http://XTnodes.com
When the new indicator light turns green, we have won gentlemen.
That means 75%+ of blocks supporting the blocksize increase has been reached.
The bigger-blocks patch is activated after 2 additional weeks from that point.
Topic: XTnodes.com added a new chart: The number of mined Bitcoin XT blocks (Read 3877 times)
August 16, 2015, 09:35:50 PM
August 18, 2015, 03:28:55 PM
If you don't want to be moderated for discussing NotXT and Pseudnodes obvious implications for XTnodes.com, I made a new thread here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12177000
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12177000
August 15, 2015, 04:34:23 PM
nice to see a staff that doesnt censor us.... bravo. Cheers
EDIT: lol right after my post he moved the thread. What a cunt move.
You keep using the inapplicable, emotionally overwrought word "censor" when you mean "moderate." What a cunt move.
lol rekt
XT --> Trash
August 15, 2015, 04:28:32 PM
You're advocating the policy of moving XT topics to the alt section. It is clear that the only reason why that is done is to limit the freedom of people to choose whether they want the core dev's version or the larger block's version.
Your hyperbolic whining about your "freedom" to post anything anywhere you like on another person's server is insufferable.
This forum is private property. The only freedom at issue is theymos's freedom to moderate it as he sees fit.
Why don't you go live in Mainland China for a year, then get back to us about what "limit the freedom of the people" really means?
http://www.onlinecollege.org/2009/07/05/25-shocking-facts-about-chinese-censorship.
August 15, 2015, 02:22:26 PM
You should be thankful we didn't need a hard fork to introduce the 1MB cap in the first place, otherwise there's a possibility it might still be 32MB (or was it 33.5MB?). I suppose you think Bitcoin would have broken and died by now if the 1MB cap hadn't happened?
I wonder how it is relevant here, but yes, I believe Bitcoin would be in trouble already. I suppose you think the 1Mb cap was introduced for no reason?You can detest it all you like, but if you use Bitcoin, this is what you're signing up for. Bitcoin can fork at any time for any reason if enough users want it to. If you can't handle that, there are plenty of closed-source projects that might suit you better. You have a vote if you choose to use it, but that's all. Either go with the flow or go somewhere else. It's up to you.
You're fighting a straw man here. I never said I can't handle Bitcoin forking if enough users want it (the so-called economic majority). I said that I don't consider 75% of miners being enough users.I'm not one of those people who are too stubborn to admit when they're wrong (as per my previous post). If you can convince me I'm wrong, I'll concede. It's not my fault you're doing a really bad job of convincing me. 
It must be very convenient to ignore the very essence of my post while commenting only less important parts, and even there you manage to fight a straw man. Well done! What's the point of arguing then?Not. An. Altcoin.
Keep telling yourself that. August 15, 2015, 10:59:41 AM
v0.11A released:
https://bitcoinxt.software
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bitcoin-xt/_YeEuaUu3Xk
https://bitcoinxt.software
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bitcoin-xt/_YeEuaUu3Xk
nice to see a staff that doesnt censor us.... bravo. Cheers
EDIT: lol right after my post he moved the thread. What a cunt move.
August 15, 2015, 10:55:11 AM
August 15, 2015, 09:30:30 AM
You're advocating the policy of moving XT topics to the alt section. It is clear that the only reason why that is done is to limit the freedom of people to choose whether they want the core dev's version or the larger block's version. The fact that the core dev's are even playing this game is because they want full control.
The fact that you are advocating the "policy", shows that you are (maybe subconsciously) happy with the centralized system.
If it were decentralized the powers that be would let the miners decide.
This is just nonsense. I was telling others the current policy of the forum. I never stated that I fully approve nor disprove this, nor am I going to comment it. Also your post contains wrong information as Hearn is the one trying to centralize the system with a dictatorship and the core developers are working on a increase BIP100 and 102.The fact that you are advocating the "policy", shows that you are (maybe subconsciously) happy with the centralized system.
If it were decentralized the powers that be would let the miners decide.
Ok, I stand corrected and retract my statement. Sorry.
August 15, 2015, 09:28:44 AM
You're advocating the policy of moving XT topics to the alt section. It is clear that the only reason why that is done is to limit the freedom of people to choose whether they want the core dev's version or the larger block's version. The fact that the core dev's are even playing this game is because they want full control.
