Many readers here will remember the origin of BU, - it started on the bitcointalk.org in 2014/15 as an economic solution to the dysfunctional decision making at the Core central headquarters.
A special thanks to
@theZerg who gave Us the push it needed to get started
I hope its not too much of a headache, it looks like you may have had a rough week.
Anyway I was browsing r/bitcoin and I realized we've gone mainstream.
Making sense of BU: A subversive, coordinated attack disguised as a block-size debate
Knowing the history* this could not be further from the truth, the headline should read
Making sense of BU: A solution to block-size, repelling a coordinated subversive attack.
The thought that popped into my mind was, me a noob who learned what bitcoin was, (
before the 6 year propaganda war), It was decentralized money. I did not have to trust anyone. The biggest threat were the developers, Gavin got the heat - I did not want any one in control. little did I know then, I was part of a larger plan to remove him from the team only to be replace with a more draconian centralized authority, the BS/Core hydra.
the same seeds are now being planted to attack BU, we are now our own enemy, (that article is an auto immune reaction) that's scary.
* the history preserved in this thread is going to be the archeological equivalent of the rosetta stone for economic historians.
The post on cointimes is intriguing. The whole site, as it seems, does only exist to smear Unlimited.
I'm not sure, but name, style and arguments of the author indicate that he is not a paid core shill but one of Berlin's most influental Bitcoiner, who has become a strong Bitcoin Unlimited Hater[*]. But I'm not sure.
The text is just a mixture of phrases about what Bitcoin is, praising of Lightning and name calling people in support of BU like Rick Falkvinge (and, somehow, Bruce Fenton, because he said there is a problem). His main argument seems to be that Bitcoin Unlimited is only Jihan, two miners, Roger Ver and some idiots.
The parts about Lightning however are pretty disclosening: When he first found Bitcoin, he thought Bitcoin could do everything. Than he learned that Bitcoin could not do everything. Than he learned to know Lightning and realized that Lightning can do everything Bitcoin can't. Maybe he really was strongly hurt when Bitcoin showed him that he was wrong about Bitcoin, which is why he gives a shit about the great choking of Bitcoin's capacity, and hopes that Lightning will come and make him retroactively right.
Another thing about Lightning: If all the Lightning Fans really want to scale and not only prevent Bitcoin to scale, and if SegWit was really the superimportant bottleneck, that prevents us from getting the great Lighning - then they should welcome BU and Emerging Consensus. If we hardfork to 2 MB blocks, I'm pretty optimistic that no 4 month later we activate SegWit. If we don't get bigger blocks, I think it will need years untill SegWit is activated, if ever.
[*] Bitcoin Unlimited Hater
I designed a little test for you:
Do you feel like wanting to jump on a rampage when ...
[ ] users freely choose the software they use?
[ ] people freely speak about software?
[ ] Roger Ver hosts a forum where people can say what they want?
[ ] Developers freely write software people want to use?
[ ] People suggest that the user can freely choose a parameter?
[ ] Some people criticize Core devs?
[ ] Miners don't obey to activate software Core wrote?
[ ] developers criticize software core build?
If you answered at least five of these questions with "yes" you might be a Bitcoin Unlimited Hater.
[doublepost=1490260009][/doublepost]Oh, and something else, completely else, regarding the price. During the first reward era Bitcoin raised from zero to ten and peaked at 30. During the second reward era Bitcoin raised from 10 to 500, peaking at 1,200. If Bitcoin doesn't do some similar stunt in the third reward era while we praise core devs for bringing us back to 1,000, it might have failed.
