How many Bitcoin Unlimited full nodes do you run?

[Peter R]

Here's a write up regarding my trip to Coinbase and BitPay:

https://medium.com/@peter_r/on-the-emerging-consensus-regarding-bitcoins-block-size-limit-insights-from-my-visit-with-2348878a16d8#.de38zadx3

 

[bitbee99]

I failed it because your question was not specific, and there was no other information. We could interpret your question in many ways. I choose to simply not to ask more questions and just give you a simple answer to a simple question
The answer had to be either roger to andreas

That is a good video, but why doesn't andreas talk about bitcoin unlimited? He tells us to ignore the trolls, yes, we can, but who are the trolls? the core people or the unlimited people

since we started with core, that would mean the unlimited people are the trolls trying to start their own coin?

Where is the video where andreas is trying to manipulate people, show me a video of andreas doing bad things

I don't agree bitcoin is dead and a failed idea, it's still going strong, and many people are still using it, yes at the moment it's not working to buy coffee, but its working for many other things,

we're a long way from people to start using it for coffee, credit card is much easier and faster,

but for storing money from governments, bitcoin is king

better than even gold, not for coffee, but we will get there


so im still not convinced to change over to unlimited, but i am seeing some of your points, and i agree with some of them


i don't even see how unlimited can win this war, its going to be super hard, when all the merchants already accept bitcoin core, and people who are stuck in the middle like myself, will stick with core, because its what we understand better,
and its working fine so far, since most people are using it for storing money and not as much for buying things,
people will think unlimited is an alt-coin,

if what you all say it true, then power to you all, but roger must be smarter and more powerful to beat the core, i hope he has a good plan to beat them, but i don't think he can do it, he doesn't seem so smart to pull it off, from watching his videos my impression is he talks like a normal guy, he doesn't seem so special

i am on the side who is against the bankers, at the moment i am on core's side, if i see unlimited is better then i will change

 

[AdrianX]

Bitcoin will succeed or fail, Coffee is a first world problem, $3 BTC purchase in 2011 = $3,000USD value today, The next industrial revolution happens when the 99% are freed from the tax of inflation, profit belongs to the people who earn it, not the money managers who can erode savings.

A $3.00 purchase today is spam according to the bitcoin central planners, why prevent adoption if we want growth? ($3.00 today = $???? in 8 years or $3) - some 5,600,000,000 people 80% - save cash - earn less than $10 a day they don't invest in stocks - as of now bitcoin distribution is still 95% subsidized yet they can's afford to use Bitcoin now - won't ever use it in the future. that 80% represent the greatest untapped potential force in history.

1MB is an arbitrary limit, and its killing adoption, I want 1,000,000,000 people buying $1 per month. that will create some serious redistribution of wealth like we've never seen, Industrial revolution 2.0, just imagine the wealth transfer and the potential of empowering the 80% we will get $1,000,000 per bitcoin if bitcoin is nothing but just better money.
[doublepost=1490307703][/doublepost]

i am on the side who is against the bankers, at the moment i am on core's side, if i see unlimited is better then i will change

AXA joined the top 3 global financial services brands in 2016, these are the guys paying the most influential Core developers to change the bitcoin rules.

 

[dooglus]

I tried to vote but my answer wasn't in the list.

I run 0 Bitcoin Unlimited nodes. Emergent Consensus is a horrible idea with many problems, especially when used for something as critical as the blocksize limit.

I expect 0 is the most common number of BU nodes that people run since most people are against BU. Why isn't 0 available as an option here?

 

[freetrader]

@dooglus has got a point

 

[bitbee99]

one thing i do agree with you strongly, is that there is a high possibly that bankers could be paying developers millions to destroy bitcoin,

who are the bitcoin developers that have been infiltrated. can you please write their names here, i want to research and find out information about them, is andreas one of them? if he is i will send him an email asking him about this or wait until he comes to my city

 

[AdrianX]

it's just an observation, you can look at the list of employees on Blockstream's website.

Bitcoin's needed rules are enforced by the miners, you are not supposed to trust developers anyway so it shouldn't matter if they are compromised.

Miners enforce needed rules. Developers lobby miners to change the rules.

 

[bitbee99]

but you were the one who said it, so i think it's better you say their names, i want a list of developers who have been infiltrated

i want to post this thread on reddit and get their opinion and see what people think

if the rules are enforced by miners, who makes the code that makes the miners work,

it seems like the miners are in charge, why cant we be miners and put them out of business

bitcoin doesn't seem as decentralized as i thought , it seems the miners are in charge and there is nothing we can do about it, not even the developers

 

[freetrader]

@bitbee99 : it's always possible to defend Bitcoin against centralization, if you think that's happened.

You can spin off, like btwpowupdate.org is considering.

Of course, you need to maintain a separate currency going forward, but if yours is more decentralized, maybe it will survive things that Bitcoin can't .

And every Bitcoiner will already have a share in it, so maybe that's an incentive for Bitcoiners to be lenient towards spin-offs that explore alternative paths (e.g. more rapid enabling of SegWit).

