Quote from: franky1 on April 12, 2017, 10:02:13 AM

Quote from: Lauda on April 12, 2017, 07:25:57 AM

It seems like you are really frustrated about ASICBoost being outed. I wonder why that is. Roll Eyes

Quote from: Wind_FURY on April 11, 2017, 04:25:43 AM

It is also undeniable that some central planning is good for the overall development of Bitcoin. The developers propose something then it is for the nodes and the miners to decide which ones they want or what they do not want. It is the centralization of mining or the possibility of miner collusion that is bad. They have gained much leverage on the network that now they have become like an enemy of the Core developers to impose what they want.

Decentralized planning doesn't work. Just use the plane analogy. Do you let you passengers decide the size and type of your engines?

lauda, your showing little to no understanding of bitcoin but high understanding to blockstreams control. i wonder why.

asicboost is no secret. in 2015 it was an efficiency boost. hardware and software was developed.
MONTHS LATER blockstream decided "wait we could implement segwit using the anyonecanspend backdoor exploit" thinking blockstream can have a easy life adding in code without node veto and thinking buying the pools a free lunch gets them segwit by christmas 2016..
so a year after asic hardware is designed. sgwit code is ready for testnet.
but the testnet tests are not thorough enough.
months later segwit gets a public release and starts having a deadline.
so thats a year of coding.. blockstream failed to realise their 2merkle backdoor version wouldnt be compatible with efficient hardware software.
they released the code.. 5 months of having the release blockstream had no clue their backdoor (going soft) would have issues.

then last month gmax hit the wall by realising that all the year and a half of trying to bypass node consensus by going soft would never have worked out right anyway.

so now gmax is having a temper tantrum and blaming pools.

please do something before replying to defend blockstream.
clear your mind of blockstream.. relax, take off the defender hat. and wear the logical thinking cap.

and imagine this.
its 2011 ATI have this snazzy feature that Geforce doesnt. is called openCL. it gives ATI an advantage.
now imagine 2012 some new bitcoin feature was needed, it was hoped to use some backdoor to implement it to not need full node consensus.
you have done lots of tests using Geforce and ATI non-openCL hardware.
near 2013 you realise your backdoor attempts hit a wall because openCL affects it.
do you
A. tell the world ATI is attacking bitcoin because of openCL
B. be honest and tell the world the node consensus bypass backdoor would never have worked as expected but you only just found the problem
C. do B but then raise your hands and say ok community, lets node consensus a new cleaner recoded version and this time lets include dynamics and other proper fixes.
D. do A and double down threatening ATI and insinuating people should hate ATI with racial rhetoric while you try killing off anyone thats using openCL

Thank you! I had no idea where the absurdity was coming from.