Quote from: thejaytiesto on September 22, 2017, 01:46:44 PM

Quote from: DooMAD on September 21, 2017, 01:43:28 PM

If the only thing you care about is the fiat price of your coins, then frankly I don't give a shit what your opinion is. Freedom doesn't have a price tag. I stand firmly on the side of the argument that freedom is infinitely more valuable than some government IOUs. Obsess about those all you like, just don't expect anyone else to care.

Of course price matters you dumb autist. And I don't care if its against fiat. If BTC goes down against the oz of gold, it's a failure. If what you are doing gets your purchasing power down while centralizing the network with bigger blocks, then why would anyone support this unless they were getting mad fiat gains behind the curtain?
Hardforking bitcoin into several bitcoins = a mistake. Holders lose purchasing power and gain nothing in return, maybe the illusion that you are now more free because you forked bitcoin into an altcoin if you are stupid enough to think that.

Quoting for emphasis: "If BTC goes down against the oz of gold, it's a failure". I see where the issue stems from now. No wonder you think the situation is so delicate. A temporary blip in material value is more important to you than permissionless freedom. Purchasing power is the icing on the cake. It's not the sole reason for using it, unless you're just a greedy shit, which is what I'm starting to suspect might be the case.

If Bitcoin can't settle disputes utilising the consensus mechanism it's equipped with, it's a failure. And that remains to be seen. As such, there is no problem here. You've got yourself all roiled up over internet drama. Bitcoin will be fine. As I've stated before, Bitcoin doesn't want or need your pampered, mollycoddled, nanny-state, protectionist foolishness. Bitcoin survives in the wild and grows stronger and more robust through adaptation and freedom of choice, selecting the best code available from the open market at any given time. Bitcoin does not need you to defend it from would-be attackers. It can do that all by itself and, whether you personally approve of the code being used or not, Bitcoin will come out stronger at the end of it, as I suspect will the price if that's your primary concern. This is the kind of shit I'd be expecting to explain to newbie accounts. How the actual fuck have you not got it into your thick skull yet?

Quote from: thejaytiesto on September 22, 2017, 01:46:44 PM

Quote from: DooMAD on September 21, 2017, 01:43:28 PM

And no one is stealing anything, you ignorant asshat. Stealing implies that someone owns the Bitcoin brand, so perhaps you could explain who that is, exactly? As far as I was aware, no one own or controls Bitcoin. Bitcoin is influenced by the code people freely choose to run. If it turns out that enough people want to run different code, that's not an act of theft. Either accept that, or go use some closed-source crapcoin like Ripple where no one has a choice.

No one owns the bitcoin brand, but it's obvious hardforking it and paying bribing miners with FIAT money so they mine your hardfork then try to claim that is the real bitcoin is a bitch ass move, but idiots like you would call this freedom and good for bitcoin. Get the fuck out of here.

Idiotic bribery part aside, I do think it's good for Bitcoin that it's possible to hardfork and that miners can choose whichever chain they like, as can users, non-mining nodes and developers. Are you suggesting Bitcoin would be somehow improved if we could put guns to the miners' heads and tell them what they have to do with their own hardware they took the risk investing in? But whether I'm correct in my views or not is irrelevant. The simple fact is, I recognise it's a natural part of the ecosystem I willingly joined. A free and permissionless system where no one dictates anything. You seem to be upset that it doesn't do what it said on the box and that it would be better if we could control the miners and tell them what they can or can't do. Bitcoin can fork at any time for any reason if enough of the participants deem it worthwhile. There is demonstrably nothing you can do to change that, so sit back and enjoy the ride.

