gmaxwell

Legendary



Offline



Activity: 3178

Merit: 4299









StaffLegendaryActivity: 3178Merit: 4299 Re: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT May 13, 2016, 08:24:05 PM #1744 Pfft. I'm not going to mislead people by failing to call it what it is-- going to have some secret meeting where you are massively outnumbered with no strong negotiator on your side where you let yourself get compelled to commit to random things which are either largely meaningless or violate other people's trust and confidence in you (or, in fact, commitments you made to others before leaving) is a truly foolish move, if not quite "publicly endorsing scammer-wright" grade.



It's not the end of the world, people screw up, shit happens, goes on on-- but someone here asked the question as to why Luke was going around polling segments of the community what kind of hardforks they'd find acceptable, and that is why. It is a disappointment because its likely to exacerbate and prolong some drama which could otherwise be largely over now.

JayJuanGee



Offline



Activity: 2380

Merit: 3253





How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?







LegendaryActivity: 2380Merit: 3253How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%? Re: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT May 13, 2016, 08:31:58 PM #1745 Quote from: gmaxwell on May 13, 2016, 08:24:05 PM Pfft. I'm not going to mislead people by failing to call it what it is-- going to have some secret meeting where you are massively outnumbered with no strong negotiator on your side where you let yourself get compelled to commit to random things which are either largely meaningless or violate other people's trust and confidence in you (or, in fact, commitments you made to others before leaving) is a truly foolish move, if not quite "publicly endorsing scammer-wright" grade.



It's not the end of the world, people screw up, shit happens, goes on on-- but someone here asked the question as to why Luke was going around polling segments of the community what kind of hardforks they'd find acceptable, and that is why. It is a disappointment because its likely to exacerbate and prolong some drama which could otherwise be largely over now.



But ultimately isn't that the nature of a system that is purported to be decentralized?





Various persons are going to come to differing independent judgements about what to do and how to spend their efforts and energies.



Surely, adults can feel as if they were forced into agreeing about something, but in the end, if someone felt coerced, then that person should retract and hopefully learn from the experience not to let such happen again, and attempt to do so in a way that preserves some of credibility... Also, many of us discover over years of living that there are ways to agreeing to things that are sufficiently general in order to allow sufficient credibility. Bitcoin is certainly no company with a dictator or a means in which a small group of people are going to lock it down based on one amorphously written agreement.



Anyhow, individuals are going to come to different conclusions regarding how to act and what to do and sometimes act irrational and burn bridges and sometimes burn credibility... but hopefully learn from those experiences, as well. But ultimately isn't that the nature of a system that is purported to be decentralized?Various persons are going to come to differing independent judgements about what to do and how to spend their efforts and energies.Surely, adults can feel as if they were forced into agreeing about something, but in the end, if someone felt coerced, then that person should retract and hopefully learn from the experience not to let such happen again, and attempt to do so in a way that preserves some of credibility... Also, many of us discover over years of living that there are ways to agreeing to things that are sufficiently general in order to allow sufficient credibility. Bitcoin is certainly no company with a dictator or a means in which a small group of people are going to lock it down based on one amorphously written agreement.Anyhow, individuals are going to come to different conclusions regarding how to act and what to do and sometimes act irrational and burn bridges and sometimes burn credibility... but hopefully learn from those experiences, as well. Put BTC here: 35EVP8EePt8dyvKHaB7bXaRmKLm22YgRCA



How much alt coin diversification is necessary? if you are investing in Bitcoin, then perhaps 0%?

danielW



Offline



Activity: 277

Merit: 250







Sr. MemberActivity: 277Merit: 250 Re: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT May 13, 2016, 09:52:39 PM #1748 Quote from: gmaxwell on May 13, 2016, 08:24:05 PM Pfft. I'm not going to mislead people by failing to call it what it is-- going to have some secret meeting where you are massively outnumbered with no strong negotiator on your side where you let yourself get compelled to commit to random things which are either largely meaningless or violate other people's trust and confidence in you (or, in fact, commitments you made to others before leaving) is a truly foolish move, if not quite "publicly endorsing scammer-wright" grade.



