Topic: XT Fork is necessary , IMO - page 2. (Read 1557 times)
As recently proposed by Core developer Sergio Lerner, is to hold onto the 1 megabyte limit, but speed up the block interval. If 1 megabyte blocks are found every five minutes instead of 10, that would allow for double the amount of transactions on the network while also decreasing confirmation times.
the changes of XT are necessary not the name change itself, why they can't simply perform those changes inside Core, instead of changing its name for no reason?
it seems that some of the developers want to follow their own route and gain more authority.
it seems that some of the developers want to follow their own route and gain more authority.
Some of the developers decided that their idea was better. When the other developers told them otherwise they decided to "take their ball and go home". Seems like to me that egos are getting in the way.
You hit it bang on the head... XT guys stepped away from Bitcoin to do their own thing, and think they still have the power they had, when they were still in charge. Wladimir is
not taking that, and refuse to budge. So Gavin/Mike team up... create XT and get some support to force changes they need for their agenda ---> Hard fork.
Massive ego's at play here.... Who suffers? ---> Bitcoiners.
You cannot have your best developers playing for opposing teams, if your common goal should be to develop Bitcoin. There can only be one A-Team.
the changes of XT are necessary not the name change itself, why they can't simply perform those changes inside Core, instead of changing its name for no reason?
it seems that some of the developers want to follow their own route and gain more authority.
it seems that some of the developers want to follow their own route and gain more authority.
Some of the developers decided that their idea was better. When the other developers told them otherwise they decided to "take their ball and go home". Seems like to me that egos are getting in the way.
the changes of XT are necessary not the name change itself, why they can't simply perform those changes inside Core, instead of changing its name for no reason?
it seems that some of the developers want to follow their own route and gain more authority.
it seems that some of the developers want to follow their own route and gain more authority.
bingo
the changes of XT are necessary not the name change itself, why they can't simply perform those changes inside Core, instead of changing its name for no reason?
it seems that some of the developers want to follow their own route and gain more authority.
it seems that some of the developers want to follow their own route and gain more authority.
I think there's probably a better analogy to use. The fork that's going on isn't the same as branches on a tree, it's just a fork in the road. How does a potential fork impact phsyical bitcoins?
Dude, are you just copying and pasting your post in multiple threads?
Dude, are you just copying and pasting your post in multiple threads?
This is what I see happening:
1. XT Is out everyone!! Herpa Derp! 75% lets jump on the Gav coin (peace be up on his name)
2. Two chains live on for a while, with core having much less hashing power. (potential for double spends, whatevs.. wait for 20 confirmations for expensive shit)
3. After a little while all the schmuck's who jumped on Shitcoin-xt start to see signs of even more centralization, black/white listing and other types of fuckary
4. Smart ones panic and sell, and dumb ones get stuck holding a bag of Shitcoin-xts
5. True BTC gets the nodes/hashing power back
6. we all live on happily ever after without mike and gavin (peace be up on his name) and they can go hang out with magical tux.
1. XT Is out everyone!! Herpa Derp! 75% lets jump on the Gav coin (peace be up on his name)
2. Two chains live on for a while, with core having much less hashing power. (potential for double spends, whatevs.. wait for 20 confirmations for expensive shit)
3. After a little while all the schmuck's who jumped on Shitcoin-xt start to see signs of even more centralization, black/white listing and other types of fuckary
4. Smart ones panic and sell, and dumb ones get stuck holding a bag of Shitcoin-xts
5. True BTC gets the nodes/hashing power back
6. we all live on happily ever after without mike and gavin (peace be up on his name) and they can go hang out with magical tux.
This is what I see happening:
1. XT Is out everyone!! Herpa Derp! 75% lets jump on the Gav coin (peace be up on his name)
2. Two chains live on for a while, with core having much less hashing power. (potential for double spends, whatevs.. wait for 20 confirmations for expensive shit)
3. After a little while all the schmuck's who jumped on Shitcoin-xt start to see signs of even more centralization, black/white listing and other types of fuckary
4. Smart ones panic and sell, and dumb ones get stuck holding a bag of Shitcoin-xts
5. True BTC gets the nodes/hashing power back
6. we all live on happily ever after without mike and gavin (peace be up on his name) and they can go hang out with magical tux.
1. XT Is out everyone!! Herpa Derp! 75% lets jump on the Gav coin (peace be up on his name)
2. Two chains live on for a while, with core having much less hashing power. (potential for double spends, whatevs.. wait for 20 confirmations for expensive shit)
3. After a little while all the schmuck's who jumped on Shitcoin-xt start to see signs of even more centralization, black/white listing and other types of fuckary
4. Smart ones panic and sell, and dumb ones get stuck holding a bag of Shitcoin-xts
5. True BTC gets the nodes/hashing power back
6. we all live on happily ever after without mike and gavin (peace be up on his name) and they can go hang out with magical tux.
Quick ELI5:
Running XT at this time is equivalent with running Core. It's the same network, and the same Bitcoins. At some point in the future, if 75% mining majority is reached (but not before January 2016), the network will split whenever a miner creates a block larger than 1MB. This will not be accepted by Core unless they adopt a large blocks patch, but will be accepted by XT, and at this point there will effectively be two chains.
Running XT means that you will always be on the largest (75%+) chain, regardless of whether the fork actually happens or not. Running Core means that you will be left behind if a 75% majority is reached. Regardless of which version you run, coins will be safe (on both chains) as long as you acquired them prior to the fork, and for some time the chains will largely mirror each other.
Running XT at this time is equivalent with running Core. It's the same network, and the same Bitcoins. At some point in the future, if 75% mining majority is reached (but not before January 2016), the network will split whenever a miner creates a block larger than 1MB. This will not be accepted by Core unless they adopt a large blocks patch, but will be accepted by XT, and at this point there will effectively be two chains.
Running XT means that you will always be on the largest (75%+) chain, regardless of whether the fork actually happens or not. Running Core means that you will be left behind if a 75% majority is reached. Regardless of which version you run, coins will be safe (on both chains) as long as you acquired them prior to the fork, and for some time the chains will largely mirror each other.
The news of XT FORK spamed the page , this made me a little boredom, It is impolite not to reciprocate., so be bored together 
.
I believes that as a member of the decentralized community, we really do not need to be too limited.
Bitcoin, figuratively, like a tree, do you still have to let it bare to prop up the sky? Twig is inevitable, as long as it continues to thrive, so much why ah, the strongest branch always only one . Besides, both from an aesthetic point of view or from the perspective of natural selection, tree's branches are necessary.
So, the XT Fork is not terrible, More forks will be better.
.I believes that as a member of the decentralized community, we really do not need to be too limited.
Bitcoin, figuratively, like a tree, do you still have to let it bare to prop up the sky? Twig is inevitable, as long as it continues to thrive, so much why ah, the strongest branch always only one . Besides, both from an aesthetic point of view or from the perspective of natural selection, tree's branches are necessary.
So, the XT Fork is not terrible, More forks will be better.
Jump to: