Topic: What is "Satoshi's vision"? which camp is right? (Read 1112 times)
Actually in my own vision also, Satoshi Nakamoto created a masterpiece and that is what bitcoin is, I do not know also if he is really behind this successful masterpiece because some also claimed that it was Roger Ver's idea but who knows? and if somebody would say such things that they defended and they proved that it was his ideas then its okay, it really doesn't matter to me, they want to remain their identity hidden then its wise, we are even using bitcoins till now and its really a bad manner if we wouldn't say thank you for the creators. Thank You.
Decentralization and privacy this was his vision! We can improve his ideas, and insert a lot of new things, but we should stick with main goals, to overthrow this corrupt banking system, responsible for this situation in the world. We can show them our teeth at lest! BTC is one, I think there are no two BTC's? 
Satoshi's vision is not very detailed in case some new problems arise every now and then, here and there. Circumstances always come out along with time. Satoshi didn't lay out everything that we should do in the next decade or so. So, we need to do some steps in order for Bitcoin to remain working.
For that aspects you are pertaining of, we should promote and spread the benefits of bitcoin to our lives as part of the steps you are saying about. I know circumstances may occur for any reasons but we should be as neutral and calm as always, because emotional stress might not give us productive future. Some people who couldn't handle such traumatic experiences will end up hopeless and quit their bitcoin job and might lose the profit in a long run.
I see a lot of comments from both sides of the scaling debate, both very strongly believing that their side (be it core, or big blockers), is the true representation of "Satoshi's vision, as obviously expressed in his whitepaper."
Who is right? What is "satoshi's vision", really? Are people twisting words too much or adding their own unfounded opinions?
Would love to hear your thoughts.
Who is right? What is "satoshi's vision", really? Are people twisting words too much or adding their own unfounded opinions?
Would love to hear your thoughts.
Why not ask himself? We have good documents from satoshi, here on bitcointalk, which was found by satoshi:
Here are the emails between Satoshi and Mike Hean
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/mike-hearn-still-holding-bitcoin-2080936
And here are the first posts on bitcointalkforum created by Satoshi
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcoin-02-released-16
"Satoshi's Vision" is a Roger Ver scam. How would anyone know his personal vision? It is self-contradictory. 
I think Satoshi would not have been against solving the scalability problem. He would have wanted his brainchild to develop, not stagnate
The Bitcoin Cash (big block) camp is right. The others are deceivers or have been lied to themselves and don't know it.
I think it depends on how we will look at this.
Bitcoin Cash is based on Satoshi Nakamoto's vision, we can say that it is the original vision and also, we can say that it is the right thing if we are looking at the bitcoin in the side of the creator. If we are looking at the side of the commoners, the right thing is the Bitcoin Segwit because it is the Bitcoin we are using until now.
I see a lot of comments from both sides of the scaling debate, both very strongly believing that their side (be it core, or big blockers), is the true representation of "Satoshi's vision, as obviously expressed in his whitepaper."
Who is right? What is "satoshi's vision", really? Are people twisting words too much or adding their own unfounded opinions?
Would love to hear your thoughts.
Who is right? What is "satoshi's vision", really? Are people twisting words too much or adding their own unfounded opinions?
Would love to hear your thoughts.
Satoshi's vision doesn't really matter. He's not here, and we need to create a system that will actually scale and work in the real world while dealing with actual issues such as bandwidth, storage, decentralization, and consensus.
In Satoshi's vision, he claimed that he'd just make decisions on his own and everyone would do whatever he decided. In the real world that wouldn't be true even if he was still here, and it certainly isn't true now that he's gone.
Here's a quote from Satoshi demonstrating his belief that he could just arbitrarily change the block size in the future and people would simply accept it:
It can be phased in, like:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.
Yeah, just put it on the 'no-brainer' list. Not worth to discuss in any detail, but aware it need a hard fork.
Sigh
It's not exactly clear cut, but I'd say the central thread running through all of it is decentralisation and the removal of third parties to give individuals control. Everything else is just tinsel.
