Quote from: VeritasSapere on September 24, 2015, 02:35:01 AM

Quote from: brg444 on September 24, 2015, 02:31:11 AM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on September 24, 2015, 02:26:29 AM

Quote from: erik777 on September 24, 2015, 02:18:49 AM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on September 24, 2015, 01:26:15 AM

Quote from: erik777 on September 24, 2015, 01:04:18 AM

It would be, if the benevolent dictator were still a part of it and got his way. But, clearly, Core devs have a proven track record of rejecting such hideous proposals for very sound reasons -- very publicly documented in threads. This is part of the reason the dictator created XT. Remember, Core recently rejected his blacklisting idea just prior to him promoting XT and including the blacklist code in XT.

If the Core team changes, and begins to accept these bad ideas, I'll be recommending people choose an alternative. Until then, Core is the best code base with the devs who have proven they are dedicated to protecting Bitcoin. Let's hope it stays that way.

I have shown time and time again unequivocally how XT is not a dictatorship. There are also no blacklists within Bitcoin XT. You are spreading misinformation, this is not conductive towards constructive discussion.

Seriously? Are we really going to rehash this 43 page thread again?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1156489.msg12330845#msg12330845

That is funny, it seems like we have both reached very different conclusions from reading that thread. lol

The issue is not whether the "DDos protection" is a blacklist or not. The concern is this feature introduces a centrally managed aspect into Bitcoin code. Considering Bitcoin is all about minimizing trust this implementation strikes at the heart of Bitcoin ethos by attempting to plug a trust-dependent function into the protocol.

No matter how you look at it this is bad and should be avoided at all cost.

You can simply just turn it off within the client itself, or even just run a BIP101 only version of XT or even Core instead. It does not add a trust-dependent function into the protocol because it is not implemented on the protocol level.

https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/tree/only-bigblocks

I don't care. The intent is there and this is in line with a long history of Mike Hearn pushing very dangerous and disturbing ideas. Certainly enough for me to never, ever support anything he gravitates around.

In fact, if there is one great thing about Bitcoin XT it's that it has hopefully marked the beginning of the end for any influence he might've had over Bitcoin development.