Norway
Well-Known Member
- Sep 29, 2015
- 2,424
- 6,410
That Bollinger, wew lads. Don't mix it, I guess.Fuck off. You're power drunk. Get your shit together
That copywright ...That Bollinger, wew lads. Don't mix it, I guess.
I just consider you as an agent with the goal of dividing so your employer can gain benefits. I'm out of your league, buddy.I have something of value for you, @Norway (it's an offer for you to resign before we vote again on your removal).
https://bitco.in/forum/threads/buip-remove-norway-from-membership.24015/
It's quite simply removing an attack vector. Nothing nefarious.The 0.2 release also has the option to reject mempool query requests for non whitelisted peers. This also seems like a dangerous path ..
Aha! Are you telling me to quit my membership, @solex?I previously assumed that you would be honorable enough to write a proper resignation when the time had come, but in the absence of a formal notice, your statements above will suffice.
I'm not a member but I think this declaration by an officer is grossly overreaching. Wait until your vote.@Norway
I am interpreting this statement as your resignation from Bitcoin Unlimited. It is 100% clear that you have lost respect for our organization, It is clear that your home is elsewhere when it comes to onchain-scaling for Bitcoin. It is a shame it has come to this after 3 long years of collegiality in BU. I previously assumed that you would be honorable enough to write a proper resignation when the time had come, but in the absence of a formal notice, your statements above will suffice.
Heady stuff, that champaign.That Bollinger, wew lads. Don't mix it, I guess.
I didn't assumed something nefarious. Just thought if it might end with a future in which network traffic could be dependent on being whitelisted (which seems stupid ..). But yes, it might be efficient to counter some attacks against unlimited blocksize ...It's quite simply removing an attack vector. Nothing nefarious.
Now if you'll excuse me I need to go and patent Christmas...
It's a precaution. The only reason this attack vector is valid is ... (the topic of my talk at Coingeek). Once we fix that, the attack vector goes away, but it will take quite a while. In the meantime, this option is available for immediate use if necessary.I didn't assumed something nefarious. Just thought if it might end with a future in which network traffic could be dependent on being whitelisted (which seems stupid ..). But yes, it might be efficient to counter some attacks against unlimited blocksize ...
Fuck off, @solex Don't tell me to resign.@Norway
I am interpreting this statement as your resignation from Bitcoin Unlimited. It is 100% clear that you have lost respect for our organization, It is clear that your home is elsewhere when it comes to onchain-scaling for Bitcoin. It is a shame it has come to this after 3 long years of collegiality in BU. I previously assumed that you would be honorable enough to write a proper resignation when the time had come, but in the absence of a formal notice, your statements above will suffice.
allow what such tx's? nlocktime? I remember a time when it became apparent that the Blockstream boys didn't want a big block hard fork outta fear it would invalidate their nlocktime bonus payouts.BSV will allow such transactions with the February 2020 update called Genesis.