Quote from: jmw74 on May 07, 2015, 07:09:05 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on May 07, 2015, 05:22:40 PM

Quote from: jmw74 on May 07, 2015, 05:10:49 PM

Quote from: justusranvier on May 07, 2015, 05:00:53 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on May 07, 2015, 04:57:28 PM

Bitcoin needs to do an Uber and scoop up as many users as fast as possible round the world before gvts, regulators, and banks can stop it. we may already be there fortunately but we do have a ways to go and it's clear that 1MB is an artificial cap on growth.

That's the biggest concern I have.

Bank-based Bitcoin competitors are not stopping to take a break and study issues - they are actively working to hire developers and build systems that can grow faster than Bitcoin.

Meanwhile, the anti-scaling crowd is telling us we need more time to study the scaling issues even though they've been saying that since the first time this issue came up in 2012.

Apparently they are the only developers capable of making any change at all.

Wait they're not? So what exactly is stopping some developers from coding the fork and releasing it? Are people worried miners will attack and destroy it? That attack can't succeed in the long term. If the attack works once, you just fork again with a 1 line change to move the fork point forward. Miners are not going to keep wasting resources on that forever, once they see your fork isn't going away, they may see it as more profitable to mine on it honestly.

I'd run it, and I'd probably sell at least part of my stake in the 1mb fork.

problem with that is that it's tantamount to lack of advertising. if you don't get a consensus, you risk large swaths of the community not even knowing about your fork and others advocating against it. it would be ideal to get a consensus so that everyone knows and are all onboard to make the switch to the new code.

most ppl don't really understand how Bitcoin works or the anything about the whole process of consensus or open source. they'll get confused about what to do if there continues to be battling btwn information sources. so yes, it's best to get a consensus if possible.

Gavin's already started coding a possible fork, you're telling me he's not well known enough in the community to get any backing? He may not go that route for political reasons, but anyone could build his code and run it.

no, i didn't say that. he does have the credibility to obtain backing for his fork. that is what will probably happen. i just said that in the ideal situation, consensus would be achieved. i don't think it's too late for that b/c in my opinion, the Blockstream devs have already lost. if they persist in obstructionist behavior, they'll probably get replaced.