Quote from: franky1 on February 11, 2016, 11:36:15 PM

Quote from: madjules007 on February 11, 2016, 11:29:43 PM

Nothing here indicates that the node consensus mechanism is trivial or easy to bypass. Pseudonodes aren't even operating with the new fork's consensus rules. What we're saying is that the numbers can give the appearance that Classic has significant node support even if it doesn't.

This is why node centralization is relevant. What used to be over 10,000 nodes is now closer to 5,000. The more bandwidth pressure we put on nodes, the less nodes we have, and the easier it is to mount a Sybil attack, such as the one Classic backers are currently mounting.

segwit 'no witness mode' takes a full node away from being a fullnode and into being just a compatible node.

centralization is where there is only one source of code. so blockstream wanting to be the only source of a fullnode. is them centralizing and then lowering the distribution of fullnodes by allowing a non-witness mode and wrongfully telling them its ok to not accept witness data

as for saying that everyone that wants 2mb is a "classic backer" shows your narrowmindedness..

oh and if you think that blockstream is winning the debate.. ill use lauda's data from an earlier post (grey and yellow show recent decisions on direction)

Nice chart. The stream blocking 1MB-PWC-Coin shows impressive momentum.