It's not the end of the world, people screw up, shit happens, goes on on-- but someone here asked the question as to why Luke was going around polling segments of the community what kind of hardforks they'd find acceptable, and that is why. It is a disappointment because its likely to exacerbate and prolong some drama which could otherwise be largely over now.



Im not sure Greg, things are only this calm because of the agreement.



Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want hard fork asap and most likely 'economic majority' want a 'reasonable' hard fork soon. Im not sure Greg, things are only this calm because of the agreement.Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want hard fork asap and most likely 'economic majority' want a 'reasonable' hard fork soon.

JayJuanGee



Offline



Activity: 2380

Merit: 3253





How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?







LegendaryActivity: 2380Merit: 3253How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%? Re: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT May 13, 2016, 10:03:20 PM #1749 Quote from: danielW on May 13, 2016, 09:52:39 PM Quote from: gmaxwell on May 13, 2016, 08:24:05 PM Pfft. I'm not going to mislead people by failing to call it what it is-- going to have some secret meeting where you are massively outnumbered with no strong negotiator on your side where you let yourself get compelled to commit to random things which are either largely meaningless or violate other people's trust and confidence in you (or, in fact, commitments you made to others before leaving) is a truly foolish move, if not quite "publicly endorsing scammer-wright" grade.



It's not the end of the world, people screw up, shit happens, goes on on-- but someone here asked the question as to why Luke was going around polling segments of the community what kind of hardforks they'd find acceptable, and that is why. It is a disappointment because its likely to exacerbate and prolong some drama which could otherwise be largely over now.



Im not sure Greg, things are only this calm because of the agreement.



Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want hard fork asap and most likely 'economic majority' want a 'reasonable' hard fork soon.

Im not sure Greg, things are only this calm because of the agreement.Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want hard fork asap and most likely 'economic majority' want a 'reasonable' hard fork soon.

DanielW: What is your source for gauging what the "economic majority" wants? And, what do you mean by hard fork? Do you mean increase the blocksize limit, change in governance, some combination of such, or something else? DanielW: What is your source for gauging what the "economic majority" wants? And, what do you mean by hard fork? Do you mean increase the blocksize limit, change in governance, some combination of such, or something else? Put BTC here: 35EVP8EePt8dyvKHaB7bXaRmKLm22YgRCA



How much alt coin diversification is necessary? if you are investing in Bitcoin, then perhaps 0%?

danielW



Offline



Activity: 277

Merit: 250







Sr. MemberActivity: 277Merit: 250 Re: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT May 13, 2016, 10:11:21 PM

Last edit: May 13, 2016, 10:24:20 PM by danielW #1750 Quote from: JayJuanGee on May 13, 2016, 10:03:20 PM Quote from: danielW on May 13, 2016, 09:52:39 PM Quote from: gmaxwell on May 13, 2016, 08:24:05 PM Pfft. I'm not going to mislead people by failing to call it what it is-- going to have some secret meeting where you are massively outnumbered with no strong negotiator on your side where you let yourself get compelled to commit to random things which are either largely meaningless or violate other people's trust and confidence in you (or, in fact, commitments you made to others before leaving) is a truly foolish move, if not quite "publicly endorsing scammer-wright" grade.



It's not the end of the world, people screw up, shit happens, goes on on-- but someone here asked the question as to why Luke was going around polling segments of the community what kind of hardforks they'd find acceptable, and that is why. It is a disappointment because its likely to exacerbate and prolong some drama which could otherwise be largely over now.



Im not sure Greg, things are only this calm because of the agreement.



Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want hard fork asap and most likely 'economic majority' want a 'reasonable' hard fork soon.

Im not sure Greg, things are only this calm because of the agreement.Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want hard fork asap and most likely 'economic majority' want a 'reasonable' hard fork soon.

DanielW: What is your source for gauging what the "economic majority" wants? And, what do you mean by hard fork? Do you mean increase the blocksize limit, change in governance, some combination of such, or something else?

DanielW: What is your source for gauging what the "economic majority" wants? And, what do you mean by hard fork? Do you mean increase the blocksize limit, change in governance, some combination of such, or something else?

Hard fork to lift capacity.



Opinion of economic majority is something that is hard to measure. Mostly its based on my experience and anecdotal evidence. Talking to people in person and on web.





Edit: Some of the miners are not particularly happy with deal and want an increase in blocksize asap, what if Antpool or F2Pool or both started mining classic? Their combined percentage is 50% hashpower.



This would also energize other classic proponents and they would be far lauder.



That would be a very unproductive environment for everybody and certainly damaging to price.

Hard fork to lift capacity.Opinion of economic majority is something that is hard to measure. Mostly its based on my experience and anecdotal evidence. Talking to people in person and on web.Edit: Some of the miners are not particularly happy with deal and want an increase in blocksize asap, what if Antpool or F2Pool or both started mining classic? Their combined percentage is 50% hashpower.This would also energize other classic proponents and they would be far lauder.That would be a very unproductive environment for everybody and certainly damaging to price.

Lauda



Offline



Activity: 2660

Merit: 2643





Exchange Bitcoin quickly-https://blockchain.com.do







LegendaryActivity: 2660Merit: 2643Exchange Bitcoin quickly-https://blockchain.com.do Re: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT May 13, 2016, 10:24:58 PM #1751 Quote from: danielW on May 13, 2016, 09:52:39 PM Im not sure Greg, things are only this calm because of the agreement.

Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want hard fork asap and most likely 'economic majority' want a 'reasonable' hard fork soon.

Possible relevant analogy: The economists telling the engineers to upgrade the servers because they think that is the right action.

How many times have we tried explaining why a X block size limit HF is pointless, and how it solves nothing? Take Segwit for example, it makes validation time scale down from quadratic to linear. Guess what? 99.9% of the people who read this don't even know what it means, nor have they ever heard of the O-notation. Some will just pretend like they do, but if they actually did they would not be requesting 'solutions' that solve nothing. Possible relevant analogy: The economists telling the engineers to upgrade the servers because they think that is the right action.How many times have we tried explaining why a X block size limit HF is pointless, and how it solves? Take Segwit for example, it makes validation time scale down from quadratic to linear. Guess what? 99.9% of the people who read this don't even know what it means, nor have they ever heard of the O-notation. Some will just pretend like they do, but if they actually did they would not be requesting 'solutions' that solve nothing.

danielW



Offline



Activity: 277

Merit: 250







Sr. MemberActivity: 277Merit: 250 Re: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT May 13, 2016, 10:34:56 PM #1752 Quote from: Lauda on May 13, 2016, 10:24:58 PM Quote from: danielW on May 13, 2016, 09:52:39 PM Im not sure Greg, things are only this calm because of the agreement.

Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want hard fork asap and most likely 'economic majority' want a 'reasonable' hard fork soon.

Possible relevant analogy: The economists telling the engineers to upgrade the servers because they think that is the right action.

How many times have we tried explaining why a X block size limit HF is pointless, and how it solves nothing? Take Segwit for example, it makes validation time scale down from quadratic to linear. Guess what? 99.9% of the people who read this don't even know what it means, nor have they ever heard of the O-notation. Some will just pretend like they do, but if they actually did they would not be requesting 'solutions' that solve nothing.

Possible relevant analogy: The economists telling the engineers to upgrade the servers because they think that is the right action.How many times have we tried explaining why a X block size limit HF is pointless, and how it solves? Take Segwit for example, it makes validation time scale down from quadratic to linear. Guess what? 99.9% of the people who read this don't even know what it means, nor have they ever heard of the O-notation. Some will just pretend like they do, but if they actually did they would not be requesting 'solutions' that solve nothing.

I agree with you but that does not change the fact that if not for the agreement reached the noise would be much louder now.



Its also important to acknowledge different perspectives and that both can perspectives can be right. 1 mb is a can kick down the road, but often can kicks are useful.



It would also install some more confidence into Bitcoin and could potentially unite the community. That would have big benefits but has nothing to do with the 'technicals'. I agree with you but that does not change the fact that if not for the agreement reached the noise would be much louder now.Its also important to acknowledge different perspectives and that both can perspectives can be right. 1 mb is a can kick down the road, but often can kicks are useful.It would also install some more confidence into Bitcoin and could potentially unite the community. That would have big benefits but has nothing to do with the 'technicals'.

danielW



Offline



Activity: 277

Merit: 250







Sr. MemberActivity: 277Merit: 250 Re: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT May 13, 2016, 10:52:18 PM #1754 Quote from: Lauda on May 13, 2016, 10:37:57 PM It is not useful since Segwit will provide similar capacity without the need for any other artificial limitations as found in Gavin's BIP.



I am talking about the compromise increase reached by core devs and miners btw.



I agree that from technical perspective there is little point in 1 mb increase. From non technical there are some big benefits I believe.

I am talking about the compromise increase reached by core devs and miners btw.I agree that from technical perspective there is little point in 1 mb increase. From non technical there are some big benefits I believe.

gmaxwell

Legendary



Offline



Activity: 3178

Merit: 4299









StaffLegendaryActivity: 3178Merit: 4299 Re: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT May 13, 2016, 11:02:52 PM

Last edit: May 13, 2016, 11:36:21 PM by gmaxwell #1755 Quote from: danielW on May 13, 2016, 09:52:39 PM Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want

Over and over, the concrete evidence shows that the hardfork at all cost push comes largely from shills, conmen, and their victims. When actual Bitcoins are put on the table in a cryptographically provable way the result is 180degress off from what the claims are in trivially sockpuppeted forums.



e.g.

http://bitcoinocracy.com/arguments/unlimited-blocksize-is-bad-for-bitcoin-because-it-diminishes-incentive-to-pay-fees-and-in-the-long-term-it-makes-mining-unprofitable

http://bitcoinocracy.com/arguments/bip101-is-better-than-the-status-quo



If you want to resist the kinds of things your signature is talking about you need to steel yourself against claims like that, because they're a primary attack vector.



Besides, if wishes were horses beggers would ride: Classic is a release behind core now, and not keeping up with network features which have been in the works for a year. It's headliner devs continue to not do anything, just as they were not doing anything with Core. Meanwhile, core continues to set the pace with both invention and development that to deliver improved scalablity, capacity, flexibility, privacy, etc. There is a clear reason why you can't get engineers who care about their reputations and about Bitcoin to back these HF at any cost initiatives-- they're no good for either.



The situation is pretty clear too and not just to me-- the big Classic voices, who are still haven't come to grips that with the fact that Wright defrauded them and denouncing wright are ramping up the complete and total dishonesty... such as mischaracterizing Theymos' repeat of the (good or bad) perennial proposal to make apparently lost coins secured with vulnerable cryptosystems unspendable after a long announcement and delay to prevent economic turmoil when someone steals them all at once, or claiming that a couple core contributors musing about potential countermeasures to the patent encumbrance of a vulnerability in SHA256 mining creating a government granted monopoly on mining is some move to make existing mining hardware unworkable, or claiming that Bitcoin core devs are totally going to line up and work on classic if only miners use it, or other such nonsense. Over and over, the concrete evidence shows that the hardfork at all cost push comes largely from shills, conmen, and their victims. When actual Bitcoins are put on the table in a cryptographically provable way the result is 180degress off from what the claims are in trivially sockpuppeted forums.e.g. http://bitcoinocracy.com/arguments/if-non-core-hard-fork-wins-major-holders-will-sell-btc-driving-price-into-the-ground If you want to resist the kinds of things your signature is talking about you need to steel yourself against claims like that, because they're a primary attack vector.Besides, if wishes were horses beggers would ride: Classic is a release behind core now, and not keeping up with network features which have been in the works for a year. It's headliner devs continue to not do anything, just as they were not doing anything with Core. Meanwhile, core continues to set the pace with both invention and development that to deliver improved scalablity, capacity, flexibility, privacy, etc. There is a clear reason why you can't get engineers who care about their reputations and about Bitcoin to back these HF at any cost initiatives-- they're no good for either.The situation is pretty clear too and not just to me-- the big Classic voices, who are still haven't come to grips that with the fact that Wright defrauded them and denouncing wright are ramping up the complete and total dishonesty... such as mischaracterizing Theymos' repeat of the (good or bad) perennial proposal to make apparently lost coins secured with vulnerable cryptosystems unspendable after a long announcement and delay to prevent economic turmoil when someone steals them all at once, or claiming that a couple core contributors musing about potential countermeasures to the patent encumbrance of a vulnerability in SHA256 mining creating a government granted monopoly on mining is some move to make existing mining hardware unworkable, or claiming that Bitcoin core devs are totally going to line up and work on classic if only miners use it, or other such nonsense.

