Quote from: inBitweTrust on February 16, 2015, 02:47:10 AM

Quote from: tvbcof on February 16, 2015, 02:37:59 AM

Satoshi was either jacking everyone off with his projections of a centralized system in which case it was a clever use of resources, or he meant what he's (supposedly) said in which case he's was kind of ignorant. One way or another I cannot help but look forward to actually showing people why decentralization is associated with robustness rather than trying to explain it to a bunch of semi-tards. Especially if MP and co are doing the heavy lifting.

So how much hashing power are you going to have on your new alt? Do you have any plans for changing the difficulty retarget shortly after the hardfork?

Some genuine advice to help you in your efforts.... perhaps your efforts would be better spent at convincing the mining pools operators and mining clients from this upgrade or buying up over 5% of hashing power? At minimum design those "pogos" so they can be upgraded if needed in case the hard fork goes through(I know, you don't believe it is going to happen.... but you should always plan for these "black swan " events)

If I were running the show I'd rush right over to the Blockstream guys and try to form an alliance which fosters sidechains and hope they didn't slam the door in my face. I'd also abandon the notion, and as temporarily as possible, that there is not an 'impure' expedient means of dealing with eventualities and would take a chance that openness and credibility would instill enough confidence to carry the effort through (to a clearly dominant position.) My ideal Bitcoin would anticipate days-long confirmations which would be enough time to deploy almost any sort of patch needed.

MP's going to do what he's going to do, but I'd be highly inclined to have the pogo's be free (in the software sense) and open. Part of it would be principle, but another part would be directed toward the effort of gathering confidence. Mostly it would be because it's awfully difficult to release bug-free code, and particularly when it is complex (if relatively well tested) and under attack by smart people. I might be inclined to install a kill fuse of some sort which would be (to me) a legitimate demand for the guy paying the bills. Something like that the device has to ping mothership occasionally and will melt down if not successful (and mothership would know if the device has been being naughty.)

All this stuff shifts away from 'purity' which I value on philosophical grounds, but I'm more of an engineer than a philosopher. It would be a minor miracle if Bitcoin survives the years long three-pronged Vessenes/Andreson/Hearn attack so I'll bend my principles a bit to try to provoke that outcome. Especially if there was a clear path to such unsightly things being temporary.