Quote from: Lauda on February 27, 2016, 06:10:29 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on February 27, 2016, 06:06:57 PM

Explain to me, how is Bitcoin Unlimited being disrespectful by using the open source code developed by Core while at the same time developing new open source solutions to scaling Bitcoin directly?

You claim implementation superiority without giving adequate amount of credit to the people who did most of the work.

It does not matter who did the most work, what matters is what is in the client itself, that determines which implementation should be considered the "best" at any one time. What matters is what is in the code, not the people that are behind it.

What do you mean with not giving adequate credit? That also does not make any sense, it is clear who wrote what code, nothing is being obfuscated and all of the code is properly accredited.

Quote from: Lauda on February 27, 2016, 06:10:29 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on February 27, 2016, 06:06:57 PM

If anything the entire Bitcoin community should thank Bitcoin Unlimited for these breakthroughs in the same way that I can thank Core for the work they have done.

No, we shouldn't. If you claim that they're breakthroughs, that doesn't make them such. I'd like to see analysis from a 3rd party first before giving any credit to anyone.

The testing has already been done, you can check the results for yourself, you could even compile the code yourself and test it, it is relatively easy to do. It almost seems like you are implying intellectual dishonesty on the side of the Bitcoin Unlimited team. Which I could say even borders on being disrespectful, since it does seem like you do not apply these same standards to Core. It is good to be skeptical though, the code is out there for everyone to critique. I am sure that if it was flawed the small blockists camp would not hesitate in letting everyone know that was the case.