hashpower to end congestion within the network.
In addition to the pool, Oldenburg reveals that a transaction accelerator platform is also coming in the near future.
Go look for yourself, BU is a complete shit-show: https://bitco.in/forum/forums/bitcoin-unlimited.15/
The look on your Face CB.
When you realized I Tricked you into Bumping this Topic for the Last 30 Minutes.
Go look for yourself, BU is a complete shit-show: https://bitco.in/forum/forums/bitcoin-unlimited.15/
Soft fork and hard fork have explained about the pro's and cons of each supporting their own group. Hard fork focus towards mining full nodes and transaction time. Soft fork focus towards the decentralization and the miners fee, so a common committee could resolve it.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
If this is how BU works, I don't think I like the idea of running a node and constantly have to check whether my synchronization has stopped because I have dropped out of the bottom consensus and then having to change configuration.
If you don't want to drop from consensus due to too small a block size limit and you don't want to update your node, then you can set your "excessive block gate" to something like 12 or so (this is actually the default setting). This means that your node will try to reject blocks larger than your block size limit setting, but give up and follow the mining majority if the network as a whole decides to accept larger blocks.
Here is an article that describes how this optional feature works:
https://medium.com/@peter_r/the-excessive-block-gate-how-a-bitcoin-unlimited-node-deals-with-large-blocks-22a4a5c322d4
LOL look this shows what a bullshit BU is. Why have a limit then anyway? If I dont want to be forked off the network I have to set it to unlimited anyway. So all decision power goes to some chinese miners, no thx.
If you ever get this shit activated the price will tank so hard, that mxgox desaster will will look like a mini dump. At least on the BU-altcoin chain :p
I would like to understand your point of view here when you say "giving all power to the miners".
Other than allowing the miners to come to a consensus about blocksize with less constraint, what power do you feel that BU gives to the miners that they don't already have?
If this is how BU works, I don't think I like the idea of running a node and constantly have to check whether my synchronization has stopped because I have dropped out of the bottom consensus and then having to change configuration.
If you don't want to drop from consensus due to too small a block size limit and you don't want to update your node, then you can set your "excessive block gate" to something like 12 or so (this is actually the default setting). This means that your node will try to reject blocks larger than your block size limit setting, but give up and follow the mining majority if the network as a whole decides to accept larger blocks.
Here is an article that describes how this optional feature works:
https://medium.com/@peter_r/the-excessive-block-gate-how-a-bitcoin-unlimited-node-deals-with-large-blocks-22a4a5c322d4
LOL look this shows what a bullshit BU is. Why have a limit then anyway? If I dont want to be forked off the network I have to set it to unlimited anyway. So all decision power goes to some chinese miners, no thx.
If you ever get this shit activated the price will tank so hard, that mxgox desaster will will look like a mini dump. At least on the BU-altcoin chain :p
Some people want to automatically track consensus regardless of the size of blocks; other people want to hold firm on the size of blocks they will accept. So we (Bitcoin Unlimited) allowed users to do either.
BTW--Bitcoin Unlimited doesn't "activate." BU nodes by default will accept blocks larger than 1 MB today.
No this is bullshit man, if you always want to stay sync with the network you have to set the litmit to unlimited. Maybe you have the time to sit infront your node and track the blocksize the whole day, but many surely dont.
So please just go away with your divergent consensus.
Good that a supermajority of the network is on core and will reject your altcoins blocks if a fork happens.
Bitcoin Unlimited simply removes friction from node operators adjusting their block size limits. Everything that a node operator can do with BU they can already do with Core by modifying the code and recompiling. If you think Bitcoin Unlimited "breaks" Bitcoin then you must think that the only reason Bitcoin is not broken is because it takes a bit of effort to recompile the code.
Some more thoughts on the matter:
https://medium.com/@peter_r/what-were-doing-with-bitcoin-unlimited-simply-6f71072f9b94
If this is how BU works, I don't think I like the idea of running a node and constantly have to check whether my synchronization has stopped because I have dropped out of the bottom consensus and then having to change configuration.
If you don't want to drop from consensus due to too small a block size limit and you don't want to update your node, then you can set your "excessive block gate" to something like 12 or so (this is actually the default setting). This means that your node will try to reject blocks larger than your block size limit setting, but give up and follow the mining majority if the network as a whole decides to accept larger blocks.
Here is an article that describes how this optional feature works:
https://medium.com/@peter_r/the-excessive-block-gate-how-a-bitcoin-unlimited-node-deals-with-large-blocks-22a4a5c322d4
LOL look this shows what a bullshit BU is. Why have a limit then anyway? If I dont want to be forked off the network I have to set it to unlimited anyway. So all decision power goes to some chinese miners, no thx.
If you ever get this shit activated the price will tank so hard, that mxgox desaster will will look like a mini dump. At least on the BU-altcoin chain :p
Some people want to automatically track consensus regardless of the size of blocks; other people want to hold firm on the size of blocks they will accept. So we (Bitcoin Unlimited) allowed users to do either.