I think those who say 'developers have no power' are only half-right. Developers have the same power as Satoshi ;-) but if they are going to build on POW someone (they?) also have to be the miners again.

So is miners in charge good or bad?

 

[AdrianX]

if the rules are enforced by miners, who makes the code that makes the miners work.

good angle, when Satoshi released the code, was it open source?
was it centrally controlled?

can miners change the rules?
can miners ask developers to change the rules?
do miners have to chose a an independent implementation?
What stops miners form adjusting the 21M limit, market confidence - or the developers refusing to change the code?

it seems like the miners are in charge, why cant we be miners and put them out of business

we can, it's a free market, - you are 8 years behind on investment so the existing infrastructure has a bit of a head start.

bitcoin doesn't seem as decentralized as i thought , it seems the miners are in charge and there is nothing we can do about it, not even the developers

Mining has been more centralized, mining is decentralizing - there are lots of forces that will decentralize mining more, I don't worry about that as much as I used too, I mined until last year (upgrading from CPU - GPU -Gen1 to Gen3 ASICS). The most important aspect of mining is bitcoin has competition.

The bitcoin code is infinity reproducible. The value is in the bitcoin network not the code. The network exists in part because the miners are incentivized to secure it at scale.

Users and investors are ultimately in control, miners are a dependent class in bitcoin, they depend on users to interact on the network and pay fees, more over miners are dependent on users to buy the coins they mine.

Market confidence in the rules miners uphold is necessary for them to profit.

I's is important the investment be huge for miners, they invest $100's of millions for the privilege they have, the return on that investment is high risky. if they try cheat the system they forfeit their investment.

Competition between miners for market share drives up bitcoin security. - it's the subsidy distribution to miners that builds the security infrastructure.

Developers on the other hand have little to no investment to forfeit, and in some cases they done even forfeit their reputation as as they are anonymous.

Developer centralization is what concerns me, bitcoin has grown up a lot, development does not need to be centralized any more. Developers can take control away from the miners with soft forks. the problem is miners need to implement the changes.

I prefer the bitcoin we have had for the last 8 years and will defend it if i can, I don't want a bitcoin controlled by developers, they wont hold on to that power for long, the whole reason I invested was because I could not trust the developers.

as for posting on reddit, good luck.

 

[Francis GASCHET]

@bitbee99 You are a new member, like I'm.
You are wondering "Which people has the control ?".
Andreas tends to say : the developers.

So please read the white paper and you'll be convinced that the mission of the developers is to implement the consensus, not to drive it and even worst : to try to create it.
The consensus is built by the miners.

Andreas says "the ones who are chatting on reddit don't write the code". He's right.
But he's wrong if he infers that who don't write the code do nothing and that who write the code must have the control.
We don't write the code but we run nodes which strengthen the whole network.
We don't write the code but we bring money to buy Bitcoins so the miners have a real incentive and we make the Bitcoin market living and growing.
We don't write the code but we are the community, including developers. And we vote with the code we are running. This is the essence of the white paper's political strategy.

Regarding the "trolls" Andreas evoked : it shouldn't be done upside down : there is a place which was the "historical" place for exchanging ideas. People discussed new ideas, possible evolution and so on on this place. Some new features born from these exchanges, were coded and became the new consensus, up to the date when some people, who control this place, refused to debate about the way to get the Bitcoin network more efficient and scalable. Their refusal of the debate took the shape of censorship when it came to speaking of the block size. Messages were deleted from the forum and members ejected from it. You can find a lot of proof of this situation.
The censored people went in another place and Andreas call them trolls !
The brawl has been triggered by the censor, not by these "trolls" !

Finally : don't "follow somebody". Make your own idea by reading as many as you can, and follow it !

 

[bitbee99]

Andreas is saying the same thing as you all, Make your own opinion



He doesn't believe in Bitcoin unlimited.

So far my opinion is to stick with Core as well

 

[Francis GASCHET]

How can you make your opinion with censorship ?
It's not a matter of believing. Bitcoin is not a religion.
Stick : yes, this is the word.

 

[bitsein]

Yeah not sure it's his most convincing video..

 

[Hyena]

Changed my vote to 4 because I installed BU on a hot wallet's virtual machine at work. In addition to the 4 livenet full nodes I'm also running 2 testnet ones but those I might not keep online for very long. But the 4 livenet ones will be permanent.

 

[Hyena]

Changed my vote to 5.
2 full nodes at home, 1 of them behind VPN and the other using plain ISP provided connection.
3 full nodes at work, 1 for production server, 1 for development and 1 on a VM for testing.
All of them have a full copy of the block chain. I just bought 1 TB external drive for the VM's vdi file.

 

[Joel Dalais]

>Still way faster than using a bank, and much cheaper

You can send transfers in the UK banking system in under 2 hours. Thing is, the UK (traditional banking) model could be outsourced to the rest of the world (if they wanted to), but would probably take years.

And obviously bitcoin transaction fees are vastly higher than a UK to UK transfer would cost (the UK fps doesn't cost the user a penny)

If we can't beat the traditional banking system for transaction speed and cost (when we clearly used to), then the system (bitcoin) is broken.

On topic - I run 1 node.