Topic: WHY CHANGE(aka BIP hell)? (Read 10302 times)

Someone doesn't know about the insert quote button. 

ok, what's with the quadruple posts?

Everyone please calm down. You are all in violent agreement.

There is really only one dispute here, and it's something over which reasonable people can disagree.

That dispute is, are short addresses required for successful deployment of 2-factor coins?

Everything else, everyone agrees on:

• 2-factor/multisig coins are an important feature to have
• Gavin and team are competent and know what they are doing
• Changing the rules of the protocol is difficult, expensive and best avoided if possible.

I don't know anyone reasonable who would disagree with the above points.

Now maybe Kokjo believes 2-factor coins can be successfully deployed without short addresses. As it happens, I would agree with that, because I believe fees will work quite differently in future, so I don't care much about where exactly the bytes go or how many there are, and I see the cost of rule changes as being higher than the benefit. 2-factor coins will happen with or without P2SH because CHECKMULTISIG whitelisting is quite uncontroversial.

But Gavin, Luke and plenty of other people with a deep understanding of Bitcoin disagree. They see short addresses as being very important, and I can certainly understand that position.

Regardless of the outcome, the eventual impact of this decision will be quite trivial - something that a small cadre of Bitcoin protocol implementors need to think about, but it'll all be hidden from users. Its impact on the success or failure of the project is miniscule. So chill out

ROFL!

backward compatibility is by default broken, no need to debug.

(yes it is trolling)

to prove its broken

why should i debug something that im not a fan of?

Most agree this will come eventually and to some it's rather urgent since it must be deployed well in advance of actual use.

Arguing that more testing is needed and feb15 is too soon is fine and I actually agree with you on that count.

Why don't you use your time and skills to debug BIP16/17  instead of calling everybody else stupid

Both!

okey, a have read the proposals again. i still don't like it, but it's acceptable.
but why the rush? February 15, 2012? are you crazy? try 2013.

i still don't like how OP_EQUAL i working as an opcode with two different meanings depending on the version of bitcoin.
how will this be implemented to avoid a endless loop? isn't there a risk of this?

true, but as long as the message gets through, i don't care.

no dude. BIND8 does not change the dns protocol, and any old client would work fine. its just the config file on some server i need to mess around with.

Kokjo has been trolling for a while if you weren't aware of it.

This or he's never thinking twice before spewing a post.

though this change seems to me as something that must be done, it does seems a bit rushed.
My only concern that maybe not enough testing was done and there would be a way to exploit the change after it goes live...

You sir are a rather WEAK speller.

If you don't want to change you can just ignore the new feature(s). There is zero risk with the proposed changes for anybody running old, un-hacked versions of bitcoin.

(if you are solo mining and hacked your version of bitcoin to accept 'non-standard' transactions then you could shoot yourself in your foot, but even that is unlikely).

If you don't like evolution, you can simply go back to use old currencies as usd/eur are

I can imagine the reaction of kokjo when BIND8 arrived, he was using BIND4 his entire life... Now all is different! Oh my!!

How to setup my domain.com?!?! I need to learn all again! CRAP!

Pleeease... Grow up... Evolution is part of this Universe, gets used to it! Even if all is good, the evolution come and try to make things better today than yesterday.

from what i can tell, OP is either seriously ignorant or a troll.

So you are using multi-sig right?  Why not?