Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
Hm, why are people euphoric about BIP100 superseding BIP101?
AFAIK, there is no implementation yet of BIP100, and its details are not even fully specified. (Is there one?)
Moreover, BIP100 will allow blocks larger than 1 MB, won't it?
Moreover, BitcoinCore does not implement BIP100, and so fat Blockstream has been totally opposed to any increase. So, if BIP100 gets into effect, it will be by some other implementation, right?.
Am I missing something?
AFAIK, there is no implementation yet of BIP100, and its details are not even fully specified. (Is there one?)
Moreover, BIP100 will allow blocks larger than 1 MB, won't it?
Moreover, BitcoinCore does not implement BIP100, and so fat Blockstream has been totally opposed to any increase. So, if BIP100 gets into effect, it will be by some other implementation, right?.
Am I missing something?
I don't think you are. However, I think this will be a good thing (yes, I know, I see everything as good for bitcoin
)Imagine this: Core refuses to pull BIP100 because of developer deadlock (perhaps Gavin objects [I hope he does], or perhaps Greg disagrees). Then Jeff Garzik forks Core into "Bitcoin-100" perhaps along with Gavin. We end up with three competing implementations: Core (1 Mb), XT (BIP101) and Bitcoin-100 (BIP100). Node operators then express their choice by downloading and running their favourite client. Eventually, the losing dev teams cave (they don't want to lose all of their user base) and implement changes to make their code compatible with whatever appears to be the favourite scaling solution.
This has two benefits:
1. Consensus is achieved for larger blocks
2. We end up decentralizing development so that the circle on the right in the image below contains three slices of (hopefully) significant size.