The fact that you are advocating the "policy", shows that you are (maybe subconsciously) happy with the centralized system.
You're taking things out of context. I was telling others the current policy of the forum. I never stated that I fully approve nor disprove this, nor am I going to comment it. I just said that people aren't mistaken if they want the thread moved due to that being the policy.The fact that you are advocating the "policy", shows that you are (maybe subconsciously) happy with the centralized system.
Also your post contains wrong information as Hearn is the one trying to centralize the system with a dictatorship and the core developers are working on a increase (BIP100 and 102).
If it were decentralized the powers that be would let the miners decide.
This 'let X,Y,B decide' won't work in such a case. It is much easier to manipulate people that do not know the full story of something (it's being done on a global scale right now, is it not?). Exactly what percentage of users checks the commits on github, 2-3% maybe or even less? There you have it.Update: Several corrections and additions.
Ok, I stand corrected and retract my statement. Sorry.
No problem, all is well. August 15, 2015, 09:24:04 AM
Gentlemen, this is proof that Bitcoin Core is centralized.
Exactly how is this proof of anything? I'm just a unknown entity who is stating his opinions. I have no relations with anybody from Core nor XT.You're advocating the policy of moving XT topics to the alt section. It is clear that the only reason why that is done is to limit the freedom of people to choose whether they want the core dev's version or the larger block's version. The fact that the core dev's are even playing this game is because they want full control.
The fact that you are advocating the "policy", shows that you are (maybe subconsciously) happy with the centralized system.
If it were decentralized the powers that be would let the miners decide.
August 15, 2015, 04:57:41 AM
If you haven't noticed, attempting to deflect attention from the PLA's authoritarian censorship onto other issues has no effect on me, and only makes you look defensive. 
you're losing me here, what exactly would i be being defensive about?
I made a point about the distinction between what theymos does (moderation) and what Mainland China does (censorship).
Your reaction was to start ranting about "terrorists...iraq...weapons of mass destruction...osama...[and]...the world trade center."
That rant was a defensive reaction, to defend censorship in Mainland China and/or smoothie the drama queen's mischaracterization of moderation.
August 15, 2015, 04:35:23 AM
If you haven't noticed, attempting to deflect attention from the PLA's authoritarian censorship onto other issues has no effect on me, and only makes you look defensive.
you're losing me here, what exactly would i be being defensive about?
August 15, 2015, 04:15:18 AM
Mike cant make a final decisions regardless of consensus. At the moment he supports a good idea that has value. dont look at the people, look at the idea/code.
He cant force people to use something else in the future. people will have the same choice as today with core and xt.
He cant force people to use something else in the future. people will have the same choice as today with core and xt.
August 15, 2015, 04:12:36 AM
What is it with dictators and checkpoints anyway? Hearn (not theymos) is the "epitome of authoritarianism."
Interestingly they come here complaining that theymos is censoring things (which he is not), but they support Hearns who proposed the idea of a benevolent dictator. 
I still don't understand why people do not go with BIP 100 or 102 and our problems would be solved for now. Hearn and Gavin have caused so much unnecessary drama and problems for nothing.
Since Hearn likes the idea of a 'bitcoin dictator' that can make the final decisions regardless of consensus, it can't be good. At some point in time he can tell people to either upgrade to some version containing who knows what or make their own fork. With him calling all the shots, who knows what could happen to the network (if XT = Bitcoin).
It's also interesting when they confuse moderation and censorship, then vote to hide theymos' responses explaining their mistake.
Which Downfall sub would be funnier?
A. Hearn, in his Fuherbunker, being told XT is stuck at ~2% of the network, with no propensity for future growth
B. Theymos, in his Fuherbunker, being told some Gavinista sock (IE Hearn) has created a BitcoinXT subreddit (with all of 350 users), thus defeating his mighty attempt at censorship
I vote for the first one.
August 15, 2015, 03:25:36 AM
Gentlemen, this is proof that Bitcoin Core is centralized.
Exactly how is this proof of anything? I'm just a unknown entity who is stating his opinions. I have no relations with anybody from Core nor XT.The drooling masses are clamoring for a Strong Man to take them into space faster than the free world, IE a Stalin for Satoshi's Gagarin.
