Quote from: BitUsher on February 09, 2016, 01:00:40 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 30, 2016, 01:05:32 AM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on January 30, 2016, 12:39:42 AM

-snip-
Also keep in mind that back when Satoshi was around, the idea was that every node would be a miner among equals. That is no longer the case.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=532.msg6306#msg6306

I support the use of SPV nodes with fraud proofs, pruned nodes , lite nodes, and mining on scale. We don't need everyone mining just sufficient decentralization where governments or industry members or malicious actors cannot subvert the will of individual users. Otherwise we will just have a very inefficient paypal and what is the point in that?

You understand that bitcoin is an incredibly inefficient distributed database by design, right? Are you comfortable having only a few banks, processors, and governemnts running full nodes in our future? what level of decentralization would satisfy you?

A majority of hashrate makes decisions by deciding to extend the chain of blocks, a bad decision impacts their profitability directly, as does a good decision. They have an interest in keeping the system sufficiently decentralized or they destroy part of the value of their product, bitcoin. This slippery slope argument is tiresome, we're talking about a 1MB increase to the Max block size.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 09, 2016, 01:00:40 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 30, 2016, 01:05:32 AM

The technical experts you derive your arguments from have always thought that the network needed paternal stewardship.

If it was true, it would probably mean guaranteed failure at some point in the future. Thankfully it isn't, and our consensus mechanism is built in, as described up thread.

Yikes, I haven't heard this argument before. So when should Classic devs walk away from maintaining their repository?

Again, you are ascribing control to developers, which they simply don't possess. Miners decide to use a particular team's software, until they don't. It's a component of antifragility, an escape valve from capture.