Quote from: thejaytiesto on September 22, 2017, 01:46:44 PM

Quote from: DooMAD on September 21, 2017, 01:43:28 PM

I keep hearing about this bribery like it was some sort of documented fact. Where is the funding from this bribery coming from? Who, exactly, is bribing who? Do you have any actual evidence for any of these seemingly baseless accusations? If not, I'd ask that you stop talking shit.

https://medium.com/@WhalePanda/roger-ver-from-bitcoin-jesus-to-bitcoin-antichrist-69fc7a17c622

Quote

Bitcoin Unlimited is the latest (soon to be failed) attempt, this time they tried bribing. Bitcoin Unlimited received a 500,000 usd donation and now additionally there is a 1 million dollar grant for alternative implementations. I think this kind of falls under the bribing part that I will discuss later.

Okay, sure, let's take a closer look at that. Your image is a little outdated, it's actually $1.2 million now.

Which one of the following do you take exception to?

Quote

1) No "Official" Bitcoin: No particular implementation of the Bitcoin protocol holds claim to being the "official" version of Bitcoin

   2) Multiple Implementations: Diversity of bitcoin protocol implementation along with a variety of development teams is a net gain for the bitcoin community.

   3) Diversity of Innovation: The presence of more developers and more development teams will lead to greater diversity of innovation and solutions to the problems we will inevitably face as a growing industry.

   4) Bitcoin is Leaderless: Bitcoin is a leaderless community comprised of many parts, and no team of developers has decision making authority for the entire community.

   5) No Censorship: Disagreement is healthy within a complex community such as ours. Yet the benefits of discussion, debate, and dissent require communication channels to remain free and open. Although we respect the right of private communities to run themselves as they see fit, the signers of this statement implore members of bitcoin to reject censorship and encourage them to support those platforms where free and open discussion is allowed to take place.

I personally see no problem with any of those tenets. They all seem perfectly reasonable to me, so what, exactly, is your problem with it? Aside from you being a fascist who thinks there should only be one dev team, since that goes without saying. You know you're fighting an unwinnable fight here, right? Aside from incessant mudslinging, which is clearly all you've got in the arsenal, there is nothing you can do to stop people writing code and releasing alternative clients. There is also nothing you can do to stop people running those alternative clients. And nothing you can do to stop people funding those clients. There's not a lot you can do about anything. Why do you even bother? You are the embodiment of flailing sperger.

Further to that, if you think Bitcoin can't cope with what's happening now, what do you think will happen when some big multinational company or bank gets over their initial walled garden naivety (just like you need to get the fuck over your walled-development-garden naivety) and releases a client? It's bound to happen one day. You won't be able to stop them either. As such, you want as much diversity in this ecosystem as possible to prevent one of those big companies gaining too much influence. Believe me when I tell you that you will definitely want the option for those people to fork away when they can't turn Bitcoin into what they'd prefer, so we need this little test to see what happens. Think about the long game, dumbass, that's how game-theory works.

I have enough faith in this little experiment to believe that everything will be fine (and genuinely, I really do), but I'd still like to see it proven empirically that Bitcoin can survive contentious hardforks. Resilient honey badger is resilient until proven otherwise.

Quote from: thejaytiesto on September 22, 2017, 01:46:44 PM

Quote from: DooMAD on September 21, 2017, 01:43:28 PM

It sounds like you prefer the ideals of closed-source development where no one can fork the code, so what the fuck are you even doing here?

Last time I checked, it was Bitcoin Unlimited releasing closed source code. Segwit2x was making the slack and github private and Garzik is trying to put his bloq shit on there, Bitcoin XT had anti privacy shit on there, the list goes on. What have any of these idiots contributed to bitcoin other than get fiat corporations and miners on board by everyone knows how? Get real buddyboy.

Let's assume just for a moment that we agreed that these people are as bad as you say they are. We categorically don't, but we'll just pretend for the moment. Despite however untrustworthy, ill-intentioned or downright bad these people are, you still don't want them to leave? You could be rid of them. Separate. Gone. If the Core devs do decide to change the mining algorithm, these evil usurpers might never have influence over your preferred chain again. These people are perfectly willing to leave you alone and do whatever the fuck you want. Why can't you leave them alone? Why are you so obstinately controlling of others, despite how utterly and truly impotent you are at doing it? Keep throwing your toys out of the pram, baby. It accomplishes nothing.