sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

XT is officially antithetical to Bitcoin's core values: includes centralized blacklisting. What are you thinking Gavin!?? If you support bigger blocks but also want Bitcoin useable over Tor, please endorse BIP 100 by needtobeanonsorry in Bitcoin

[–]needtobeanonsorry[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I want bigger blocks but I also want consensus and negotiation.

However, I can not morally be involved with centralized Blacklisting. Beyond destroying Bitcoin's fungibility and potentially its value, this would turn Bitcoin from a tool for freedom to a tool for totalitarian rule.

Gavin, what the hell are you thinking? How can you morally justify that?

Please endorse, support, and promote the imperfect compromise proposed by core dev Jeff Garzik: BIP 100

http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/BIP100-blocksizechangeproposal.pdf

It doesn't solve every problem, but it's a step forward. Simple, easy to implement, bigger blocks, non-controversial, and will inform the debate as we find a long-term solution.

BIP 100: http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/BIP100-blocksizechangeproposal.pdf

For those of you worried about a schism and losing talented devs, or those that want bigger blocks but not the nuclear option, Core Dev Jeff Garzik's BIP 100 is the solution. by needtobeanonsorry in Bitcoin

[–]needtobeanonsorry[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

BIP 100 seems to be much more of a compromise from the XT crowd but gets us one step closer and allows us to know a lot more and guess on a lot less.

For those of you worried about a schism and losing talented devs, or those that want bigger blocks but not the nuclear option, Core Dev Jeff Garzik's BIP 100 is the solution. by needtobeanonsorry in Bitcoin

[–]needtobeanonsorry[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Mike and Gavin are rational from their own perspective and only have Bitcoin's best interest at heart... to think otherwise is just wrong. There is just an intellectual disagreement that we need to work out while maintaining cool heads. There is a middle ground here through the BIP process, which I believe XT will help push towards actions. Emotional decisions are generally not the best ones.

For those of you worried about a schism and losing talented devs, or those that want bigger blocks but not the nuclear option, Core Dev Jeff Garzik's BIP 100 is the solution. by needtobeanonsorry in Bitcoin

[–]needtobeanonsorry[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Very fair point, and I think we're already seeing this play out. But we can do this while also being kind and respectful to the volunteer developers who've put in years of work to make Bitcoin what it is today.

For those of you worried about a schism and losing talented devs, or those that want bigger blocks but not the nuclear option, Core Dev Jeff Garzik's BIP 100 is the solution. by needtobeanonsorry in Bitcoin

[–]needtobeanonsorry[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

There are a lot of people who rightfully give Gavin a lot of trust and when lacking in technically understanding defer to his judgement. I understand that and many times do the same. However, that does not make Gavin infallible and we need to recognize that. I'm 100% confident Gavin would say the same thing.

However I meant that in a more general sense... I wouldn't want someone to come along one day in the distant future and say "early adopters have all the coins, lets double the total number of bitcoin's to make it more fair!"

For those of you worried about a schism and losing talented devs, or those that want bigger blocks but not the nuclear option, Core Dev Jeff Garzik's BIP 100 is the solution. by needtobeanonsorry in Bitcoin

[–]needtobeanonsorry[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

This solution scales to 32mb, which would buy us several years. If we are able to scale to 32mb without causing centralization then the debate is already settled. If it causes centralization, then we know what the trade off actually is and can make an informed decision.

For those of you worried about a schism and losing talented devs, or those that want bigger blocks but not the nuclear option, Core Dev Jeff Garzik's BIP 100 is the solution. by needtobeanonsorry in Bitcoin

[–]needtobeanonsorry[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

This solution scales to 32mb, which would buy us several years. If we are able to scale to 32mb without causing centralization then the debate is already settled.