This makes it even muddier as you can throw the same accusation at all camps depending on how you want to frame it. Bitmain and their big blocking friends will centralise nodes and they've already centralised mining. If BCH 'wins' then they also control development. The blockstreamborgcore types have taken control of development and are pushing things that also have the potential for centralisation on the second layer.
All of this is why this issue will never go away. Everyone feels they're right.
This makes it even muddier as you can throw the same accusation at all camps depending on how you want to frame it. Bitmain and their big blocking friends will centralise nodes and they've already centralised mining. If BCH 'wins' then they also control development. The blockstreamborgcore types have taken control of development and are pushing things that also have the potential for centralisation on the second layer.
All of this is why this issue will never go away. Everyone feels they're right.
Satoshi's vision is not very detailed in case some new problems arise every now and then, here and there. Circumstances always come out along with time. Satoshi didn't lay out everything that we should do in the next decade or so. So, we need to do some steps in order for Bitcoin to remain working.
Satoshi died for our sins.
The Bitcoin Cash (big block) camp is right. The others are deceivers or have been lied to themselves and don't know it.
Why would Satoshi's vision matter when he's not even around the scene? As long as improvements are needed for bitcoin to scale, then developments should take place. If efficiency and usability is on the line, legacy shouldn't be the basis of where will we go from there but instead what would be the best possible action we could take as a community.
It's naive to think that Satoshi's vision should be carried out. Where did he say that once the blockchain is up and running there should never be improvments made? Also, if he is still out there why not just create an altcoin with the original bitcoin's code and continue on with that..? Oh because it's been improved in many ways over the years. If you aren't moving forward in this industry you'll die off VERY quickly.
I dont really think that Satoshi exists, i think that he is just a character that makes us believe that he is the person who really created all this system, and we need someone to believe in. The really creator of the bitcoin is probably holding large amounts of bitcoins, but he probably can sell them, because they will be worth millions and millions, and that could take the attention of all money entities on the world.
Satoshi was never really confronted by opposing views and different opinions when he was still around. People accepted his "vision" because he or she or they, were the creator of this experiment. Most people welcome the fact that Satoshi left the scene to make way for new ideas and innovation, without the restraint of centralized decision making.
Satoshi never left the scene, he's just playing a different part now.
Neither is right. Bitcoin needs major changes to scale long term.
I think both camps have their merits and Satoshi might have been on the fence. He probably would have welcomed the fork.
Satoshi was never really confronted by opposing views and different opinions when he was still around. People accepted his "vision" because he or she or they, were the creator of this experiment. Most people welcome the fact that Satoshi left the scene to make way for new ideas and innovation, without the restraint of centralized decision making.
This experiment evolved into something new and consensus replaced centralized authority. People should acknowledge this and just move with the changing tide. We will never scale enough or fast enough with Block size increases, if we have to wait for consensus. ^hmmmmmm^
This experiment evolved into something new and consensus replaced centralized authority. People should acknowledge this and just move with the changing tide. We will never scale enough or fast enough with Block size increases, if we have to wait for consensus. ^hmmmmmm^
"Satoshi's Vision" = money 2.0
It's supposed to be an improvement to fiat in all ways.
A living idea that should grow towards maximum efficiency.
All things should be possible.
Isn't there voting and such implemented? That alone suggests an initial desire for improvement.
The block-chains should be able to communicate with each other.
The miners should get paid for their efforts.
The traders should be able to buy/sell as needed.
People that invest should get returns on their investments.
It's that simple really.
It's supposed to be an improvement to fiat in all ways.
A living idea that should grow towards maximum efficiency.
All things should be possible.
Isn't there voting and such implemented? That alone suggests an initial desire for improvement.
The block-chains should be able to communicate with each other.
The miners should get paid for their efforts.
The traders should be able to buy/sell as needed.
People that invest should get returns on their investments.
It's that simple really.
Jump to: