Reasonable way to move the block size up?

Tago

New Member
Sep 8, 2015
6
0



I see most of the forum is for the increase of the block size and I also agree with that. However I very much do not agree with any plan that I have yet seen. I do not like Gavin wanting to be the central banker of bitcoin and set policy. I also do not like giving the miners more power, they have too much already. Setting a reasonable formula and letting it do it's thing is the way to go? I realize thermos and maxwell will never agree as their short sighted profit gains blind them, and I doubt Gavin will either as his lust for power will blind him as well. I just wonder what Satoshi would do....
 

Beanow

New Member
Sep 18, 2015
8
2
@Tago I think BIP101 is more in line with what you just said than it may seem.

"I do not like Gavin wanting to be the central banker of bitcoin and set policy."
While it is true that Gavin and Mike maintain Bitcoin XT and will have the ultimate say in what patches get merged there, that does not make them the policy makers surrounding Bitcoin. BIP101 is well defined and in case it's looking likely to succeed anyone can implement BIP101 alone without following Bitcoin XT in other regards.

"I also do not like giving the miners more power, they have too much already. Setting a reasonable formula and letting it do it's thing is the way to go?"
BIP101 is formula based. I've outlined it a bit on the wikipedia page.
And for exact implementation details you can look at the BIP itself.

"I just wonder what Satoshi would do...."
I think Satoshi would neuter the political debates by defining the Bitcoin behaviour through sound engineering and cryptography.
While always leaving the open-source attitude in there, implying: "This is my solution, feel free to fork it and see if you can do better."
 

Tago

New Member
Sep 8, 2015
6
0
After learning more about it BIP101 does look more like what I think is reasonable. Still this whole mess with the debate is sad. That being said I'm glad there is huge resistance to any change.

Not really sure what I would even pick assuming I was Bitcoin dictator. I can see this going on for a long time.
 

Beanow

New Member
Sep 18, 2015
8
2
Luckily there is a big debate without a dictator and many brains are rattling over this issue.

It shouldn't go on for too long since the first problems with the status quo already started. (The "stress test").
 

ladoga

Member
Sep 17, 2015
50
63
@Tago
It's good to have this debate. It might drag on, but it's better than having no discussion at all.

Only sad thing is that instead of debating people resort to dirty tactics like censorship and DOS attacks, but even that might be beneficial and make the Bitcoin stronger. It must survive these things (and more) by it's own merit if it's going to succeed.

I do not like Gavin wanting to be the central banker of bitcoin and set policy.
The good thing is that he can't be, even if he wanted to. Bitcoin is open source. Anyone can fork, modify and do what he/she wishes with it.

Actually Mike Hearn is the lead developer of XT, not Gavin (He didn't want to take that position again after being in this position in Core for so long).
source: EB94 - Gavin Andresen: On the Blocksize and Bitcoin's Governance
 
Last edited:

Tago

New Member
Sep 8, 2015
6
0
Censorship by thermos was massive fail. Got this site going and over a year ago some other forum with 500 old time members. Lot's of people are getting away from that other forum and reddit. Such fail.

Wish this site had more on news and current events though.
 

cbeast

Active Member
Sep 15, 2015
260
299
Discussion is fine. Debate is pointless. What's happening in Bitcoin is the same type of gridlock that happens when governments get too big. There is no consensus because the goalposts for consensus keep moving. That's what I like about Mike and Gavin's approach to the quagmire of the BIP system. Lead, follow, or get out of the way. Yes it's a fork, but that doesn't matter because the name Bitcoin is irrelevant. So you can keep debating which BIP you want to choose or let the users decide by continually forking the blockchain until it evolves beyond this debate. Then we can discuss more important features.
 

cypherdoc

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2015
5,257
12,994
what will be interesting is if 0.12.0 gets much uptake. i think the last version wasn't downloaded to the extent hoped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Faiyaz Khan