Odd... is anyone else noticing that those 2 posts don't show up in the main thread accusing Adam of condoning censorship or is it just me?
Has testing1567 been shadowbanned? Ohhh, the irony.
Those posts reflect a very different version of BU than has been described by its proponents in this thread . Either they have't fully reviewed the code or testing1567 is incorrect but there is a discrepency. I suppose I will have to read the code myself one day to get to the bottom of this.
The comments by testing1567 are showing up for me.
BitUsher, please note that I've been focusing on one part of BU - the aspect I consider to be the major one - because I know this discussion will quickly become impossible if we talk about two many things at once (already 6 pages), but there is another aspect of BU called the "oversized block acceptance depth" or "excessive block acceptance depth" that was originally thought to be either necessary or useful to make the concept work. I personally now don't think it is necessary at all, but it may turn out to be useful. It certainly
looks like it would be useful, but I'm very much aware of the difficulties in proving that to be case, so for now I consider it an experimental thing for everyone to consider.
Meanwhile, I would like to argue that - even in the absence of that setting - the BU concept of simply letting users set the blocksize cap themselves will not result in chaos, but simply a smoother version of what we have now, with the will of the market expressed more completely and granularly, without jiggering by the wall of inconvenience of having controversial consensus parameters locked down. See
here for elaboration.
I spoke too soon. testing1567 was just hidden within a downvoted thread. I see it now.
Ok, thanks for clarifying and I understand why you wanted to ignore those "differences" but they should have been revealed up front when I kept asking for clarification as this is a technical subforum where we are meant to discuss the details .
testing1567 had 2 very interesting posts.... do you disagree with any of the information therein before I start pondering them in detail?