funyug

series k What do they when they run out of alphabets?

Is this an issue with git or github only? If this is an issue with github only, i won't use it anymore for personal projects

Segwit2x has been cancelled.

Yes 100%

Here is a poll by Ryan X charles who is core opposer and a signee of the NY agreement https://twitter.com/ryanxcharles/status/927568458849533952

But satoshi's vision was that every computer can run the software to vote for the chain they want. Majority of hashrate today is controlled by a single company Bitmain.

Also Segwit2x are trying to kill the current bitcoin chain. I wont have a problem with them if they had a replay protection but putting users in danger is contentious.

Schnorr signatures, Mast and even block size increase is a part of their future plans. Lightning network has been tested on the testnet and alpha version has already been released.

They even had to delay their release of 0.15.1 for this hard fork.

You can join us IndiaBits at http://t.me/indiabits I am an admin of the group and we try to keep the discussions as clean as possible.

I understand but they are not directly involved in the process. They provide value to other systems rather than carrying the value themselves.

> If you mean that there should be a more dynamic way of choosing max block size, I agree Actually no. Ethereum currently have dynamic block size and they are heading for doom with their increasing node costs everyday. Also regarding the btc reddit,you can go to r/btc right now and see that it has only core bashing and bitcoin cash supporting posts. Nothing about scaling or anything else. I do support increasing block size to 2MB but thats it. Because I do believe that everyone should run their own nodes to verify each transaction themselve.

I actually don't care about nullc or anyone else spreading lies or anything. I just believe that core scaling plan is far more superior to what others have been demanding.

Thanks for the presenting the other side of the argument. I have been a part of the bitcoin community since 2013 so I am pretty aware of both sides of the debate. I am actually a supporter of bigger blocks. But i know that we cannot keep increasing the block size everytime we need. It is not about Jeff garzik not being competent enough, it is about the amount of work he will have to do. Current bitcoin developer group is huge and many developers review the same code, work on new stuff and much more. Segwit2x havent shown anyone else other than Jeff garzik who is going to work on Segwit2x codebase.

Both r/bitcoin and r/btc are terrible. You wont ever get a proper discussion for bigger blocks on r/bitcoin and r/btc has basically turned into a place for bitcoin cash and is not anyway related to bitcoin now. They even celebrate everytime bitcoin price dumps.

Exactly everyone is free to fork and create their own chain but they dont take the brand value with them. Bitcoin XT, cash and segwit2x all have had the same supporters everytime. They just change the name of their movement.

Because they dont involve money but bitcoin does.

a. The limit has been changed quite a few times in the past. It has both been decreased and increased when required. I think they were soft limits which didnt require a hard fork. I dont have links right now. Will post them as soon as i find any.

b. You are right but their is still a maintainer of the repo that merges the code in the repository and do releases. Core developers don't believe in capability of segwit2x developer i.e. just Jeff Garzik to handle this task.

c. There are two pools slushpool and f2pool that are currently supporting the original chain. Other than this several twitter polls have been done and several meetup groups have posted articles on medium denouncing their support for segwit2x. I am not good with saving links but I am sure you will find several polls with a simple google search.

d. Miners are not a part of bitcoin consensus mechanism. They are a way of safely executing the chosen decision. All issues must be raised before merging code in the bitcoin repo. By blocking the activation of segwit for over an year, miners lost the confidence from the community. Also around 40% of mining power is currently controlled by Bitmain and the rest is also dependent on them as they are the only mining hardware manufacturer.

Not in this particular hard fork. If you spend coins on the other fork, it can get replayed on the original bitcoin chain and you may lose your coins. Read my article about replay protection linked in the article.

Great analogy. Since bitcoin has no true leader it makes it open to people to chose their leader themselves. It makes it open to huge amount of manipulation too like in religious groups :P

Yeah but it is better as everyone will have a clear direction after it

Lightning is a great solution but it is still years away from production use. Ethereum is doing something similar but their tech is also scheduled to be ready in 2019. Nothing is available right now.

Outdating spam attacks and disregarding their info kills the immutability part of the system. There is currently no solution to this issue as if fee reduces spam becomes more prominent and bloats the blockchain. Their needs to be a balance.

I have not looked into their tech but i have heard that they have similar issues to bitcoin when bitcoin was 0 fee i.e spam attacks and other stuff.