<div dir="ltr"><span style="font-size:13px">"How then to end this XT madness?"<br></span><br>Instead of bashing on someone that has actually put a solution forward, make your own fork and see if your ideas on how to solve the issue are any better.<div><br></div><div>As of now, 1Mb blocks are pure madness, and people are voting over an 8mb block increase every day that passes, even with a "useless project" like you call it.<br><br>Go out there and see how bitcoin is actually used.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><a href="http://twitter.com/gubatron" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/gubatron</a><br></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 10:54 PM, odinn via bitcoin-dev <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target="_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>
Hash: SHA1<br>
<br>
The "XT Fork" (better said, a POS alt*) and those behind it make not<br>
even a pretense to work through process involved with bitcoin developmen<br>
t.<br>
<br>
(*This is not intended as a slight toward any other alts, as here in<br>
this post I am focusing solely on XT.)<br>
<br>
Instead of abandoning their useless project, or at least conceding<br>
that their alt is operating essentially outside of the development<br>
funnel (by this I mean BIP process), the developers of XT, via their<br>
latest presentation of XT give nothing more than an attack on bitcoin<br>
(albeit one that, more than anything, is designed to sidetrack real<br>
discussion necessary to resolve the issues so as to achieve some level<br>
of consensus in block size debates). Curiously, XT is not even truly<br>
the implementation of BIP 101; the actual proposed implementation of<br>
BIP 101 as proposed at<br>
<a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0101.mediawiki#implement" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0101.mediawiki#implement</a><br>
ation<br>
is found here: <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6341" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6341</a><br>
(It is currently a closed issue.)<br>
<br>
It's probably valid to call into question why Mike Hearn in particular<br>
persists with this project at all, as he has been its biggest<br>
cheerleader. Some reasons may be:<br>
1) His interest in attacking bitcoin in the past (seems to be a<br>
recurring pattern)<br>
<a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=333824.0" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=333824.0</a><br>
<br>
2) His employment (has come up before) - QinetiQ, Google, etc<br>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/+MikeHearn/about" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://plus.google.com/+MikeHearn/about</a> - it's simply not<br>
unreasonable to ask why he's pushing it so hard when nobody wants it.<br>
<br>
3) Various reasons mentioned here:<br>
<a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/39yaug/the_history_of_mike_hea
rn_and_why_you_should_not/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/39yaug/the_history_of_mike_hea<br>
rn_and_why_you_should_not/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
4) His disinterest in following what is actually happening with votes<br>
on legitimate proposals (e.g. Garzik's BIP 100) in the blocks. (Caveat<br>
~ one doesn't see the BIP 100 yet in bitcoin/bips because it won't<br>
appear for another couple weeks, supposedly. The miners' voting is<br>
already happening however.) Even according to <a href="http://xtnodes.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://xtnodes.com/</a> we<br>
see that XT runs minimal nodes in comparison to the rest of nodes<br>
being run across the network.<br>
<br>
BIP 100 itself is anticipated to be submitted w/ implementation in the<br>
next 2 weeks and many miners are already voting on BIP 100 (as per<br>
Jeff Garzik, from a post 08/12/2015 12:46 PM -0400 to this mailing list)<br>
.<br>
<br>
It is an insult to see Hearn fling the XT turd into the community<br>
repeatedly.<br>
<br>
How then to end this XT madness?<br>
<br>
"The ring was made in the fires of Mount Doom. Only there can it be<br>
unmade. The ring must be taken deep into Mordor and cast back into the<br>
fiery chasm from whence it came. One of you must do this."<br>
- - Lord Elrond<br>
<br>
Do not download this loathsome XT thing. Cast it back into the fires<br>
from whence it came.<br>
<br>
- -Odinn<br>
<br>
<br>
On 08/15/2015 10:43 AM, Satoshi Nakamoto via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br>
> I have been following the recent block size debates through the<br>
> mailing list. I had hoped the debate would resolve and that a fork<br>
> proposal would achieve widespread consensus. However with the<br>
> formal release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely to happen,<br>
> and so I am forced to share my concerns about this very dangerous<br>
> fork.<br>
><br>
> The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my<br>
> original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth. When<br>
> I designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future<br>
> modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near<br>
> unanimous agreement. Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the<br>
> influence of charismatic leaders, even if their name is Gavin<br>
> Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto. Nearly everyone has<br>
> to agree on a change, and they have to do it without being forced<br>
> or pressured into it. By doing a fork in this way, these<br>
> developers are violating the "original vision" they claim to<br>
> honour.<br>
><br>
> They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was<br>
> supposed to be. However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since<br>
> that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some<br>
> of my early opinions. For example I didn't anticipate pooled<br>
> mining and its effects on the security of the network. Making<br>
> Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its<br>
> security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take<br>
> more time to come up with a robust solution. I suspect we need a<br>
> better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely<br>
> on altruism.<br>
><br>
> If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what<br>
> "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and<br>
> through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but<br>
> to declare Bitcoin a failed project. Bitcoin was meant to be both<br>
> technically and socially robust. This present situation has been<br>
> very disappointing to watch unfold.<br>
><br>
> Satoshi Nakamoto<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing<br>
> list <a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
><br>
<br>
- --<br>
<a href="http://abis.io" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://abis.io</a> ~<br>
"a protocol concept to enable decentralization<br>
and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"<br>
<a href="https://keybase.io/odinn" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://keybase.io/odinn</a><br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
Version: GnuPG v1<br>
<br>
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJV0+/fAAoJEGxwq/inSG8C4ZAIAKm1pEne0FlOW1O4zLe6mZOz<br>
YTcnpSHFiVw4AfUPgbzR813ODphnJqcwnoT1q/sojjqgIDtwZY+AqdjA3VAbe15D<br>
bAPlvQGmXMlaXq8OteDYPKxPzQMUlRtxEd9+sxO5IGFx0kvmKQLzdk6cmgawcRhN<br>
PrDyXIqLlx6Yp0REQ03v3poLTGojUkPLeqdMrJAjwpuAyv9F8iVUn7SeHemEi8cm<br>
fW4wOJogA8j9P//3a7+Cr8bjnOz6+QwpHsdlZlKM4VUTxt3Vgx4vu+SQjQxWgZEK<br>
I+HGvgQW1buoDxleBbFq6SJc55lhF41IB17tewuDuPzT2nL4zOkbis1tUk3ASxY=<br>
=Rm7w<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>