JayJuanGee



Offline



Activity: 2380

Merit: 3253





How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?







LegendaryActivity: 2380Merit: 3253How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%? Re: ToominCoin aka "Bitcoin_Classic" #R3KT May 13, 2016, 11:27:02 PM #1757 Quote from: danielW on May 13, 2016, 10:11:21 PM Quote from: JayJuanGee on May 13, 2016, 10:03:20 PM Quote from: danielW on May 13, 2016, 09:52:39 PM Quote from: gmaxwell on May 13, 2016, 08:24:05 PM Pfft. I'm not going to mislead people by failing to call it what it is-- going to have some secret meeting where you are massively outnumbered with no strong negotiator on your side where you let yourself get compelled to commit to random things which are either largely meaningless or violate other people's trust and confidence in you (or, in fact, commitments you made to others before leaving) is a truly foolish move, if not quite "publicly endorsing scammer-wright" grade.



It's not the end of the world, people screw up, shit happens, goes on on-- but someone here asked the question as to why Luke was going around polling segments of the community what kind of hardforks they'd find acceptable, and that is why. It is a disappointment because its likely to exacerbate and prolong some drama which could otherwise be largely over now.



Im not sure Greg, things are only this calm because of the agreement.



Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want hard fork asap and most likely 'economic majority' want a 'reasonable' hard fork soon.

Im not sure Greg, things are only this calm because of the agreement.Like it or not a significant amount of 'economic majority' want hard fork asap and most likely 'economic majority' want a 'reasonable' hard fork soon.

DanielW: What is your source for gauging what the "economic majority" wants? And, what do you mean by hard fork? Do you mean increase the blocksize limit, change in governance, some combination of such, or something else?

DanielW: What is your source for gauging what the "economic majority" wants? And, what do you mean by hard fork? Do you mean increase the blocksize limit, change in governance, some combination of such, or something else?

Hard fork to lift capacity.



Opinion of economic majority is something that is hard to measure. Mostly its based on my experience and anecdotal evidence. Talking to people in person and on web.





Edit: Some of the miners are not particularly happy with deal and want an increase in blocksize asap, what if Antpool or F2Pool or both started mining classic? Their combined percentage is 50% hashpower.



This would also energize other classic proponents and they would be far lauder.



That would be a very unproductive environment for everybody and certainly damaging to price.



Hard fork to lift capacity.Opinion of economic majority is something that is hard to measure. Mostly its based on my experience and anecdotal evidence. Talking to people in person and on web.Edit: Some of the miners are not particularly happy with deal and want an increase in blocksize asap, what if Antpool or F2Pool or both started mining classic? Their combined percentage is 50% hashpower.This would also energize other classic proponents and they would be far lauder.That would be a very unproductive environment for everybody and certainly damaging to price.

Thanks for responding, but I don't think that your sources for a supposed "economic majority" are good.



I mean merely because there has been a lot of hype and loud voices around the issue (raising the blocksize limit) does not really mean that it is a good idea to raise the blocksize limit, even if there seems to be some common impression that there is some kind of "technical" problem, when there is not really any technical problem (such as delayed transactions and high fees).



The issue about raising the blocksize limit has mostly been a bunch of hype and loud voices, especially when there are various technical solutions (including seg wit) in the pipeline. Thanks for responding, but I don't think that your sources for a supposed "economic majority" are good.I mean merely because there has been a lot of hype and loud voices around the issue (raising the blocksize limit) does not really mean that it is a good idea to raise the blocksize limit, even if there seems to be some common impression that there is some kind of "technical" problem, when there is not really any technical problem (such as delayed transactions and high fees).The issue about raising the blocksize limit has mostly been a bunch of hype and loud voices, especially when there are various technical solutions (including seg wit) in the pipeline. Put BTC here: 35EVP8EePt8dyvKHaB7bXaRmKLm22YgRCA



How much alt coin diversification is necessary? if you are investing in Bitcoin, then perhaps 0%?