What is it with dictators and checkpoints anyway? Hearn (not theymos) is the "epitome of authoritarianism."
Interestingly they come here complaining that theymos is censoring things (which he is not), but they support Hearns who proposed the idea of a benevolent dictator. What is it with dictators and checkpoints anyway? Hearn (not theymos) is the "epitome of authoritarianism."
I still don't understand why people do not go with BIP 100 or 102 and our problems would be solved for now. Hearn and Gavin have caused so much unnecessary drama and problems for nothing.
But, what if all this block size stuff is just a bait to make everyone do the switch (let's leave aside the probabilites of that IRL) and only after the world has been conquered, do the controversial changes start to come in? (eg. that "redlisting" thing that MH was all for). The world is not going to switch back even if Bitcoin Core supports bigger blocks.
Exactly. This is something that I've been trying to explain to others. Since Hearn likes the idea of a 'bitcoin dictator' that can make the final decisions regardless of consensus, it can't be good. At some point in time he can tell people to either upgrade to some version containing who knows what or make their own fork. With him calling all the shots, who knows what could happen to the network (if XT = Bitcoin). August 15, 2015, 01:42:47 AM
-snip-
Anyway, I *really* hope the core devs can find a compromise between a sudden switch 8MB or no growth at all, so that Bitcoin doesn't have to be split into Core and XT.
Anyway, I *really* hope the core devs can find a compromise between a sudden switch 8MB or no growth at all, so that Bitcoin doesn't have to be split into Core and XT.
2 MB blocks in November 2015 is the proposed backup plan.
It is the current policy to move XT threads to the altcoin section. Whoever proposes this within the topic has not made a mistake but rather is following the policy (which is controversial according to some). XT has caused so many unneeded problems, and has yielded with so many pointless discussions.
Gentlemen, this is proof that Bitcoin Core is centralized.
August 15, 2015, 01:32:57 AM
thats something nice .. would be keeping eye on it from now on
August 15, 2015, 01:30:13 AM
You keep using that word, i dont think you know what it means
Maybe you can go and live in
Fixed it for you.
fixed it for you both
In (mainland) China, are the names of the two heroes in the above picture renowned and appropriately celebrated?
I have been led to believe they are not, but perhaps that's just "USA propaganda."
Please correct my misapprehension and improve my understanding.
in the US there's a label for civilians standing in the way of tanks; terrorists
and iraq had weapons of mass destruction (and of course the US wouldn't be armed to the teeth itself with WMDs, but if it did it as leader of the free world has every right too 
)and with osama in charge iraq destroyed the world trade center .... 
Let's stick to my open question and the subject of censorship, instead of wandering off into unrelated (although distracting) Dubya vs Saddam vs 9-11 melodrama.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that "in the US there's a label for civilians standing in the way of tanks; terrorists."
In (mainland) China, is there even a label for Tank Man and Tank Driver? Or is knowledge of their heroic, patriotic actions (and mere existence) denied to those who should most cherish and honor their memories?
If you haven't noticed, attempting to deflect attention from the PLA's authoritarian censorship onto other issues has no effect on me, and only makes you look defensive.
August 15, 2015, 12:36:22 AM
You keep using that word, i dont think you know what it means
Maybe you can go and live in
Fixed it for you.
fixed it for you both
In (mainland) China, are the names of the two heroes in the above picture renowned and appropriately celebrated?
I have been led to believe they are not, but perhaps that's just "USA propaganda."
Please correct my misapprehension and improve my understanding.
in the US there's a label for civilians standing in the way of tanks; terrorists
and iraq had weapons of mass destruction (and of course the US wouldn't be armed to the teeth itself with WMDs, but if it did it as leader of the free world has every right too )and with osama in charge iraq destroyed the world trade center .... August 14, 2015, 11:40:05 PM
You keep using that word, i dont think you know what it means
Maybe you can go and live in
Fixed it for you.
fixed it for you both
In (mainland) China, are the names of the two heroes in the above picture renowned and appropriately celebrated?
I have been led to believe they are not, but perhaps that's just "USA propaganda."
Please correct my misapprehension and improve my understanding.
Jump to: