Quote from: iCEBREAKER on July 10, 2015, 01:08:32 PM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on July 10, 2015, 02:39:46 AM

"Fork of July"
Beast of Apocalypse of the Anagavinists

Heh, very droll. Tres bot mots! Cheesy

The first one is not mine; I got it from /r/bitcoin. Thanks for the other...

Quote

I'm not sure from where you're getting this "new" [ core dev ] adjective.

"New" in the sense that they took control of the "reference" implementation after Gavin stepped aside.

Quote

The ad hom is irrelevant in any case, because the claim you infer from it, that "they have invented several spiffy gadgets to handle it that they are dying to use," is not accurate. Sidechains and Lightening are spiffy to be sure

I was referring to replace-by-fee, child-pays-for-parent, and other tools that they have developed for the "fee market".

I understand that BIP66 fixes a malleability bug and a security risk, but I got the impression that it got implemented now because it was necessary for those tools to work.

Quote

but we are seeing them being slowly deployed via the proper (IE whitepaper->peer review->prototype->testnet->listserve feedback->BIP) process, in marked contrast to the Gavinista's insurgent tactics of going straight to the drooling masses and inciting the mob to demand Action Now.

AFAIK, Gavin has been discussing the block increase with the other devs for a long time. He implemented a 20 MB prototype, tested it on the test net with full load, and wrote many blog posts about it. He sought the main affected parties -- major miners, exchanges, and payment processors, etc. -- and got their support (something that the "new devs" apparently are not willing to do). But since the "new devs" were bent on the "let it clog" plan, he brought the issue to the general bitcoin public (something that the "new devs" did not do) and went on to support the BitcoinXT code fork. Which is what any dev is supposed to do when he is unhappy with the evolution of an open source project.

I am not a fan of Gavin; I cannot forget that he supported the Bitcoin Foundation well after it started to smell bad, and apparently still likes the title of "Chief Scientist of TBF" even though he is not being paid by them. But I cannot have any respect for the "new devs" for their use of ad-hominem and vague technical FUD to prevent a block increase; and for their stated plans to push all person-to-person traffic off the bitcoin network and appropriate the experiment for their company's use. I cannot understand how the bitcoiners could be happy with that plan...

The Lightning Network is is still in the paper napkin stage, and "Sidechain" is just another word for "something". But what is certain is that the "overlay network" will have a few large "hubs", and individual users would have to open accounts with those hubs and lock all their circulating bitcoins in those accounts. I have a hunch about the names of the first two hubs: one will start with "C" and end with "e", while the other will end with "e" and start with "C"...