I'm sure they'd argue they never broke any social contract because none of the bitcoin rules have been changed or some such nonsense, even though they continually change the underlying properties of the protocol with soft forks. The Belgian Shills are already getting us in trouble. This feature allows a stockholm to access van created after the backup was made. None of them want to be der the hook laan fucking up Bitcoin, so they're doing everything in their power to avoid that, and more insidiously, others are taking advantage of their spineless attitude to drive development into a completely unintended direction. This has now been updated. I'm not against LN. It seems cheap to buy a lot wladimir influence in a 6 billion USD market.
Clever idea, I'll give them that. Thankfully there has been a billion dollars and a lot of time and energy poured into Bitcoin already, that is a level of investment that does not just walk away without a fight. Not to mention the free coffee, the wild office parties every month, and the cookies that Janet brings now and then. If you look at the history of most of the buttcoin trolls eg: They work on implementing SegWit which is months away from being ready and later LN maybe a year or more.
bitcoin mining unix operating manual В»
Separating these two functions will turn Bitcoin-Qt into a simple payment wallet i. Please don't post your bitcoin address in posts laan comments unless asked. Log in or sign up in seconds. If you are interested in having your own AMA, please message the mods and let us know. Welcome to Reddit, the van page of the internet. Doxing or posts that resemble doxing will result in the post wladimir removed and the user banned stockholm. See der list of past AMAs bitcoin.
vote for trump song bitcoin В»
A distributed, worldwide, decentralized digital money. Unlike traditional currencies such as dollars, bitcoins are issued and managed without the need for any central authority whatsoever. There is no government, company, or bank in charge of Bitcoin. As such, it is more resistant to wild inflation and corrupt banks.
With Bitcoin, you can be your own bank. Read the original Bitcoin Whitepaper by Satoshi Nakamoto. See a list of past AMAs here. If you are interested in having your own AMA, please message the mods and let us know. Yes, [my position remains the same]. This guy is comparing the financial system to Moore's law and also fails to identify that inaction actually means changing the rules. In fact, here is what he thinks about the block size issue after months of debate:. If the current cap was the best current technology could do, then yes resisting increasing the cap would be equivalent to resisting Moore's law.
The but cap isn't even close to the current technology limits yet. Technology could freeze today and we still could scale bitcoin quite a bit farther. I wonder how much money it would cost to make such an intelligent person make such unintelligent comparisons.
It seems cheap to buy a lot of influence in a 6 billion USD market. Clever idea, I'll give them that. But the rest of the market has opposing incentives. So we'll see what history will have to say about Blockstream. Messaging you on Parent commenter can delete this message to hide from others.
They are incapable of making hard decisions, as you say, if these guys had been in charge of Bitcoin from the outset, Bitcoin would simply never have happened, it required a guy that was willing to break all the traditional conventions about money, networks and even coding to make Bitcoin a reality.
All the current contributors are simply janitors, they fix bugs, ruminate on this and that, and that's it. They are not innovators, rule breakers or brave enough to make tough calls. They may be excellent coders, but when it comes down to it, they're wimps. None of them want to be on the hook for fucking up Bitcoin, so they're doing everything in their power to avoid that, and more insidiously, others are taking advantage of their spineless attitude to drive development into a completely unintended direction.
Since Gavin has stated he does not desire to be lead either, he should simply drop everyone's commit access and shut down the repository on Github so that new leaders can come to the fore. Core is a dead project IMO. They are incapable of making hard decisions,. I actually think someone who doesn't want to lead is probably a much better person to lead than someone who really wants to.
Gavin is a perfect fit to lead Bitcoin. Even though he might even do it in an unconventional way which can't really be considered leadership.
They do innovate, not just into the direction that satoshi envisioned or the community bought into. If they had balls they would identify exactly which changes they are proposing enhance Bitcoin, Lightning network or both.
If any of them were true innovators they would test theories on LN elsewhere ViaCoin seems to need help and then sell the benefits to Bitcoin community. Which is more dangerous, causing a sudden change in economics and direction of the BTC or a hard fork?
