Quote from: sgbett on February 07, 2015, 01:05:44 AM

Quote from: homo homini lupus on February 07, 2015, 12:17:12 AM

Quote from: sgbett on February 07, 2015, 12:15:19 AM

Quote from: homo homini lupus on February 07, 2015, 12:10:10 AM

^^^
misinfo/disinfo

what a compelling counter argument to the facts I presented. bravo.

man, people need to inform themselves. I really don't have the nerves to refute all propaganda 10 times.

You say 'there is only one bitcoin'
correct and that's Mpcoin as it is the unforked chain and 1 to 1 bitcoin of today. Gavincoin is per definition a fork of bitcoin and thus an altcoin. (to put it really short)

you trying to tell people a second fork wouldn't exist is wrong information.

Why do you keep trying to rename bitcoin, what is your agenda. Its almost as if you are trying to frighten people, make them feel uncertain about bitcoin's future so they doubt it will succeed.

In actual fact, you trying to tell people a second for will exist, is blatant speculation!

What's interesting is that your repeated use of the term 'hard fork' shows that you pay more attention to the media than to the facts. The term is used by media outlets because it carries gravitas, it generates click through revenue, it 'sells papers'.

What Gavin is proposing is an update to bitcoin core that allows for larger blocks - that is not a 'hard fork', despite what you read in the papers. The deployment of the update can be properly managed so as to create minimum disruption to all of those with a vested interest in the continued success of bitcoin, just as satoshi described.

What you actually mean is a blockchain fork. This is not something Gavin can do, or even MP in his omnipotence! A fork is just what happens when miners haven't yet reached consensus, eventually they do and one of the chains becomes orphaned and every one just carries on.

Here are two axiomatic truths. There will always exist bad actors. There will always be innocent people that just forget to upgrade.

What the bad actors here are trying to do, is subvert the upgrade process by trying to fork the blockchain by only accepting smaller blocks. The bad actors will intentionally not upgrade, and will take advantage of the fact that there are innocent people who have forgotten to upgrade and recruit there hashing power. (of course they will also then try to argue that all of these people are 'supporters')

The thing is, in reality those chains will too become orphaned in time. That too is mathematically certain. The only way this cannot happen is if the bad actors are able to pull off a 50% attack... Now is that really what you are suggesting that you would do just to stop this change from being implemented?

MP is super smart but an egomaniac with it, which makes his his blog blog a great read! (I'm serious btw).

Only he would try and hard fork the blockchain just to get his own way! ... whilst all the time accusing everyone else of being the villains

Bitcoin is Bitcoin
Gavincoin is not Bitcoin

-----------

but i really loose patience here for the brain spasm - i go back to trading. Maybe i check back in once having better mood for educating some sheep