Quote from: RocketSingh on August 15, 2015, 07:02:48 PM

Quote from: TraderTimm on August 15, 2015, 06:33:42 PM

I refuse to upgrade just because Gavin says it should be so. Let the actual market decide, in terms of fees and such. I detest centralized decision making - and frankly have some suspicions about Gavin ever since he caved in to meet with the CIA.

I do kind of agree with you. I am in favor of the proposal Gavin & Hearn is pitching. But, Hearn's history, especially the claim to ignore the longest chain makes me suspicious about his future plan. It might be the case that he is winning the public support by backing a popular demand, but in future he might take the lead to kill the founding pillars of bitcoin, like ignoring the longest chain.

It'd have been way better if the core devs could agree at some point and raised the block size a little, because we need to know how decentralized the lightning.network is... as well.

I hope you read that and maybe you have also seen Hearn at Epicenter where he said.If so you should know better what actually said.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1150481.msg12140304#msg12140304

Quote from: meono on August 14, 2015, 03:33:20 PM

Quote from: LaudaM on August 14, 2015, 03:25:10 PM

Quote from: DooMAD on August 14, 2015, 03:16:33 PM

It has nothing to do with "special treatment". If a fork occurred without consensus, only then does it become an altcoin. If it either achieves consensus or the fork doesn't happen, it's still Bitcoin. The fork hasn't happened yet, so it is still Bitcoin. XT sends and receives bitcoin transactions using the Bitcoin blockchain. It is an alternative client, not an alternative coin. Stop spreading misinformation.

It is not misinformation because those are Hearns intention. He stated that in the worst case scenario checkpoints will be implemented to ignore the longest chain. In other words, consensus is not necessary for the fork to happen according to him. I'd rather people be aware of his intentions on time.
That alternative client needs to die.

Dont twist words around to fit your agenda.

The key part Mike said that you intentionally left out from that video:

Quote

If the needs of the wider global bitcoin community start diverging from what miners in China want, the who wins .... the answer is the economic majority wins

The fundamental of bitcoin blockchain has always been economic incentive. Miners dont make rules they're rewarded for following rules. The moment they're stupid enough to disagree as in the worst case Mike mentioned, the network will have to ignore them and treat them as an attack ( ignoring the longest chain is a defense against attack)