BTW--Bitcoin Unlimited doesn't "activate." BU nodes by default will accept blocks larger than 1 MB today.
No this is bullshit man, if you always want to stay sync with the network you have to set the litmit to unlimited. Maybe you have the time to sit infront your node and track the blocksize the whole day, but many surely dont.
So please just go away with your divergent consensus.
Good that a supermajority of the network is on core and will reject your altcoins blocks if a fork happens.
If this is how BU works, I don't think I like the idea of running a node and constantly have to check whether my synchronization has stopped because I have dropped out of the bottom consensus and then having to change configuration.
If you don't want to drop from consensus due to too small a block size limit and you don't want to update your node, then you can set your "excessive block gate" to something like 12 or so (this is actually the default setting). This means that your node will try to reject blocks larger than your block size limit setting, but give up and follow the mining majority if the network as a whole decides to accept larger blocks.
Here is an article that describes how this optional feature works:
https://medium.com/@peter_r/the-excessive-block-gate-how-a-bitcoin-unlimited-node-deals-with-large-blocks-22a4a5c322d4
LOL look this shows what a bullshit BU is. Why have a limit then anyway? If I dont want to be forked off the network I have to set it to unlimited anyway. So all decision power goes to some chinese miners, no thx.
If you ever get this shit activated the price will tank so hard, that mxgox desaster will will look like a mini dump. At least on the BU-altcoin chain :p
Some people want to automatically track consensus regardless of the size of blocks; other people want to hold firm on the size of blocks they will accept. So we (Bitcoin Unlimited) allowed users to do either.
BTW--Bitcoin Unlimited doesn't "activate." BU nodes by default will accept blocks larger than 1 MB today.
If this is how BU works, I don't think I like the idea of running a node and constantly have to check whether my synchronization has stopped because I have dropped out of the bottom consensus and then having to change configuration.
If you don't want to drop from consensus due to too small a block size limit and you don't want to update your node, then you can set your "excessive block gate" to something like 12 or so (this is actually the default setting). This means that your node will try to reject blocks larger than your block size limit setting, but give up and follow the mining majority if the network as a whole decides to accept larger blocks.
Here is an article that describes how this optional feature works:
https://medium.com/@peter_r/the-excessive-block-gate-how-a-bitcoin-unlimited-node-deals-with-large-blocks-22a4a5c322d4
LOL look this shows what a bullshit BU is. Why have a limit then anyway? If I dont want to be forked off the network I have to set it to unlimited anyway. So all decision power goes to some chinese miners, no thx.
If you ever get this shit activated the price will tank so hard, that mxgox desaster will will look like a mini dump. At least on the BU-altcoin chain :p
If this is how BU works, I don't think I like the idea of running a node and constantly have to check whether my synchronization has stopped because I have dropped out of the bottom consensus and then having to change configuration.
Also, there is a need for blocksize to shrink to stop the fee market tending back to zero when there is no or little block reward when volume drops. If BU doesn't do this then I don't think it is the right answer either.
It all needs to be a lot more automatic for me.
Also, there is a need for blocksize to shrink to stop the fee market tending back to zero when there is no or little block reward when volume drops. If BU doesn't do this then I don't think it is the right answer either.
It all needs to be a lot more automatic for me.
the description of DYNAMIC BLOCKS i made in post #57 is the broader way of how nodes set limits and pools follow in regards to how consenus generally works for all of the different 'dynamic proposals'
BU(just one of many proposals) for instance has a little extra(which is about the Excessive block stuff). which would occur in step two of my broader description. which would as you say 'automate' to move the goal posts. thus if you have the right upper setting. will find that your node wont unsync and be left behind as much as you think
but like i said there is more then one 'limit' and also pools follow what nodes allow, not the other way round.
yes if your nodes upper limit is not that high then you have to check now and again that its still syncing.
but if your node has sufficient limits set and knowing that pools are not stupid to jump too high to fast (pools are smart to take small tolerable steps to avoid orphan drama as much as possible) you wont have to worry about checking often
2. I thought the difference between an orphan and an invalid block would be that an invalid block doesn't meat the parameters of the consensus. Whereas an orphan is a valid block that is just propagated at the same time with another and it is not sure which one will result in the longer chain. So invalid = fork and orphan =/= fork.
edit: just read your edit and this makes it clear clear for me. Thank you.
edit: just read your edit and this makes it clear clear for me. Thank you.
an invalid block = blocks that doesnt meet the rules (your understanding of not meeting the parameters)
a rejected block can be valid(data/rule) but for propagation or longer chain or other reasons it just doesnt get accepted.
an orphan is just an umbrella term.
EG real world.
an orphan is a child thrown aside and detached from its parent.
it can be because the parent is killed off.
it can be because the parent no longer wants to be linked to the child (gave up for adoption)
it can be force away from parent (social services removed parental rights)
so in bitcoin the umbrella term orphan, just means thrown aside..
orphans happen alot
http://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocks
but explanations as to WHY, vary. all you can see is what other child replaced it as the preferred child
Jump to: