VhXXe0Vm

1
2Patrick Strateman [4:54 PM] 
3@brucefenton: please do not put words into peoples mouths
4
5Jeff Garzik [4:55 PM] 
6I was very happy with Matt’s email and think he’s honestly trying to bridge the gap, which is great progress.
7
8Trace Mayer [4:55 PM] 
9@brucefenton: Perhaps @jgarzik can point to some of his pull requests where he has had significant impact on consensus code?
10
11[4:55] 
12Since he is here I think it is better for him to prove his work so it doesn't get cited out of context or something.
13
14buddhamangler [4:55 PM] 
15@tracemayer: sigh
16
17Yoghurt [4:55 PM] 
18(Nobody has significant impact on consensus code)
19
20Trace Mayer [4:56 PM] 
21@yoghurt: Right, sipa hasn't had any impact on consensus code.
22
23Bruce Fenton [4:56 PM] 
24@phantomcircuit: read above, not putting words in others mouths
25
26buddhamangler [4:56 PM] 
27@tracemayer: how about you trace?
28
29mvyr [4:56 PM] 
30@tracemayer: he fixed the OpenSSL signature forking bug.
31
32brg444 [4:57 PM] 
33@jgarzik while this is great to hear. This is not leading us anywhere as long as Classic insist on posturing that they will fork the network TOMORROW. I understand you don't necessarily agree but the code you've released shows otherwise
34
35Trace Mayer [4:57 PM] 
36@buddhamangler: I don't hold myself out as an expert on the Bitcoin project with commit access to the Core project.
37
38Patrick Strateman [4:57 PM] 
39@brucefenton: i think you were "Even their biggest critics within core agree that they do"
40
41chek2fire [4:57 PM] 
42Guys is simple. Classic supporters and developers will never go to consensus and the reason is that they dont want to upgrade bitcoin core or something like that. They only want to kill Bitcoin core whatever the cost for taht
43
44[4:57] 
45i see a big hate from Gavin, and the other developers to core developers
462 1  
47
48buddhamangler [4:58 PM] 
49@tracemayer: he has nothing to prove to you or anyone, and given you are not an expert i doubt you could be an accurate measure of any proof anyways, so just stop
50
51aknix [4:58 PM] 
52Some people want a "broken" bitcoin, some don't
53
54aknix [4:58 PM] 
55shrugs
56
57eragmus [4:58 PM] 
58@buddhamangler: Nothing to prove, because relative to other Core devs, there ​*is*​ nothing to prove. Let’s at least be honest about it. Or, prove tracemayer ’s assertion wrong.(edited)
59
60chek2fire [4:59 PM] 
61i am sure that all of them will have the same reaction like hearn. One day they will ragequit bitcoin :stuck_out_tongue:
62
63Bruce Fenton [4:59 PM] 
64@phantomcircuit: fair enough "SOME (at least one who told me!) of their critics agree they are experts :)   I had a prominent core person the other day tell me he considers Gavin to be among the top 30 in the world -- I was very surprised
65
66buddhamangler [4:59 PM] 
67@eragmus: no thanks, i dont feel the need to engage in your epeen contest(edited)
68
69Bruce Fenton [4:59 PM] 
70@phantomcircuit: but let's not make this a battle of who the biggest genius is
71
72eragmus [4:59 PM] 
73@buddhamangler: Yeah, people will happily ignore what they like, and meanwhile the facts will remain on the table. All I request here is honesty.(edited)
74
75Yoghurt [5:00 PM] 
76@tracemayer That code is read by dozens of eyes before it gets anywhere near a release; so no, there is no significant impact of an individual in there.
77
78chek2fire [5:01 PM] 
79Good luck to anyone that think will change bitcoin from  a p2p decentrilized system to a centrilized data center payment system
80
81Trace Mayer [5:01 PM] 
82added and commented on a Plain Text snippet: garzik-net-commits.txt 
833795e81 leveldbwrapper file rename to dbwrapper.*
84 9 files changed, 643 insertions(+), 643 deletions(-)
858587b23 leveldbwrapper symbol rename: Remove "Level" from class, etc. names
86 5 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-)
876ec4b7e leveldbwrapper: Remove unused .Prev(), .SeekToLast() methods
88 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
893ab3de8 qa/pull-tester/rpc-tests.py: chmod 0755
90 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
9183f0e22 Temporarily disable ZMQ tests in bitcoin test suite
92 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
930143a1f configure.ac: Revert autotools-auto-updated 2.69 autoconf requirement
94 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
95e6a14b6 Add ZeroMQ support. Notify blocks and transactions via ZeroMQ
96 16 files changed, 717 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
9715982a8 Convert tree to using univalue. Eliminate all json_spirit uses.
98 23 files changed, 321 insertions(+), 205 deletions(-)
995e3060c UniValue: export NullUniValue global constant
100 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
101efc7883 UniValue: prefer .size() to .count(), to harmonize w/ existing tree
102 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
1037f68c7d contrib/linearize: Support linearization of testnet blocks
104 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
1057715c84 HTTP REST: minor fixes
106 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
107e2655e0 Add unauthenticated HTTP REST interface to public blockchain data.
108 4 files changed, 216 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
109ff36cbe RPC getnetworkinfo: export local node's client sub-version string
110 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
111540ac45 Avoid returning many "inv" orphans
112 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
113399cdbc contrib/linearize: Add feature to set file's timestamp based on block header time.
114 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
11511a8994 qt/splashscreen: #include version.h
116 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
1178f5a423 contrib/linearize: split block files based on year-month, not just year
118 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
11975400a2 contrib/linearize: Guarantee that output is generated in-order
120 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
121b4a72a7 contrib/linearize: split output files based on new-timestamp-year or max-file-size
122 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
123476eb7e Update linearize scripts.
124 5 files changed, 325 insertions(+), 138 deletions(-)
1257f836c6 rpc_tests: use BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL
126 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
127dc271fc UniValue tests: use more BOOST_CHECK()
128 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
129e85267b UniValue: add unit tests
130 2 files changed, 276 insertions(+)
131dee9324 UniValue: compact (!pretty) output should not include extra whitespace
132 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
13342642c9 UniValue: use correct setNumStr() input val, when setting number values
134 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
135df4d61e Add bitcoin-tx tests
136 8 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
137fb14452 bitcoin-tx: Accept input via stdin. Add input handling to tests.
138 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
139d789386 Add "it works" test for bitcoin-tx
140 6 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
1413a56de7 addrman: Do not propagate obviously poor addresses onto the network
142 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
1433cceba7 Univalue: Do not build JSON escape list at runtime
144 5 files changed, 344 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
1456f2c26a Closely track mempool byte total. Add "getmempoolinfo" RPC.
146 5 files changed, 41 insertions(+)
147c7b6117 Create new signal for notification of new blocks.  Use w/ -blocknotify
148 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
149beb36e8 ui_interface: remove unused NotifyBlocksChanged signal
150 3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 15 deletions(-)
15170b9d36 Log "version" message IP addresses in client connect summary
152 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
153c7614f1 univalue: remove unused methods getArray, getObject
154 2 files changed, 24 deletions(-)
1556b5ee2e Update openssl.org URL to include https://
156 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
1576fd59ee script.h: set_vch() should shift a >32 bit value
158 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
159cbe39a3 Add "bitcoin-tx" command line utility and supporting modules.
160 13 files changed, 1655 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
1613ce7e66 bitcoin-cli, rpcrawtransaction: harmonize "{" styling
162 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-)
163b2aeaa7 Move ParseScript() helper, becoming accessible outside src/test/
164 4 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
165ae775b5 Consolidate CTransaction hex encode/decode into core_io.h, core_{read,write}.cpp
166 7 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
1672e7009d Avoid querying DNS seeds, if we have open connections.
168 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
1693da434a Introduce option to disable relay/mining of bare multisig scripts in TX outputs
170 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
171ed5769f Move AcceptedConnection class to rpcserver.h.
172 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
173854d013 RPC code movement: separate out JSON-RPC execution logic from HTTP server logic
174 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
175c912e22 RPC cleanup: Improve HTTP server replies
176 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
177e35b37b RPC client: Simplify command line string-to-JSON-value conversion code
178 1 file changed, 104 insertions(+), 79 deletions(-)
1790cafb63 bitcoin-cli, rpcclient: prefer EXIT_FAILURE cstdlib constant
180 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
18188df548 base58: add paranoid return value checks
182 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
183d04fd3e CWallet: fix nTimeFirstKey init, by making constructor init common code
184 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
1857d0e9bc doc/README.md: remove 'rc' label for 0.9.0 version, in title
186 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
1878175c79 script: reduce OP_RETURN standard relay bytes to 40
188 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
189595b6d8 script: tighten multisig non-standard rules: do not relay pubkeys above 65 bytes
190 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
191518f3bd Add -zapwallettxes cli/config option, used for wallet recovery
192 5 files changed, 128 insertions(+)
193e6b7e3d Add -disablewallet option, to disable wallet support (and BDB)
194 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
195f9ee7a0 init.cpp: cosmetic indent changes, preparing for no-wallet mode
196 1 file changed, 113 insertions(+), 109 deletions(-)
197406b1f0 Revert "JSON Spirit updated to v4.06"
198 14 files changed, 382 insertions(+), 681 deletions(-)
1990db9a80 Revert "Switch to using raw_utf8"
200 5 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
201a793424 Relay OP_RETURN data TxOut as standard transaction type
202 5 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
20328f6b8d RPC validateaddress: test pwalletMain for NULL (no-wallet mode)
204 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
205b073087 Support absence of wallet (pwalletMain==NULL) in several locations, notably RPC.
206 6 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-)
2072e9c8ae configure.ac: remove unneeded OSX flags
208 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
2098bd6d19 configure.ac: remove debug/release concept, prefer autotools default CXXFLAGS
210 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
211acafc9c Add src/.gitignore: ignore src/test_bitcoin
212 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
21312564aa configure.ac: remove superfluous bracket
214 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
215df6c543 contrib/misc/mkbootstrap: rename to linearize.py
216 4 files changed, 141 insertions(+), 138 deletions(-)
217701f6c3 Add "mkbootstrap" script to contrib, for creating bootstrap.dat.
218 2 files changed, 138 insertions(+)
219e5e9904 RPC: add getrawchangeaddress, for raw transaction change destinations
220 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
221f1dbed9 miner: constify CreateNewBlock() arg scriptPubKeyIn
222 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
2237bb0f6c RPC: getblocktemplate does not require a key, to create a block template
224 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
2257e17018 CreateNewBlock() now takes scriptPubKey argument, rather than a key.
226 4 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
227d247a5d Move internal miner/block creation to separate miner.cpp module.
228 12 files changed, 700 insertions(+), 668 deletions(-)
2291894684 Minor miner fixes (hey hey it's fun to say)
230 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
231091aa8d RPC: add getbestblockhash, to return tip of best chain
232 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+)
23336bd46f RPC: keypoolrefill gains optional size parameter
234 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
23513dd2d0 CWallet::TopUpKeyPool() takes optional pool size argument
236 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
23779f6925 main.h->core.h include dependency improvements.
238 4 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
2396d3f005 init.cpp: fix chainparams.h double include.
240 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
241980bfe6 Log reason for non-standard transaction rejection
242 4 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
243f590653 RPC: add 'verifychain', to verify chain database at runtime
244 4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
245168ba99 Pass check level, check depth to VerifyDB()
246 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
2478da9dd0 Wallet: optimize rescan to skip blocks prior to birthday
248 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
2493869fb8 Wallet: store key creation time. Calculate whole-wallet birthday.
250 4 files changed, 135 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
251f0d8a52 Replace repeated GetBoolArg() calls with Checkpoint::fEnabled variable set once at init time.
252 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
2539f4976a RPC: strictly require HTTP URI "/"
254 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
2551483aac net.cpp: Do not change primary process name from (default) to "bitcoin-start"
256 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
257a0cafb7 Move GenerateBitcoins() call out of net.cpp's StartNode()
258 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
259b9ff297 P2P: improve RX/TX flow control
260 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
261bc2f5aa P2P, cosmetic: break out buffer send(2) code into separate function
262 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
263607dbfd P2P: parse network datastream into header/data components in socket thread
264 3 files changed, 176 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
265ea97885 test/util_tests.cpp: one more DateTimeStrFormat 'T' removal
266 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
2673f964b3 Remove 'T' from remaining date/time format strings.
268 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
269393819c Remove 'T' from debug log timestamps
270 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
271e6955d0 New 'checkpoints' option should default to true.
272 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
273857b3ad Add "checkpoints" option, to permit disabling of checkpoint logic.
274 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
275fdbb537 Add new RPC "lockunspent", to prevent spending of selected outputs and associated RPC "listlockunspent".
276 5 files changed, 125 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
2777e1610d RPC: Forbid RPC username == RPC password
278 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
279fcf234f RPC: HTTP server uses its own ReadHTTPRequestLine() rather than reusing ReadHTTPStatus() from the client mode.
280 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
2812306dc4 RPC, cosmetic: push down ReadHTTPStatus() calls into ReadHTTP() callers
282 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
283b855abb Revert "Send 'mempool' P2P command at the start of each P2P session"
284 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 18 deletions(-)
285bd2e140 CAddrMan: verify pchMessageStart file marker, before reading address data
286 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
287189eb6a walletdb.h: remove dead code
288 1 file changed, 30 deletions(-)
28922f9b06 Send 'mempool' P2P command at the start of each P2P session to query remote node mempool contents.
290 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
29152c90a2 Import $DataDir/bootstrap.dat automatically, if it exists.
292 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
29393dd68e P2P: Do not request blocks from peers with fewer blocks than us
294 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
295b1d3e95 When rejected TX relay due to lack of fees, log full txid
296 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
297ea0796b Trim trailing whitespace for src/*.{h,cpp}
298 11 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
29917f8d6e Improve debug logging, for mempool TXs that do not include sufficient fees
300 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
3017697009 Cosmetic: move CTransaction::GetMinFee out of header file
302 2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
3032387944 select(): Use precise fd presence check, rather than imprecise hSocketMax test
304 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
30542613c9 Add block file naming helper, BlockFilePath()
306 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
307dcb1419 init.cpp: fix build error, and possibly-uninit'd warning
308 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
309c2cd13f release-notes.txt: mention getmemorypool removal
310 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
311f29eaee Update release notes
312 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
3130e1d355 RPC: add facility to enable RPCs to run outside cs_main, wallet locks
314 2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
315c625ae0 RPC, cosmetic: move more RPC code to new rpcblockchain.cpp module
316 11 files changed, 215 insertions(+), 197 deletions(-)
317e3bc569 RPC, cosmetic: move wallet-related RPCs to new rpcwallet.cpp module
318 8 files changed, 1489 insertions(+), 1437 deletions(-)
319a2168d9 RPC: submitblock returns null on success, string on error
320 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
3217600e7f RPC, cosmetic: Create rpcmining.cpp as new home for mining-related RPC code
322 7 files changed, 394 insertions(+), 365 deletions(-)
323ddd1ffb RPC, cosmetic: de-indent getblocktemplate()
324 1 file changed, 93 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-)
32579f2525 RPC: split new 'submitblock' out of 'getblocktemplate'
326 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
3270f46064 Add doc/release-notes.txt, temporary for 0.7 release
328 1 file changed, 71 insertions(+)
32905a85b2 Add 'mempool' P2P command, and extend 'getdata' behavior to permit downloading of mempool transactions from the remote peer.
330 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
331698b9f3 bitcoinrpc.cpp: Removed outdated comment
332 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
333f77654a CTxMemPool: eliminate redundant lock, GetHash() call
334 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
3356133890 RPC: add support for JSON-RPC 2.0-style request batching
336 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
337c6494d8 RPC: break out high level JSON-RPC req/resp into their own functions
338 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
33918e8e43 RPC getpeerinfo: s/height/startingheight/ for returned nStartingHeight value
340 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
3411006f07 RPC: add 'getpeerinfo', returning easy-to-retrieve per-CNode data
342 4 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
34370ab73a Create new rpcnet module, and move 'getconnectioncount' RPC to it
344 7 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
345d887f54 Document -debugnet option in command line help.
346 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
347983e4bd Quieten 'getdata' P2P message output
348 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
349d07eaba Introduce -debugnet option, thereby quieting some redundant debug messages
350 5 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
35125d5c19 RPC: add 'getrawmempool', listing all transaction ids in memory pool
352 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+)
353b92095f DoS_tests: fix signed/unsigned comparison warnings
354 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
355480d44b rpcdump: include cleanup. move JSONRPCError def to bitcoinrpc.h.
356 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
357429039d Refactor: move runCommand() to util.cpp
358 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
3598956453 .gitignore: add test_bitcoin
360 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
361976c08b JSON-RPC: Add 'sendrawtx' op, for sending pre-built TX's to network
362 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
3639ac282c Refactor: add IsChainFile helper. LoadBlockIndex() code movement.
364 2 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-)
36578eb278 ProcessMessage(): remove duplicate orphan tx debug message
366 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
3678fe791e Prevent crashes due to missing or corrupted blk????.dat records
368 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
369f94b64c Prevent crashes due to missing or corrupted database records
370 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
3717b671f5 Define BOOST_SPIRIT_THREADSAFE in all makefiles rather than at each include site.
372 6 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
3739c137aa BDB: restore DB_PRIVATE flag to environment
374 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
375ffe8b77 Further CDBEnv encapsulation work.
376 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
37794e34fa CDB::CDB: properly initialize activeTxn to NULL
378 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
3798b1202c Remove unused nested BDB transaction support
380 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
38124b57e3 Create CDBEnv::TxnBegin(), and use it in CDB::TxnBegin()
382 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
383cd9696f Encapsulate BDB environment inside new CDBEnv class
384 4 files changed, 110 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-)
385b52a270 Reorganize(): remove spurious TxnAbort()
386 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
387394b929 Default to DB_TXN_WRITE_NOSYNC for all transactional operations
388 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
38947f48a6 JSON-RPC: remove 'getblocknumber' deprecated RPC
390 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 17 deletions(-)
3916d64a0b Make orphan logging more verbose, displaying mapOrphanTransactions.size()
392 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
393f9dd136 Revert "use _strnicmp (ISO C++) instead of deprecated strnicmp (POSIX) and add missing "#define strncasecmp _strnicmp" in init.cpp"
394 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
395928d3a0 CAddrDB: Replace BDB-managed addr.dat with internally managed peers.dat
396 5 files changed, 100 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
397768e5d5 Add new utility functions FileCommit(), RenameOver()
398 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
399a7d45c5 Remove dead code: CTxDB::EraseBlockIndex(), CBlockIndex::EraseBlockFromDisk()
400 3 files changed, 21 deletions(-)
4010fb78ea Always check return values of TxnBegin() and TxnCommit()
402 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
40333a53bc CTxMemPool::accept(): do not log FetchInputs failure redundantly
404 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
405133dce6 CTxMemPool: consolidate two frequently-printed debug.log lines into one
406 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
407781fc2c Revert part of 1302257e: don't update CXXFLAGS, only xCXXFLAGS
408 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
4091302257 makefile.unix: add -Wall to default CXXFLAGS
410 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
411024fa1c EvalScript(): cast to avoid signed/unsigned warning
412 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
413061a001 ThreadSocketHandler2(): cast to avoid signed/unsigned warning
414 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
41510ab9c2 OpenBlockFile(): cast to eliminate signed/unsigned comparison warning
416 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
41724de922 CDiskTxPos, CInPoint, COutPoint: cast null value (-1) to unsigned int to eliminate signed/unsigned comparison warnings
418 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
419735a606 Change signed->unsigned at 3 code sites
420 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
4215aa0b23 CBlock::WriteToDisk() properly checks ftell(3) for error return
422 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
4231d8c7a9 Add casts for unavoidable signed/unsigned comparisons
424 8 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
425c0a0a93 Test ScriptSigArgsExpected() for error, before accumulating return value
426 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
4277bd9c3a SigOp and orphan-tx constants and counts are always unsigned.
428 5 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
429faf705a Prefer 'unsigned int' for loop index variables tested against ::size()
430 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
431dc42bf5 Encapsulate RPC command dispatch in an array of CRPCCommand's
432 1 file changed, 89 insertions(+), 84 deletions(-)
433ccd65d4 Move proto version to version.h.  Reduce header deps a bit more.
434 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
4359eace6b Move CWalletDB code to new walletdb module.
436 15 files changed, 624 insertions(+), 591 deletions(-)
437ce8c934 main.cpp: replace tabs with spaces
438 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
4398bff8ac AlreadyHave(): only hold lock during mapTransactions access
440 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
441ea96279 Bump PROTOCOL_VERSION to 60001, thereby enabling BIP31
442 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
4439fb89c2 Fix misc. minor sign-comparison warnings
444 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
4450dd710a CNode's nHeaderStart may be negative, so change its type
446 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
447c3fad83 serialize.h: CAutoFile's read and write may take size_t nSize
448 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
4493a78f82 Fix sign-compare warnings: netbase's Lookup* max-solutions may be unsigned
450 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
451c376ac3 Fix loop index var types, fixing many minor sign comparison warnings
452 10 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
453ab9dc75 The string class returns string::npos, when find() fails.
454 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
455ca4c4c5 CTxMemPool: add helper methods, to reduce global mempool.mapTx accesses
456 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
457d01903e CTxMemPool: encapsulate AcceptToMemoryPool
458 2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
4598e45ed6 CTxMemPool: encapsulate AddToMemoryPoolUnchecked(), RemoveFromMemoryPool(), and nPooledTx
460 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
461235507a New class CTxMemPool, encapsulating TX memory pool data members
462 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
4638deb982 Locking fix for AlreadyHave()
464 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
4659925d34 Database micro-optimization for "tx" network message
466 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
4678b09cd3 Replace several network protocol version numbers with named constants stored in version.h.
468 4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
469460b66b Remove obsolete Win32 AffinityBugWorkaround()
470 2 files changed, 22 deletions(-)
471b87c0fc version.h: separate client, net sections.  Move more constants to this file.
472 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
47393e447b BIP 0031: pong message
474 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
47502d630c Remove vladimir's DNS seed, at his request.
476 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
477cbd959c Revert "Define MSG_NOSIGNAL to 0 on platforms where it is unavailable."
478 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
479cc558f0 README.md: word wrap text file
480 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
481927aaa0 Add reference python miner, in contrib/pyminer/
482 3 files changed, 290 insertions(+)
483b2fd0ca src/makefile.unix: remove -DFOURWAYSSE2
484 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
485a139ed7 CAddrDB::LoadAddresses: properly initialize CAddress
486 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
487e9fd7d9 doc/README: word wrap into something readable
488 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
48924a0def Bump version to 0.3.25
490 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
491116df55 Update CWallet::LoadWallet for proper return type.
492 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
493f087364 Compile 'sv' translation
494 1 file changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
495fc27eb1 Bump OSX version to 0.3.24 (missed in previous commit)
496 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
497b4b536d Bump version to 0.3.24.
498 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
499362efb2 Enable DNS seeding by default.
500 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
501aa0c5e8 CWalletTx::GetAmounts(): pass NULL for CKeyStore*, rather than false to fix warning.
502 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
503eeac872 doc/release-process.txt: minor updates
504 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
505c02ec54 FormatFullVersion: build fix related to recent translation improvement
506 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
5076854a2a Add minimal release process docs.
508 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
5096de1326 Lower minimum relay TX fee to 0.0001 (from 0.0005) BTC.
510 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
511352b4ea Reduce minimum TX fee for new transactions, to 0.0005.
512 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
5136f07e22 Bump version to 0.3.23.
514 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
51569a27a4 irc: #bitcoin is overflowing.  split up into 100 randomly-joined channels.
516 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
51769ae372 OSX build tweaks (laszlo)
518 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
519270e944 doc/README: bump version to 0.3.22
520 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
5212a24875 Decrease minimum TX fee to 0.0005 BTC.
522 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
523a630da6 Replace CENT with new constant MIN_TX_FEE, where appropriate.
524 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
525d9068ad Add settxfee RPC, to permit setting default TX fee at runtime.
526 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
527e93e534 Remove GUI's "Generate Coins" option from the menu.
528 11 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-)
52917616ea Send/return full bitcoin version string in Server and User-Agent HTTP headers
530 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4
5311 Comment Collapse
532@yoghurt: Perhaps @jgarzik can confirm whether this file represents his code commits net of code contributed by others.
533
534chek2fire [5:01 PM] 
535no one will follow them
536
537buddhamangler [5:01 PM] 
538@eragmus: so what is the assertion here?  You guys want to burn every bridge and discredit anyone that disagrees with you.
539
540Trace Mayer [5:02 PM] 
541@yoghurt: Let's bring some greater transparency to the meritocracy.
542
543aknix [5:02 PM] 
544>.<
545
546eragmus [5:02 PM] 
547@buddhamangler: I’m interesting in no such thing. But, being honest about relative contributions is fair, is it not? Or is selective omissions of truth the new standard of honesty?
548
549chek2fire [5:02 PM] 
550I propose to devs like Gavin and any other that support that idea simple to leave bitcoin or to ragequit it. With hearn ragequit we have all so much fun especially with his photo in the carpet :smile:
5512  
552
553aknix [5:03 PM] 
554No need for a @jgarzik character assassinations, I am sure he knows how much work he put in. :laughing:
555
556chek2fire [5:03 PM] 
557Gavin can get a ragequit pic in his bathroom :stuck_out_tongue:
558
559bitsko [5:03 PM] 
560chek2fire: noise please
561
562buddhamangler [5:03 PM] 
563@eragmus: so you get a measure of relative contributions, then what?  Is this the measure by which all ideas are filtered through?  Even ones based in economic theory?
564
565eragmus [5:03 PM] 
566@buddhamangler: I’m just saying… if Bitcoin is to retain and continue to attract talent (be a meritocracy), then those who do the most work had better get recognized for it, very clearly. False equivalencies are unacceptable.
567
568Trace Mayer [5:03 PM] 
569@aknix: I think it is good for everyone else to know the quality and quantity of the work put in. That way we can begin to rank to developers in terms of expertise, importance and prolificness.
5702 1  
571
572Jeff Garzik [5:04 PM] 
573You can check my github for two independent implementations of bitcoin, among others.
574This is what happens when we try to engage and communicate...
575
576buddhamangler [5:04 PM] 
577@eragmus: where are people not getting recognized?
578
579aknix [5:04 PM] 
580@tracemayer: That would make sense to help back this for what it is, a meritocracy
581
582Bruce Fenton [5:04 PM] 
583@tracemayer: You are a smart guy with better people skills / human understanding than this - no need to attack Garzik - point is that the industry is where it is because of division -- we can say "don't let the door hit you on the way out" to Classic but we'd all be a heck of a lot better off as an industry if we found common ground
584
585buddhamangler [5:04 PM] 
586@tracemayer: I prefer to rank ideas, not people
587
588Trace Mayer [5:05 PM] 
589@buddhamangler: I don't know what @jgarzik considers his 3 most important commits to be. I would greatly appreciate for him to point them out.
590
591buddhamangler [5:05 PM] 
592@tracemayer: what are you getting at?  What is your goal with this line of questioning?  Just come out and say it
593
594aknix [5:05 PM] 
595Its better to attack the facts, right, like look at how misleading the term "classic" is or look at Gavins proposal fro SPV mining
596
597[5:05] 
598Its clear there are 2 different road, and one is drastically shorter
599
600Trace Mayer [5:05 PM] 
601@brucefenton: This is not an attack at all; I am genuinely interested in what @jgarzik considers his 3 most important contributions/commits to Bitcoin to be. Please, provide the URL as I want to understand better why.
602
603eragmus [5:06 PM] 
604@buddhamangler: My main issue is the “false equivalencies” part, where Gavin and/or Garzik are equated to other Core devs in impact, like Maxwell, Wuille, Todd, etc. … a fair ranking seems helpful, like this: https://bitcoincore.slack.com/archives/general/p1455152638037527
605Trace Mayer tracemayer
606@aknix: I think it is good for everyone else to know the quality and quantity of the work put in. That way we can begin to rank to developers in terms of expertise, importance and prolificness.
607Today at 5:03 PM
608
609mvyr [5:06 PM] 
610@aknix: SPV mining is incompatible with SPV wallets. pick one.
611
612aknix [5:06 PM] 
613hehehe i know
614
615Trace Mayer [5:07 PM] 
616@buddhamangler: I would like to know why @jgarzik considers himself to be a Bitcoin expert and it should be pretty easy to point at his three most important contributions and say 'I built that'. Github commits are a great form of proof of work.
617
618buddhamangler [5:07 PM] 
619@eragmus: False equivalencies by whom though?
620
621Trace Mayer [5:07 PM] 
622Not the only proof of course but a helpful one.
623
624buddhamangler [5:07 PM] 
625@eragmus: show me an example
626
627Bruce Fenton [5:07 PM] 
628There is an all time ranking and Gavin is I think #4 or 5 or so.  Does this mean his expertise overrides others?
629
630eragmus [5:07 PM] 
631@buddhamangler: By the general public and even industry CEOs. Look at how Classic supporters go on and on about Gavin? And virtually ignore everyone else.(edited)
632
633aknix [5:07 PM] 
634Classic is all over the place, Some still want SW, some just want it the way it is plus bigger blocks, some want spv to continue to work, and some want optin RBF. its a mess
635
636phlip [5:08 PM] 
637The lack of respect in this channel is amazing. It explains why this situation is the way it is. Well done to you all
6382  
639
640chek2fire [5:08 PM] 
641Gavin is a great Developer but a poor mind to how economical systems works
642
643Trace Mayer [5:08 PM] 
644@buddhamangler: And it should not be that big of a deal. Github commits are facts and there is no reason anyone should be playing games with facts or hiding them.
645
646Bruce Fenton [5:08 PM] 
647Cmon @tracemayer every person on this Slack is a Bitcoin expert - certainly Jeff
648
649aknix [5:08 PM] 
650@phlip: It is hard to keep it together with all the low blows from team classic(edited)
651
652buddhamangler [5:08 PM] 
653@eragmus: Yeah thats their opinon, is Jeff or Gavin somehow responsible for what they think about their ideas?
654
655eragmus [5:09 PM] 
656@buddhamangler: But those opinions come out due to “mythology”. That’s why I think an objective ranking list would be helpful.
657
658buddhamangler [5:09 PM] 
659@tracemayer: You imply Jeff is hiding or playing games, show me an example
660
661Trace Mayer [5:09 PM] 
662@buddhamangler: I am simply asking what @jgarzik considers to be his three most important contributions to Bitcoin and provide the URL for the Github commit.
663
664Yoghurt [5:10 PM] 
665Ten times the effort and knowledge goes in review and analysis. Writing code and pushing a ton of commits is just that. GitHub is sadly lacking in this regard.
6663  
667
668Trace Mayer [5:10 PM] 
669A response like 'look at my Github repo' is very nebulous and hard to quantify. Additionally, @jgarzik is in the best position to point to what he considers to be his three best contributions and lets him not have anything taken out of context. I think he would gladly want to do it and take some pride in his work.
6703  
671
672aknix [5:10 PM] 
673@tracemayer: I too want to see this but the phrasing of the question is everything. Better to be extremely PC/polite about it.
674
675buddhamangler [5:10 PM] 
676@eragmus: Mythology pushed by whom?  You guys consistently cannot look inward at all.  Even if this mysterious "mythology" exists, is Gavin or Jeff pushing it?  jeez
677
678eragmus [5:11 PM] 
679@buddhamangler: Not pushed by anyone. An issue is that those developers who have a large public image, writing blogs or being active on Twitter or Reddit get much more public attention. That hardly seems fair… that produces perverse incentives.(edited)
6801  
681
682Bruce Fenton [5:11 PM] 
683The entire line of discussion is silly - clearly Jeff is an expert -- for arguments sake -- even if he's "dumber" than all active core devs and the top 40 Bitcoin CTOs he's still top 100 on the planet -- this reminds me of military guys who want to compare service records as if there is a hierarchy over who can discuss war / peace policies
684
685buddhamangler [5:11 PM] 
686@eragmus: They don't have a monopoly on ideas or platforms, ideas win out, not people
687
688Trace Mayer [5:11 PM] 
689@aknix: Have a better way to phrase it? It is pretty straight forward since it is merely asking for a fact and any opinion is given full due by the one providing the answer.
690
691Bruce Fenton [5:12 PM] 
692We need to move on to solutions
6931  
694
695eragmus [5:12 PM] 
696@buddhamangler: You’re missing the point. I’ll repeat my post —> An issue is that those developers who have a large public image, writing blogs or being active on Twitter or Reddit get much more public attention. That hardly seems fair… that produces perverse incentives.
697
698aknix [5:12 PM] 
699@tracemayer: Not really, also kind of the point I was trying to make.(edited)
700
701[5:12] 
702Meritocracy is brutal, but honest
7031  
704
705mrhodl [5:12 PM] 
706@brucefenton: We have a solution, you didn't see the road map?
707
708buddhamangler [5:12 PM] 
709@eragmus: No I see what you are saying, what would you like for them to do?  Not say what they believe?
710
711Bruce Fenton [5:12 PM] 
712@eragmus: public comms are the way of the world
713
714eragmus [5:13 PM] 
715@buddhamangler: I have no idea what the solution is. But, if tracemayer ’s public objective ranking list is possible to achieve, then that would be a good start to prioritizing merit?
716
717Trace Mayer [5:13 PM] 
718@brucefenton: And if I ask you why @jgarzik is an expert then what is your reasoning?
719
720BtcDrak [5:13 PM] 
721@jgarzik: guess your politicking failed to make Classic sane then.
7221  
723
724eragmus [5:14 PM] 
725@brucefenton: But that kind of incentive system is really unhealthy for Bitcoin. It’s the way to let politics/popularity contest/cult of personality... dictate the protocol.(edited)
726
727Bruce Fenton [5:14 PM] 
728@tracemayer: same reason I consider you an expert -- haven't defined it but as with any subject I'd say being top 1% in the world is a good start
729
730[5:15] 
731@eragmus: politics and PR are a reality of life - he who ignores them loses
732
733Patrick Strateman [5:15 PM] 
734@tracemayer: @jgarzik clearly left the moment you asked him to prove he's an expert
7351  
736
737BtcDrak [5:15 PM] 
738@jgarzik: you might have successfully derailed XT with your BIP100 trickery, but your 2MB slight of hand backfired on you.
739
740buddhamangler [5:15 PM] 
741@eragmus: No, god no, why would that be a good idea?  So we can somehow automatically multiply ideas by their merit owner?
742
743Trace Mayer [5:16 PM] 
744@brucefenton: My 'expertness', if I have any, is vastly inferior to say sipa, wumpus or @morcos. @jgarzik seems to assert he belongs in the same category of expertness as sipa, sumpus or @morcos. So, my simple question is why? And are there any FACTS like Github commits to cite to that helps prove the expertness status?
7451  
746
747[5:16] 
748Judge Forrest did not let Andreas testify at Ulbricht's trial because he did not meet the threshold of expert. Why should he or why should he not?
749
750buddhamangler [5:17 PM] 
751This witchhunt crap is stupid, lets talk about anything, as long as its not the ideas.
752
753Bruce Fenton [5:17 PM] 
754@mrhodl: re: roadmap.  The roadmap solved the tech issues from perspective of the majority of technical people -- but clearly it has failed in reaching CEOs etc - so it's not a settled matter if we want to end the division
755
756aknix [5:17 PM] 
757Just review IRC meeting logs and commits, you will have a pretty good understanding of  who the "experts" are.
758
759eragmus [5:17 PM] 
760@buddhamangler: "somehow automatically multiply ideas by their merit owner” — this is already happening. I’m proposing to have some objective measurement to allow it to happen at least meritocratically.(edited)
761
762BtcDrak [5:17 PM] 
763Meetings here: https://bitcoincore.org/en/meetings/
764Bitcoin Core
765IRC Meetings
766The project usually holds IRC meetings every Thursday at 19:00 UTC in #bitcoin-dev on irc.freenode.net. Everyone is welcome to attend.
7673  
768
769aknix [5:18 PM] 
770Also IMO the best work @jgarzik did was a few BIPs a few I kinda liked at the time.
771
772Jeff Garzik [5:18 PM] 
773@phantomcircuit: No, it’s because it is a fruitless discussion.
774Anyone can look at my github to see many bitcoin projects written by me — the entire commit history or at least vast majority thereof.
775This character stuff serves absolutely no purpose in trying to heal the community and bring people back together.
776
777Trace Mayer [5:18 PM] 
778@buddhamangler: It is very helpful to be able to talk about the ideas once expertness has been determined. Courts use this process all the time - https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702
779 
780LII / Legal Information Institute
781Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses
782A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; (b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
783
784buddhamangler [5:19 PM] 
785@eragmus: Good luck I guess, I'm sitting here trying to imagine what that will look like and I just think that would be so strange.  Well sir, your idea was good, but since this guy over here has a merit score of 4.9 his idea trumps yours.
786
787[5:19] 
788wtf
789
790mvyr [5:19 PM] 
791@jgarzik: what is "healing", and why do we need it?
792
793BtcDrak [5:19 PM] 
794@jgarzik: that's a bit rich coming from you. You've been one of the most divisive people in this ordeal next to Mike and Gavin.(edited)
795
796Trace Mayer [5:19 PM] 
797@jgarzik: Is there any particular reason you are unwilling to at least point in the direction of what you consider to be your three most important contributions/commits? I would really appreciate it.
798
799aknix [5:20 PM] 
800hahahaha I forgot about @jgarzik diablo miner, was the 2nd piece of bitcoin software i ran...
801
802[5:20] 
803Its probably diablominer but that isnt core
804
805mvyr [5:20 PM] 
806@aknix: @jgarzik's DiabloMiner?
807
808buddhamangler [5:20 PM] 
809@tracemayer: They do trace, but those are situations where a jury believe what a witness says because they are an expert.  In bitcoin we don't need to believe them.  We can examine the code and know.
810
811Matt Corallo [5:20 PM] 
812@jgarzik: I'm really quite dissapointed with your behavior here...while some of the arguments in your medium post are more philosophical and more for a broad discussion, many of them are very technical and specific...I took time out of my schedule to have a meeting with you to talk about how we can work to move the technical discussions back to technical forums in an attempt to save your reputation with the development community. You'll note that my public blog post contained no technical talk and only general talk of how we as a community can move forward, and then I made technical points in a technical forum so that we can all bury the hatchet...you responded with a slap in the face and continued to turn this into a public PR war. I'm sorry but I cannot attempt to save your reputation any longer - you seriously have no future with anyone in the technical bitcoin community at this point
8134  
814
815aknix [5:21 PM] 
816https://github.com/Diablo-D3/DiabloMiner
817 
818GitHub
819Diablo-D3/DiabloMiner
820DiabloMiner - OpenCL miner for Bitcoin
821
822mvyr [5:21 PM] 
823@aknix: you mean Diablo-D3's DiabloMiner.
8241  
825
826aknix [5:21 PM] 
827yes
828
829[5:21] 
830i thought he wrote it lol
831
832[5:21] 
833oops
834
835eragmus [5:21 PM] 
836@buddhamangler: Like I said, I don’t know the perfect answer. But, the current situation where Gavin/Garzik are made to appear as equals to people like: Maxwell, Wuille, etc. — is just dishonest.
8371  
838
839[5:21] 
840Horribly dishonest.
841
842[5:22] 
843So, whatever can reverse this… let’s do it.
844
845Trace Mayer [5:22 PM] 
846@eragmus: Why would it be dishonest? Surely @jgarzik has some commits he has made that are like libsec.
847
848Jeff Garzik [5:22 PM] 
849@bluematt: “public PR war”?   There are specific issues being raised that are real field issues, not theory.
8501  
851
852eragmus [5:22 PM] 
853@tracemayer: :confused:
854
855[5:22] 
856@tracemayer: Or, like Confidential Transactions’ genius, or CoinJoin. :disappointed:
857
858mvyr [5:23 PM] 
859@jgarzik: no, this is manufactured.
8601  
861
862Bruce Fenton [5:23 PM] 
863@tracemayer:  I think the judge was wrong -- as with many things in that trial, bafflingly unfair.   Andreas is clearly an expert as is Trace Mayer and Jeff (and even me -- while all three of you are a lot smarter on this than I am) so wumpus and sipa are even smarter than the other geniuses --do we want to build them a special tower and make everyone ring a bell before speaking to them?   You've read enough human decision studies to know that the addition of varied opinions makes for better decisions. 
864We could spend effort ranking how smart everyone is -- on code, I volunteer to be at the bottom of this slack -- but it's better use of time to focus on cooperation.   Whether Jeff is an expert, genius or fool he exists and important people in our industry respect his opinion -- core can dismiss them ... But that's the attitude that fuels a contentious HF
865
866eragmus [5:23 PM] 
867The genius does not and has never come from Gavin and Garzik.
868
869[5:23] 
870@buddhamangler: ^ That is my point.
871
872brg444 [5:23 PM] 
873@jgarzik: We keep hearing this but are never privy to any details.
874
875Matt Corallo [5:23 PM] 
876@jgarzik: you sat, in person, across from me and agreed that we should be moving technical discussions back to a technical forum instead of sniping at each other on blog posts and thus leaving the community to discuss things on reddit. your response to my attempt to make good on that was to do the same thing again.
8772  
878
879Jeff Garzik [5:23 PM] 
880@mvyr: Incorrect.  These are real field issues people have come to me with.
881
882eragmus [5:23 PM] 
883Instead of rewarding genius, we have hostile XT/Classic forks where Gavin + Garzik try to act high and mighty.(edited)
884
885mvyr [5:23 PM] 
886@jgarzik: describe them then.
8871  
888
889aknix [5:24 PM] 
890The "genius" of bitcoin is getting smart minds together to solve the worlds problems, not famefagging around...
891
892Jeff Garzik [5:24 PM] 
893@bluematt: The mail was sent first to bitcoin-discuss, but got no replies
894
895Matt Corallo [5:24 PM] 
896@jgarzik you gave it like 12 hours
897
898Jeff Garzik [5:24 PM] 
899@mvyr: The post did
900
901Matt Corallo [5:24 PM] 
902I'm sorry people didnt respond to you in 12 hours...
903
904mvyr [5:25 PM] 
905@jgarzik: I've refuted the points you've presented, is that entirely it?
906
907@Satoshi_N_ [5:25 PM] 
908Which channel is for discussing damage control & back pedaling?
9093 3  
910
911BtcDrak [5:25 PM] 
912#back-pedalling
9131  
914
915buddhamangler [5:26 PM] 
916This is the witchhunt channel, might as well stay
917
918Jeff Garzik [5:26 PM] 
919@mvyr: It sounds like you misunderstood the points.  There are real issues with production roll-out and custom forks.
920
921aknix [5:27 PM] 
922@jgarzik: Maybe NON-concensus HFs are a root cause... Obfuscating the issue
923
924Nicolas "btchip" Bacca [5:27 PM] 
925people can help with those, you can point them to the irc channel typically.
926
927eragmus [5:27 PM] 
928@buddhamangler: I’ve explained how this has ​*nothing*​ to do with witch-hunting. This is about rewarding merit. (at least from my perspective).
929
930mvyr [5:27 PM] 
931@jgarzik: you should enunciate more clearly then.
932
933buddhamangler [5:28 PM] 
934@eragmus: Reward with what?  A medal?
935
936aknix [5:28 PM] 
937If we didnt have some other "entity" trying to change bitcoin and actually stalling progress we wouldnt be having a debate of HF/SF "upgrades"
938
939[5:28] 
940This is misleadg @jgarzik
941
942Jeff Garzik [5:28 PM] 
943@mvyr: The post includes a specific example, which is replicated across at least 3 other larger bitcoin businesses
944
945@Satoshi_N_ [5:29 PM] 
946@jgarzik You have been more than clear.
947
948mvyr [5:29 PM] 
949@jgarzik: can you name which companies find themselves incapable of making no changes to their software?
950
951eragmus [5:29 PM] 
952@buddhamangler: Of course not a ‘medal’. With respect and recognition, and appreciation for their views. I’ve already explained the issue a lot.
953
954aknix [5:29 PM] 
955@jgarzik: What are the conditions for that scenario you just mentioned?
956
957Jeff Garzik [5:29 PM] 
958@mvyr: :facepalm:   Companies are not saying they are incapable of making changes
959
960aknix [5:29 PM] 
961Are there 2 competing nodes in it?(edited)
962
963Bryan Bishop [5:30 PM] 
964i don't think it's reasonable to expect companies to speak through jgarzik
965
966Bruce Fenton [5:30 PM] 
967@jgarzik: and @bluematt there's lots of bad blood, Matt's right about a reset -I don't know what was said in the meeting but how about we take a breath on it and napkin scratch a simple gentlemen's agreement in private on how and what tech matters are discussed where - these things are only valuable of written and defined ... and even then still need fine tuning & discussion.
968
969Jeff Garzik [5:30 PM] 
970It is the rush that is problematic.  They have to task teams busy with other stuff to merge into their custom forks and then core software.
971
972Matt Corallo [5:30 PM] 
973@brucefenton: I /thought/ we had that
974
975mvyr [5:30 PM] 
976@jgarzik: you are saying that they are not ready to support segwit, that's fine because they need to make no changes to their software.
977
978eragmus [5:30 PM] 
979@buddhamangler: Who came up with the genius tech? libsec, confidential transactions, coinjoin, segregated witness, the key to turning segwit from a hard-fork into a soft-fork, etc.? Who has been supported as if they’re a God? who has been personally insulted and attacked? Who has been ignored by all of industry, pretty much? and vice versa? — There is a massive problem with recognition.(edited)
9801  
981
982Jeff Garzik [5:30 PM] 
983Ergo, you cannot set a short deadline on that.
984
985mvyr [5:30 PM] 
986there's no deadline set.
987
988aknix [5:31 PM] 
989@jgarzik: EXACTLY custom software, non consensus systems that Classic is supporting(edited)
990
991Matt Corallo [5:31 PM] 
992brucefenton: imagine my surprise when I saw jeff doing the exact opposite of what he told me he'd do just one week ago
993
994Bryan Bishop [5:31 PM] 
995if they are using custom non-core forks then why would anyone believe that they are using bitcoind?(edited)
996
997@Satoshi_N_ [5:31 PM] 
998Core could merge 2 MB with a longer window.  That'd be yuge!
999
1000Patrick Strateman [5:31 PM] 
1001@jgarzik Your actions recently have been nothing short of deceptive.
1002You keep repeating that segregated witness is “too complex”.  This is ​*simply not true*​ and I know for a fact that nobody has heard directly from anyone with complaints about the complexity who was not immediately offered ​*free*​ help.
1003Arguing against a soft fork that changes the economics of the system while at the same time arguing for a hard fork to do effectively the same thing is at the absolute minimum internally inconsistent.
1004
1005Bruce Fenton [5:31 PM] 
1006@bluematt: well let's try again,  I'll help this time --- if it works it works, if it doesn't then I'd call out anyone who broke from what was agreed --
1007
1008mvyr [5:32 PM] 
1009@jgarzik: lets compare SegWit and a hard fork. a company for segwit can make changes, whenever they feel like it in the future. a company in a hard fork needs to upgrade all of their software or lose money.
10101  
1011
1012eragmus [5:32 PM] 
1013@brucefenton: Good idea. Maybe what is needed is a moderator, to keep parties accountable.
10141  
1015
1016aknix [5:33 PM] 
1017SW may be complicated for companies that have complete custom systems for pooling inputs in FIFO style...(edited)
1018
1019brg444 [5:33 PM] 
1020@jgarzik: It sounds to me like this is an issue Bloq could solve, for a fee of course :simple_smile:
10212  
1022
1023Nicolas "btchip" Bacca [5:33 PM] 
1024most of the things regarding segwit integration can be pretty much isolated the same way BitGo offered a transparent update to multisig.
1025
1026mvyr [5:33 PM] 
1027@aknix: that doesn't matter, if you don't move to segwit support that is handled transparently.
10281  
1029
1030alp [5:33 PM] 
1031So how do these companies with custom forks upgrade to a hard fork 2MB?
1032
1033Patrick Strateman [5:34 PM] 
1034@alp
1035
1036@Satoshi_N_ [5:34 PM] 
1037So, if Classic triggers what are the predictions now?
1038
1039Patrick Strateman [5:34 PM] 
1040@alp: jeff is specifically talking about a company which operates it's entire business with SPV security
1041
1042Jeff Garzik [5:34 PM] 
1043@phantomcircuit: No, it is evaluation of relative complexity, not “too complex”
1044In comparison with a hard fork, the complexity is much higher — but also a soft fork/hard fork risk calculus is different.
1045
1046Patrick Strateman [5:34 PM] 
1047@alp: which is insane
1048
1049alp [5:34 PM] 
1050depends what the business is I suppose
1051
1052Jeff Garzik [5:34 PM] 
1053@phantomcircuit: No, I’m not, do not assume.
1054
1055buddhamangler [5:34 PM] 
1056@eragmus: I don't think there is a problem with recognition.  I think you just have a problem that people agree with them on particular things.
1057
1058Bruce Fenton [5:35 PM] 
1059@brg444: I get that @jgarzik isn't Mr. Popular in this slack but snipes don't serve to elevate or solve this - he's in the lions den and I'd guess it's more because he wants to communicate than that he came in to attack --
10606  
1061
1062eragmus [5:36 PM] 
1063@buddhamangler: It is a problem with recognition. Do you know how ‘bitcoin industry’ has worked? They simply follow Hearn + Gavin, mainly. Now perhaps Garzik too. But, basically no other Core devs… think back to how industry quickly signed the BIP101 letter, and ignored Core’s objections.
1064
1065mvyr [5:36 PM] 
1066@jgarzik: it's hard not to make assumptions if you keep quoting anonymous benevolent overlords.
1067
1068eragmus [5:36 PM] 
1069@buddhamangler: And that’s BIP101! The BIP that is absurd in how it scaled, and which we see has zero support from miners, basically.
1070
1071aknix [5:37 PM] 
1072We need some ego relief valves....
10731  
1074
1075rgrant [5:37 PM] 
1076@jgarzik: is Classic planning to stop at 2MB?
1077
1078brg444 [5:37 PM] 
1079@brucefenton: the issue and I presume what is making it hard on Jeff is that he acts as a proxy to all these industry players. why aren't they here in this very slack talking these things through with everyone? Are Bitcoin's CEOs that important they cannot mingle with the common man here?
1080
1081Patrick Strateman [5:37 PM] 
1082@jgarzik: unless you're going to either tell us who you're talking about OR get them to contact someone about the free help, i have to say the assertion that such a group even exists rings untrue
1083
1084@Satoshi_N_ [5:37 PM] 
1085set the channel topic: 1st Annual Garzik Roast.  Sorry, no refreshments.  It's BYOB.
1086
1087buddhamangler [5:38 PM] 
1088@eragmus: Well that's how it works, they made a go at it and it did not win out.  Now its a simple 2MB HF.  They don't have a monopoly on ideas.
1089
1090brg444 [5:38 PM] 
1091They can send their CTOs if they care btw
1092
1093Bruce Fenton [5:38 PM] 
1094@brg444: Why aren't they here in this Slack?  Read back through the last 3 hours and the answer should be very clear.   :)
1095
1096Bryan Bishop [5:39 PM] 
1097brg444: wrong to frame that as mingling with common man; perhaps you should instead say "mingle with Core" :)
1098
1099buddhamangler [5:39 PM] 
1100I would guess because they would be treated the same way you treat jeff
1101
1102rgrant [5:39 PM] 
1103@jgarzik: How do I get an invitation to the Classic slack?
1104
1105brg444 [5:39 PM] 
1106@brucefenton: oh so the answer is because they are a bunch of thin skin bedwetters who can't take criticism?
1107
1108buddhamangler [5:39 PM] 
1109the invitation page is public
1110
1111rgrant [5:39 PM] 
1112oh thx
1113
1114Jeff Garzik [5:39 PM] 
1115@phantomcircuit: I’m disclosing what I can.  Sorry for making the effort to inject real field data (if redacted) into the discussion.
1116
1117Bryan Bishop [5:40 PM] 
1118@jgarzik: that's crazytalk; if you want to have a way to inject data, then make up a proposal or standard for that.
1119
1120Patrick Strateman [5:40 PM] 
1121@jgarzik: ok then how about i assert that there's a MASSIVE EXCHANGE that cannot support anything more than 200kB blocks???
1122
1123BtcDrak [5:40 PM] 
1124> Jeff Garzik [1:39 AM] 
1125> @phantomcircuit: I’m disclosing what I can.  Sorry for making the effort to inject real field data (if redacted) into the discussion.
1126
1127Patrick Strateman [5:40 PM] 
1128im clearly being ridiculous, you're being willfully deceptive
1129
1130Bryan Bishop [5:40 PM] 
1131phantomcircuit: because you would be no better than jgarzik, and you would feel miserable
1132
1133aknix [5:41 PM] 
1134@jgarzik: Im sure many of us already know... Its should just be brought to light at this point...(edited)
1135
1136Jeff Garzik [5:41 PM] 
1137I don’t assume people on slack are lying to me… you may have different assumptions (sigh)
1138
1139Bryan Bishop [5:41 PM] 
1140jgarzik: deceptive does not mean lying
1141
1142[5:41] 
1143what's going on here?
1144
1145BtcDrak [5:41 PM] 
1146@kanzure: he's being deceptive of course :wink:
1147
1148Patrick Strateman [5:42 PM] 
1149@jgarzik: you're spewing nonsense about things that are trivial to implement being complex
11502  
1151
1152Jeff Garzik [5:42 PM] 
1153@phantomcircuit: Did you read the example in the post?
1154
1155aknix [5:42 PM] 
1156@jgarzik: I for one know exactly which companies you speak of. Everyone knows, cmon....
1157
1158eragmus [5:42 PM] 
1159@buddhamangler: Again you missed the entire point of the post. My point was that recognition IS an issue. Industry CEOs have a problem with recognizing value in Bitcoin protocol development. A problem tracemayer suggested solving by an objective ranking list, where contributions are highlighted.
1160
1161mvyr [5:42 PM] 
1162@jgarzik: we have already discussed why your example is misleading.
11631  
1164
1165bdny [5:43 PM] 
1166I am curious where the concern is for companies that have custom node implementations that will have to drop everything they are doing and code in the 2MB hard fork or risk being isolated…. at least with segwit they can take their time.
11673  
1168
1169Alex Morcos [5:43 PM] 
1170@brucefenton: Let me try and express some of the frustration with Jeff and Gavin in a bit less hostile terms.  Certainly both of them have far more experience with Bitcoin coding than I do and in fact are both significantly better coders.  However, over the last couple of years (since I have been involved), they have not been a significant  part of the development effort.  If you’re not involved on an active basis, it is really hard to just sort of step back in and expect everyone to listen to you.   Gavin (and to a lesser extent Jeff) have a different take on the security decentralization tradeoffs than the rest of the team.  To some extent these may represent legitimate differing opinion, but when you aren’t in there doing battle every day, taking part in what has been learned over the last couple years, there is a reasonable tendency to think maybe you’re missing something.   Gavin and Jeff’s opinion however is more informed by interaction with industry.
11714 1  
1172
1173brg444 [5:43 PM] 
1174"Until today, our involvement has consisted of listening, researching and testing and we believe that work is complete, and it is time to communicate our view in a clear and transparent manner."
1175
1176https://bitcoinxt.software/industry-letter.pdf
1177
1178This is the best we, as a community, as users of these services have gotten since the beginning of this shitshow. If the "industry" cares about getting their input through they might want to step down from their tower and come share their "research and tests". It's unfair to everyone and especially for @jgarzik to be sent to the lions for them and serve as proxy for their own agendas.
11791  
1180
1181BtcDrak [5:43 PM] 
1182https://twitter.com/Yingsena/status/697580900343648256
1183Ying Sena @Yingsena
1184@btcdrak @rogerkver After classic Roger could move on to promote recycling https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ca5OIaRVAAA0nb0.jpg (6KB)
1185Today at 4:40 PM
1186
1187Patrick Strateman [5:43 PM] 
1188@jgarzik: you mean your ridiculous strawman comparison that entirely fails to account for the inherent instability of attempting to replace the entire software ecosystem for bitcoin in one go? yes i did read that complete travesty(edited)
1189
1190Alex Morcos [5:45 PM] 
1191If we take what I just said at face value.  Then the correct course of action would have been for Gavin and Jeff to try to help industry interface with the rest of the core team.  So those lines of communication could be open.  Instead, it appears to much of core, like they kind of just took it upon themselves to decide where the right balance lay and launch XT and Classic to try to meet that perceived need.  Why instead of telling the other developers well industry needs A, B, and C, weren’t they helping industry communicate that directly to the people actually doing the work now.  It feels like they accepted the role of negotiating on behalf of the development team, knowing full well that they had technical disagreement and were no longer doing active development.
11924  
1193
1194buddhamangler [5:45 PM] 
1195@eragmus: All of that can be true, and they may still disagree with Core.  I see this consistent belief from Core that if they could only explain, more conferences, more meetings that everyone would come around.  Well no, not really.  This is not black and white, some people simply disagree.
1196
1197brg444 [5:46 PM] 
1198@jgarzik: What I've repeatedly failed to see or read from you and Gavin in the most recent blog posts are consideration for the independent peer users. Where do we draw the line between addressing industry concerns and respecting the peer status of less prominent entities?
1199
1200Jeff Garzik [5:46 PM] 
1201@phantomcircuit: The teams actually doing the work have a different opinion.  Swapping out bitcoind to them is much less work — assuming a non-contentious HF.
1202
1203sshcoin [5:46 PM] 
1204joined #general
1205
1206BtcDrak [5:47 PM] 
1207@morcos: That seems a really weird spin. The hostility of XT and Classic is apparent for everyone to see.
1208
1209Jeff Garzik [5:47 PM] 
1210Because that excludes up-layer changes that have wider site impact.
1211
1212mvyr [5:47 PM] 
1213@jgarzik: weren't you saying before the difficulty was in people running custom software, not in off the shelf bitcoind?
1214
1215Jeff Garzik [5:47 PM] 
1216@mvyr: Custom up-layer software (as outlined in the post…)
1217
1218bdny [5:47 PM] 
1219@mvyr: Exactly… what if  company has a custom node implementation that does not use bitcoind as border router? Where is the concern for them?
1220
1221BtcDrak [5:47 PM] 
1222@morcos: it's the justification they give for their actions, but it's not the genesis of them.
12231  
1224
1225windjc [5:48 PM] 
1226Wow the arrogance in here stinks
12272 3  
1228
1229keewee [5:48 PM] 
1230joined #general
1231
1232eragmus [5:48 PM] 
1233@buddhamangler: I tend to believe that if we all have the same goals… then, there will be one single optimal path/truth. If we don’t know that path, then that is because the requirements are not clear. If we have same goal, but the issue is not knowing what level of decentralization is highest cost vs. benefit (agree?), then maybe we should identify those requirements. Then, it should be much clearer which path to choose. — all this is irrelevant to 2MB HF vs. SegWit SF though, IMO. I think SegWit SF wins that debate quite easily.
1234
1235Patrick Strateman [5:49 PM] 
1236@jgarzik: you know that a hard fork would involve more than that... or maybe you don't and im just arguing with the wall here
1237
1238Alex Morcos [5:49 PM] 
1239@btcdrak: I think my point is that some of the support behind XT/Classic is upset that “Core" wouldn’t do something that “Core” told them was perfectly reasonable.  When in fact they haven’t spoken to Core, they’ve only spoken to people who used to be part of Core who have a bit of a different take on things.
1240
1241BtcDrak [5:49 PM] 
1242Well I'll enjoy the logs at bitcoincore.slackarchive.io/general/, I should go to bed. Exciting things in a few hours.
12433 1 2  
1244
1245brg444 [5:49 PM] 
1246@windjc: stay away then :wink:
1247
1248Bruce Fenton [5:49 PM] 
1249@morcos: your description exactly mirrors much of core who I've spoken with
1250
1251bdny [5:50 PM] 
1252@windjc: Given our discussion last night it would seem that you coming in here and making comments like that is the complete opposite of what I would expect if you really believe what you said about emotional decision making and trying to rise above.
12531 2  
1254
1255buddhamangler [5:50 PM] 
1256@eragmus: I think its a nice thought, but unfortunately the world is not deterministic
1257
1258windjc [5:50 PM] 
1259@bdny I don't have to condone out of control arrogance
1260
1261Alex Morcos [5:50 PM] 
1262To be clear, I don’t think everything is all Jeff and Gavin’s fault.  But I think if they could recognize that they did have a role in getting us to where we are now, maybe they could help use their influence to get us out of this place.
12636  
1264
1265bdny [5:51 PM] 
1266@windjc: Coming in here and laying your judgment does not add value to the conversation. No one said anything about condoning.(edited)
1267
1268Matt Corallo [5:51 PM] 
1269@morcos: lets be honest, EVERYONE is at fault
12704  
1271
1272[5:52] 
1273@morcos: the most important thing we can all do now is admit we are all at fault and try to bury the hatchet
12749  
1275
1276[5:52] 
1277@morcos: I tried this with @jgarzik and failed :disappointed:
1278
1279Alex Morcos [5:52 PM] 
1280you just didn’t succeed yet
1281
1282BtcDrak [5:53 PM] 
1283@morcos: try standing in a circle and hugging trees. It would be more effective than trying to reason with Jeff
12841  
1285
1286p2phash [5:53 PM] 
1287@bluematt: fixing personal issues takes time. Why do you say you failed?'
1288
1289BtcDrak [5:54 PM] 
1290@p2phash: it's nothing to do with personal issue. It's to do with Mike, Jeff and Gavin going out of their way to make trouble. including going in secret to tell what what to industry and plan(edited)
1291
1292p2phash [5:54 PM] 
1293@btcdrak: oh, that is helping
1294
1295[5:54] 
1296yeah
1297
1298aknix [5:54 PM] 
1299We are @jgarzik peers, and we are all just trying to help, hopefully he realizes that. No one is kicking anyone out or ostricsizing.  I think maybe the biggest flaw and breakdown in bitcoin is the lack of the human component in development and developmental discussions.(edited)
1300
1301buddhamangler [5:55 PM] 
1302@btcdrak: Does that include adam feverishly trying to convince miners not to move?
13031  
1304
1305Trace Mayer [5:55 PM] 
1306@bluematt: I am not so sure. Core's lack of communication is not Core's problem though; it is the problem of people who want to hear what Core has to say. Sure, Core could have been more tactical or strategic but that is not 'fault'. If Core has any 'fault' it is giving the market the mistaken impression that Gavin or Garzik have significant influence or representation of Core (by virtue of their commit access to the project) when they do not in fact have that influence or representation. This would be a case of the market's reasonable reliance on an agent who has only apparent and not actual authority. And that would be a fault of Core's to allow or enable that apparent authority to continue when there is no actual authority.
1307
1308mrhodl [5:55 PM] 
1309@buddhamangler: Wasn't jeff in china doing the same thing?
1310
1311Alex Morcos [5:55 PM] 
1312@brucefenton is trying to do the right thing by getting people together to talk.  But I think the fact that major industry leaders aren’t attending shows we haven’t gotten to the root of the problem yet.  If you’re going to be a VC and funds $10M’s in bitcoin companies or if you are going to be a CEO building a company on Bitcoin, I’m sorry, but you have to take the time to really understand what Bitcoin is all about.
13133  
1314
1315buddhamangler [5:56 PM] 
1316@mrhodl: I didn'
1317
1318[5:56] 
1319@mrhodl: I didn't exclaim anything, i was just pointing out the pot calling the kettle black there
1320
1321alp [5:56 PM] 
1322@morcos: And when you make an assumption about what Bitcoin is about, you don't get to wave your hands and scream because it doesn't do what you thought.
13231  
1324
1325aknix [5:57 PM] 
1326@mrhodl: He was!
1327
1328BtcDrak [5:57 PM] 
1329@p2phash: you are foolish if you cant listen to the genesis of this bullcrap. If you dont have the stomach to hear the truth, you should do something else. Ignoring the truth and getting all hippy "we should all just hold hands and get along" is keeping your head in the clouds. How can you expect harmony with people like Jeff regularly taking to public and making jibes at everyone or spreading disinformation, or travelling in secret and misrepresenting core develoipment? You know at Scaling Bitcoin Jeff was outright lying to miners about segwit as a simple example.
1330
1331sambiohazard [5:57 PM] 
1332@btcdrak: can i ask you about VIA here?
1333
1334buddhamangler [5:57 PM] 
1335lol
1336
1337Jeff Garzik [5:57 PM] 
1338horse manure
13392 1  
1340
1341BtcDrak [5:58 PM] 
1342@jgarzik: oh finally you're willing to speak huh?
1343
1344buddhamangler [5:58 PM] 
1345@btcdrak: calling your bullshit
13462 1  
1347
1348Jeff Garzik [5:58 PM] 
1349We have different evaluations of risk in various levels of the stack does not equate to lying.
1350
1351p2phash [5:58 PM] 
1352@btcdrak: the jibes I see are right here, practically 24/7. When no one is around the "regulars" here just bash left and right. Been watching a bit. So please don't talk about jibes, and bullcrap. So much of it here.(edited)
1353
1354Alex Morcos [5:58 PM] 
1355@tracemayer: I actually think it’s more industry’s fault for not properly understanding the value of the expertise in core developers and building some structure around them to learn from that expertise and help figure out how to safely evolve the protocol.  If they had realized the value more earlier, we could have done so much by now.  It was never going to be the expertise of Core developers to figure out how to communicate well.  People who are good at that should have helped, but in a supportive way.
13561  
1357
1358sambiohazard [5:59 PM] 
1359Can you prove yuor argument by implementing it in VIA, then they have to accept it. @btcdrak
1360
1361BtcDrak [5:59 PM] 
1362@jgarzik: no, you were outright ​_lying_​ about segwit security to miners at SB HK.
1363
1364Jeff Garzik [5:59 PM] 
1365Fact is, there is continued stalling on even planning for a hard fork — while at the same time claiming that a hard fork is on the roadmap, yet it takes a long time to plan.
1366
1367Trace Mayer [5:59 PM] 
1368@morcos: The duty is on industry to learn from the Core developers or to build their own implementations. It is not Core developer's duty to educate industry.
13693 2  
1370
1371eragmus [5:59 PM] 
1372@morcos: My opinion of @jgarzik is he is a smart guy, and has a well-rounded personality. I can see no logical reason why he changed his tune from: http://bitcoincore.svbtle.com/jeff-garzik-bitcoin-is-a-settlement-system-by-design … to: "bitcoin is being hot-wired for settlement", via a joint post with Gavin. Maybe industry pressure, maybe his startup Bloq, maybe something else? Point is… maybe there is hope with him. —— But, when it comes to Gavin, it seems hopeless to expect anything from him, since his views have been clear for many years now… see these example quotes from the years: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/e07eb742e8c0fe781f0d — Gavin flat out does not care about centralization's threat, nor does he respect security.
1373 
1374Highlights from Bitcoin Core on Svbtle
1375[Feb 12, 2015] Jeff Garzik: “Bitcoin is a settlement system, by design.”
1376Repeating past statements, it is acknowledged that Peter’s scorched earth replace-by-fee proposal is aptly named, and would be widely anti-social on the current network. At a high level, we can see that this thread is contentious because this... | Highlights from Bitcoin Core | Svbtle
1377
1378Francis Pouliot [6:00 PM] 
1379@jgarzik got to admit you're right about mixed messages regarding the hard fork
1380
1381aknix [6:00 PM] 
1382@eragmus: Money would seem to me like the only motivator for that change....
1383
1384Jeff Garzik [6:01 PM] 
1385@eragmus: It is clear if you read beyond the headline...
1386
1387aknix [6:01 PM] 
1388@jgarzik: You changed your stance quite a bit, it is evident in your twitter for example...
1389
1390Jeff Garzik [6:01 PM] 
1391@eragmus: Those posts outline that blockchain tech cannot scale infinitely, but there is plenty of evidence that 2M is attainable
1392
1393[6:02] 
1394@eragmus: and it is in that context
1395
1396eragmus [6:02 PM] 
1397@jgarzik: But the headline is so blatantly deceptive… that it almost discredits the rest? // And Core agrees that 2x is attainable. That was never in dispute, right? SegWit SF scales to 1.8x if wallets adopt it, too. And there is proof that it’s not difficult for wallets to update, via: https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/
1398Bitcoin Core
1399Segregated Witness Support
1400The following is a list of companies and projects which have stated they will support segregated witness.
1401
1402superquick [6:03 PM] 
1403jgarzik is consistent, he wants the miners to be in charge of the block limit
1404
1405eragmus [6:03 PM] 
1406@jgarzik: There are lot of arguments I can make why SegWit SF is superior to 2MB HF.
1407
1408Alex Morcos [6:03 PM] 
1409ok, i’m calling it a night as well…   in the end, the biggest problem here is all the work that isn’t happening, both in industry and in protocol development.  Everytime we see something like the release of Classic with Jeff and Gavin as the official development team, it really sets back the ability to start working together again.  I’m sorry to say that, but its true.
14102 3  
1411
1412Trace Mayer [6:03 PM] 
1413@morcos: Good night, keep up the good work!
1414
1415Luke-Jr [6:03 PM] 
1416jgarzik: spending time planning a hardfork delays block size increase. which is more important to you right now?
1417
1418brg444 [6:03 PM] 
1419Classic is the only thing keeping Bitcoin down at the moment
1420
1421p2phash [6:03 PM] 
1422@eragmus: do you think every bitcoin wallet should be backed by their own full node? What are your thoughts on node distribution and node to wallet make up? Is running a node in my basement fundamentally different than running a vps node?(edited)
1423
1424Francis Pouliot [6:04 PM] 
1425Maybe core should publish the exact same roadmap, call it "Bitcoin Original", advertise it as a hard fork after SegWit(edited)
1426
1427Luke-Jr [6:04 PM] 
1428francispouliot: ?
1429
1430brg444 [6:05 PM] 
1431“Our vision of New Money includes Bitcoin,” a PayPal spokeswoman said in an email on Wednesday. “But to avoid customer confusion, we asked them for the video to be removed.”
1432
1433http://www.wsj.com/articles/paypal-puts-a-stop-to-bitcoin-inspired-ad-parody-1455150080
1434
1435Interesting
1436WSJ
1437PayPal Puts a Stop to Bitcoin-Inspired Ad Parody
1438PayPal Holdings this week blocked a parody of its “New Money” Super Bowl ad that swapped in “bitcoin” as the future of money. (25KB)
1439
1440Francis Pouliot [6:05 PM] 
1441it's a joke - people don't understand / won't hear that 2MB fork is part of the Core Roadmap
1442
1443Bruce Fenton [6:05 PM] 
1444@morcos: we've got Gavin, Back, Garzik, Corallo, Back, Todd, Luke Jr, Lombrozo in a room with 30+ venture backed CEOs, reps of 8 or so wallets,  holders of of over a million coins and 85% of the hashing power - not to mention people like Patrick Byrne, Fidelity and various early adopters who are pretty smart people - all in a private location --- what better could we realistically have?   Has there been a better attended event?
1445
1446Don't let the perfect be be enemy of the great.
1447
1448Some CEOs just don't care and won't attend.  There will always be schedule issues.  IMHO this event is a better use of a weekend than catching up on emails and watching Netflix at home or even hanging out on Slack.(edited)
1449
1450[6:05] 
1451:)
1452
1453sambiohazard [6:05 PM] 
1454where'd he go?
1455
1456superquick [6:05 PM] 
1457we were lucky we heard this much from jgarzik he hardly ever speaks
14581  
1459
1460Nicolas "btchip" Bacca [6:06 PM] 
1461apparently deployment in production can be quick - https://mobile.twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/697577379007324160
1462Brian Armstrong @brian_armstrong
1463Coinbase is now running BitcoinClassic!  Let's help Bitcoin scale. Please download and run your own copy https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/releases/tag/v0.11.2.cl1
1464Today at 4:26 PM
1465
1466p2phash [6:06 PM] 
1467@superquick: brave to jump in here with the sharks :simple_smile:
1468
1469Jeff Garzik [6:06 PM] 
1470I came here trying to chat and engage
14715  
1472
1473[6:06] 
1474I remain hopeful
1475
1476mrhodl [6:06 PM] 
1477l0l
1478
1479[6:06] 
1480:popcorn:
1481
1482superquick [6:06 PM] 
1483jgarzik: do you have any thoughts on 75% activation, 28 days later?
1484
1485sambiohazard [6:07 PM] 
1486btcdrak VIA needs you :disappointed:
1487
1488Jeff Garzik [6:07 PM] 
1489@superquick: Yes: 28 days too short, https://medium.com/@jgarzik/bitcoin-upgrade-governance-hard-forks-and-segregated-witness-942885e0ce58#.wb4n8q7wn(edited)
1490
1491sambiohazard [6:07 PM] 
1492BTW what do you guys think of Decred that just launched?
1493
1494superquick [6:08 PM] 
1495jgarzik: the timing seems inconsistent with what Satoshi envisioned for a hard fork and inconsistent with what Gavin originally said for a hard fork and inconsistent with normal software practices for breaking compatibility
1496
1497Jeff Garzik [6:09 PM] 
1498@superquick: That’s definitely part of engaging — trying to get hard answers to those numbers
1499
1500superquick [6:09 PM] 
1501jgarzik: many wallet authors have asked for segwit soft fork first as well
1502
1503BtcDrak [6:09 PM] 
1504@jgarzik: so if 28 days is too short, can you explain why you assisted Classic in packaging their product? I mean, if you agree it's too short, dangerously so, then why participate at all?
1505
1506Francis Pouliot [6:10 PM] 
1507@jgarzik Gavin's post justifying 75% was not totally convincing too. Do you agree with that number?
1508
1509sambiohazard [6:10 PM] 
1510Decred agrees with 66%
1511
1512superquick [6:10 PM] 
1513btcdrak: jgarzik says that is an ok time for an urgent hard fork
1514
1515windjc [6:11 PM] 
1516@jgarzik: thank you for trying to engage calmly with the community. We need more of this from you
15171  
1518
1519brg444 [6:11 PM] 
1520@jgarzik: Don't you think engaging ​*before*​ baking it into the code would've been the more reasonable approach?
1521
1522superquick [6:11 PM] 
1523"28 days is more like an emergency update than planned update."
1524
1525Jeff Garzik [6:11 PM] 
1526@superquick: A few people got confused on that score, so I tried to revise a bit
1527
1528[6:11] 
1529yeah
1530
1531[6:11] 
1532keyword: emergency
1533
1534BtcDrak [6:11 PM] 
1535where is the emergency?
1536
1537superquick [6:11 PM] 
1538i think jgarzik is saying that it doesn't feel like an emergency
1539
1540BtcDrak [6:12 PM] 
1541for me emergency is the network is broken and people are losing money right now. THat's an emergency.
1542
1543superquick [6:12 PM] 
1544next block fee is $0.04 so there is no fee event just yet
1545
1546windjc [6:12 PM] 
1547@jgarzik: many of us agree that 3-6 months sounds reasonable
1548
1549sambiohazard [6:12 PM] 
1550to those who want bitcoin to became global payments network its an emergency
1551
1552Francis Pouliot [6:12 PM] 
1553paypal is a global payment network
1554
1555brg444 [6:13 PM] 
1556@sambiohazard: sure, a 1MB increase is going to turn Bitcoin into a global payments network by tomorrow
15571  
1558
1559windjc [6:13 PM] 
1560The point is to not have a fee event first(edited)
1561
1562[6:13] 
1563*not
1564
1565brg444 [6:13 PM] 
1566The fee event meme is frankly irritating, there is no such thing
1567
1568superquick [6:13 PM] 
1569jgarzik: do you think there should ever come a day when the economic policy does change and fees go up, because the alternative is increased centralization?(edited)
1570
1571Jeff Garzik [6:13 PM] 
1572Correct @superquick.   Hard forks need planning and community engagement, plenty of prep time.  ​_Not_​ claiming an emergency.  ​_Am_​ claiming that hard forks are hard, and we need to start planning and coding for that now.
1573
1574windjc [6:13 PM] 
1575Yet
1576
1577hostfat [6:13 PM] 
1578the point is to avoid at ANY costs the virtual fee market
1579
1580sambiohazard [6:13 PM] 
1581they want to be tor, visa, paypal all of it, cuz it make money, finanacial privacy makes no money
1582
1583superquick [6:14 PM] 
1584the logic of 28 days might make more sense if we had already hit the "fee event" and we needed to immediately stop it
1585
1586brg444 [6:14 PM] 
1587@hostfat: this is not a viable solution. perpetually subsidizing transactions leads to the death of the Bitcoin security model
15882  
1589
1590windjc [6:14 PM] 
1591We need to challenge all limits of what we think Bitcoin can't do
1592
1593alp [6:14 PM] 
1594brg444: Miners can create a fee market any time they want.
15952  
1596
1597hostfat [6:14 PM] 
1598miners will never work for free, so your logic doesn't work
1599
1600alp [6:14 PM] 
1601They can soft fork a block limit :simple_smile:
1602
1603sambiohazard [6:15 PM] 
1604fuck security, how will VC get there money back
1605
1606Francis Pouliot [6:15 PM] 
1607​*troll identified*​
1608
1609brg444 [6:15 PM] 
1610@sambiohazard: gold, the hallmark of financial privacy for centuries, is worth more than VISA, Paypal and every other payment networks combined
1611
1612sambiohazard [6:15 PM] 
1613lol
1614
1615windjc [6:15 PM] 
1616Solutions don't exist until they are found. Saying Bitcoin can't do something just slows everything down
16171  
1618
1619[6:16] 
1620It's not healthy to have dev majority with a "limits" mindset
1621
1622sambiohazard [6:16 PM] 
1623forcing things on people when it breaks the most important feature which no other thing provides is oppresion
1624
1625Francis Pouliot [6:16 PM] 
1626its definitely healthy to stay within one's limits
1627
1628hostfat [6:16 PM] 
1629@brg444 a faster gold will be just better, even better then bitcoin ...
1630
1631superquick [6:16 PM] 
1632it's concerning to me that no Core nodes seem to be switching to Classic, the only Classic nodes appearing on the network are new arrivals
1633
1634Luke-Jr [6:16 PM] 
1635superquick: concerning how?
1636
1637arron [6:16 PM] 
1638Can I prevent Classic nodes from connecting to my node ?
1639
1640windjc [6:16 PM] 
1641@francispouliot: not really all the time
1642
1643alp [6:17 PM] 
1644superquick: gavin said there would be a sybil attack
1645
1646Francis Pouliot [6:17 PM] 
1647Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can pay a few bucks to add IPs to ONE node and make it look like multiple nodes, correct?
1648
1649superquick [6:17 PM] 
1650it looks like there is huge silent majority of people who want to maintain the status quo, if for no better reason than they don't know otherwise
1651
1652Francis Pouliot [6:17 PM] 
1653@windjc my personal opinion is that altcoins and sidechains are best for experimentations
1654
1655chek2fire [6:17 PM] 
1656@arron i like also to do this. Is there any way to block classic nodes?
1657
1658brg444 [6:17 PM] 
1659@hostfat: for Bitcoin to be a faster gold it needs to be fungible first
1660
1661superquick [6:17 PM] 
1662I don't like the idea that the people on the fringes are the ones who decide for the majority
1663
1664hostfat [6:18 PM] 
1665yep, but it still need to not lose on any sides
1666
1667windjc [6:18 PM] 
1668@francispouliot: I disagree. They don't have network effect data so they aren't very good for testing
1669
1670p2phash [6:18 PM] 
1671@alp I thought he mentioned trying to prevent a sybil attack, which in turn was taken as him trying to start one. Could just be me though.
1672
1673alp [6:18 PM] 
1674yeah, he mentioned it, but he is starting one.
1675
1676[6:18] 
1677the idea is to disconnect as many core nodes as possible
1678
1679superquick [6:18 PM] 
1680classic nodes should be automatically banned by Core nodes as soon as they start relaying invalid blocks
16811  
1682
1683hostfat [6:18 PM] 
1684fungibility and liquidity
1685
1686brg444 [6:18 PM] 
1687@hostfat: Bitcoin needs to compete using its strength. Payment processing isn't one of these
1688
1689windjc [6:18 PM] 
1690The opposition to Core is bigger than most people on here seem to want to acknowledge honestly
1691
1692alp [6:18 PM] 
1693He's pissing in your  boots and telling you its raining.
1694
1695Luke-Jr [6:19 PM] 
1696Classic nodes are automatically blocked when they fork off
1697
1698[6:19] 
1699there's no reliable way to detect them until then
1700
1701[6:19] 
1702and using unreliable ways just hurts everyone
1703
1704brg444 [6:19 PM] 
1705@windjc: That's what we keep hearing since the days of XT, look how that turned out...
1706
1707hostfat [6:19 PM] 
1708it can be, it must try, there is space to be it while it doesn't lose on other sides(edited)
1709
1710alp [6:19 PM] 
1711If something advertises as classic, might as well just boot them then
1712
1713sambiohazard [6:19 PM] 
1714why is lower fee or more transactions more important than financial privacy or moving value across borders?
1715
1716brg444 [6:19 PM] 
1717it's not :simple_smile:
17181  
1719
1720windjc [6:19 PM] 
1721@brg444: if everyone here was so confident they wouldn't be so up in arms
1722
1723Luke-Jr [6:19 PM] 
1724alp: then you just incentivise them to lie
1725
1726hostfat [6:19 PM] 
1727because something else will take its place
1728
1729p2phash [6:20 PM] 
1730@alp can't core and classic nodes communicate? Tell me more about that.
1731
1732alp [6:20 PM] 
1733what if them lying isn;t a bad thing :simple_smile:
1734
1735brg444 [6:20 PM] 
1736@windjc: we aren't up in arms so much. all of us I imagine are pretty comfortable that Classic is never going to amount to much of anything. the main issue is it's delaying everyone's productivity and undermining the market trust
1737
1738windjc [6:20 PM] 
1739@luke-jr: you are more likely to be forked off than most since you are on the more extreme fringe than most
1740
1741hostfat [6:20 PM] 
1742@p2phash they can while they are on the same chain, as now
1743
1744arron [6:20 PM] 
1745Classic nodes are just AWS instances.   /r/btc thinks they can keep the uptrend going indifferently...   Can't wait for it to plateau and then the subsequent crying when their node count comes crashing down...  it's all an illusion.
1746
1747alp [6:20 PM] 
1748they can communicate, but why would you want to talk to them?
1749
1750laroberts [6:20 PM] 
1751joined #general
1752
1753windjc [6:21 PM] 
1754@brg444: ok
1755
1756sambiohazard [6:21 PM] 
1757i can finally send money to people 1000s of miles away from me w/o doxxing myself. is that not enough?
1758
1759alp [6:21 PM] 
1760windjc: you should consider learning how bitcoin works.
1761
1762mrhodl [6:21 PM] 
1763@sambiohazard: For VCs, no.
1764
1765windjc [6:21 PM] 
1766@alp ;)
1767
1768p2phash [6:21 PM] 
1769@alp just trying to understand the sybil attack argument. Its a proposed hardfork that is being tried. If the chain splits and people stay on smaller chain, well, yes that is a problem. Don't stay on smaller chain.
1770
1771Luke-Jr [6:21 PM] 
1772alp: lying is always a bad thing