If they think that hard forks should not be done and that Bitcoin needs a change of direction eliminating the 0-conf and "excess" on-chain capacity , they should tell it officially well beforehand with few years of notice so that the economy can prepare.
Now they atleast some of them have been talking about the blocksize limit increase just smaller than BIP for past two years, then, suddenly they put up a roadmap on a short notice mere months where they say that no blocksize limit increase will happen for the time being if it's up to them, end of debate. This equals messaging the economy that all is ok, there is no hurry, everything will go on like it used to and then suddenly pulling the rug under them.
Many payment processors and merchants have their systems dependant on 0-conf and on chain transactions. They hate surprises like this. If the Core developers were worried to the least they should have made an announcement. Announce well beforehand and with clear timelines that this can go on only for a few years, while they work for replacement technologies and that businesses depending on soon to be deprecated features need to either reinvent their business model or adapt their systems to whatever replacing technology.
Then everyone can make an informed decision unlike the chaos what we have now, where everyone scrambles around and no one knows what to expect. I don't think zero-conf is getting axed. Haven't seen any proposal from Core which would do that.
Or did I miss something? And Core didn't plan anything because they were searching for solutions, then they found out how to do SW as a soft fork and gave each other high fives. From their perspective the problems they were working around probably didn't feel contrived at all. So they probably hate half of the community even more now after our reaction.
It probably goes a bit like this: I was thinking of RBF and removal of priority transactions. If you say that RBF enabled transactions would be easily identifiable and refused by default, and that no transaction could be stuck forever due to low fee, then fine. I have only superficial understanding of it from random posts I've read here. I agree that's likely the way they see things too. Much of the problem could be due to lack of understanding and poor communication.
Yes, RBF is kind of a devils dilemma. But on the other hand its weird to underpay in situations where quick confirmation is important anyway. So this should not be a problem in practice. I find a lot of what they are doing is simply twisting and distorting things, in a very cowardly manner no less. I'm sure they'd argue they never broke any social contract because none of the consensus rules have been changed or some such nonsense, even though they continually change the underlying properties of the protocol with soft forks.
It's far from brave IMO, more like craven and manipulative. True balls would have been to face the community head on with their vision, tell everyone Satoshi's vision is not sustainable or something similar, and to win the community over directly with their new plans.
That in a nutshell is why we are in this horrible mess. The devs that are now in charge have never believed in bitcoin as it was originally designed! It's like buttcoin took over development. The result is the nightmare we're in now. Buttcoin makes fun of the continuous stream of stupid ideas and all of the fanatics with zero self-awareness in this community.
It is hilarious to read all the nonsense FUD spread about the invisible hand of Buttcoin trolls. That is absolutely amazing. Nothing so revolutionary has ever had such great success. I certainly do coding myself, but as core maintainer my task is primarily to review, test and merge what is submitted by the wonderful people of the open source community. Program code image via Shutterstock. This has now been updated. Thank you to those who pointed out the error. The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is an independent media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies.
Have breaking news or a story tip to send to our journalists? Contact us at news coindesk. Bitcoin Client Bitcoin QT. Oct 9, at In August, over a third of users in China downloading the bitcoin client chose the Linux version. Sep 11, at A mistake made by a bitcoin wallet developer stopped people restarting their bitcoin client software this week.
May 24, at Canada comes out on top in the number of Bitcoin downloads per capita so far this year, followed by Australia, the UK, the US and Germany. What will be the hottest sector of blockchain this fall? I would like to receive the following emails: Blockchain — What is bitcoin?
Bitcoin What is Bitcoin? How Can I Buy Bitcoin? How Does Bitcoin Mining Work? How Do Bitcoin Transactions Work? How Can I Sell Bitcoin? Blockchain What is Blockchain Technology? How Does Blockchain Technology Work?
What Can a Blockchain Do? What is a Distributed Ledger? Why Use a Blockchain? Ethereum What is Ethereum? How Do I Use Ethereum? How Does Ethereum Work?