:: Re: [unSYSTEM] Bitcoin Foundation P…
Kezdőlap
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Szerző: odinn
Dátum:  
Címzett: System undo crew
Tárgy: Re: [unSYSTEM] Bitcoin Foundation Passive Aggressive shoutout to Blockstream
Hello,

I have been very anti-XT for reasons which are obvious if you look at
the bitcoin-development list archive. No need to rehash it here.

As for whether some form of increase of the max block size is needed,

Well before June of 2015 I had been pretty vocal about this kind of
thing, asking questions regularly about related matter. In June of
2015 I made a post about it on twitlonger -
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1smkanp - which got the attention of
Adam Back:

https://twitter.com/adam3us/status/608920099609817088

In my twitlonger post, and in some of my posts on bitcoin-development,
I encouraged people to take a closer look at and possibly support
Cameron Garnham's idea of dynamic block size adjustment, which was
designed completely as a soft-fork to be implemented without
changing any client code. However, this ultimately didn't get much
traction and technical issues were raised against it. I had suggested
that BIP 100 would be a superior alternative to BIP 101, if people
were going to be considering those two (though there are many to pick
from - see: http://bipsxdevs.azurewebsites.net/

Currently, when we look at the ideas which have early support in the
preliminary votes being made, we see:

https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/block_size_votes/7d?c=block_size_vot
es&r=hour&t=bar

http://bitcoinstats.com/network/votes/

You'll note that BIP 101 has literally almost zero support - just 1
block from slush (despite letters and pleas from industry who would
love for it to be supported by the broader community along with XT).
Note also that BIP 100 dominates in the field of BIPS measured by the
graph of things.

Cheers,

O



Amir Taaki:
> no
>
> sickpig@???:
>> thanks for the frank reply.
>>
>> leaving aside the xt saga and maneuvering, do you think that some
>> form of increase of the max block size is needed?
>>
>> On 8 Sep 2015 22:04, "Amir Taaki" <genjix@???> wrote:
>>>
>>> Bitcoin XT is a conspiracy being pushed by malevolent powers.
>>>
>>> sickpig@???:
>>>> Hi Amir, all
>>>>
>>>> sorry for being OT and hijacking the thread, but I would be
>>>> interested
>> in
>>>> knowing what's your take on the max block size debate?
>>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Amir Taaki
>>>> <genjix@???> wrote:
>>>>> cody, http://shitco.in/2015/08/19/the-bitcoin-xt-trojan
>>>>>
>>>>> Cody R Wilson:
>>>>>> Explain the politics to me here. On Sep 7, 2015 8:18 PM,
>>>>>> "Amir Taaki" <genjix@???> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://twitter.com/btcfoundation/status/639856958317707264
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>

Today’s shoutout is to @Blockstream who has funded more core dev than
>>>>>>> anyone, including us. Their knowledge & depth is
>>>>>>> extraordinary.
>>> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM
>>> mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>

_______________________________________________
>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>
> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
> list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>


- --
http://abis.io ~
"a protocol concept to enable decentralization
and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
https://keybase.io/odinn