Quote from: knight22 on August 27, 2015, 06:37:26 PM

Quote from: brg444 on August 27, 2015, 06:29:36 PM

Quote from: Peter R on August 27, 2015, 05:40:17 PM

Quote from: brg444 on August 27, 2015, 03:56:48 PM

Yes about BIP and its very dangerous 75% "supermajority":

Quote

5. Summary
As it stands, the BIP101 has implementation flaws that could cause BIP101 activation with a significantly sub-supermajority, or (in the presence of fake BIP101 voters) a minority. It is almost certain that if BIP101 is activated, it will be with a sub-supermajority, or even a minority.

http://organofcorti.blogspot.ca/2015/08/bip101-implementation-flaws.html

This blog post shows that the probability that BIP101 gets activated and it does not become the longest chain (due to variance) is less likely than the network hash power finding a SHA256 collision:

*zip*

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ilwq1/bip101_implementation_flaws/

This post shows the probability that BIP101 becomes the longest chain is 0:

Quote from: brg444 on August 27, 2015, 03:49:39 PM

Quote

"We believe a substantial part of full nodes right now would not be able to support blocks of this size simply because of hardware limitations. Similarly, we do not support propositions to fork client software as we believe this move may have potential negative consequences for the entire bitcoin ecosystem. - Valery Vavilov BitFury

Unlike your opinion, hardware evolves you know Roll Eyes

I'm sure you are qualified to speak hardware with the folks at BitFury. I suggest you go ahead and write them an email and try to change their mind. Until then...

#REKT