4 ms·

They've managed to kick or drive out anyone who has disagreed, so yeah, the sheep that are left are not problematic and produce only the appropriate agreeable n

by ericb 9y ago

They've managed to kick or drive out anyone who has disagreed, so yeah, the sheep that are left are not problematic and produce only the appropriate agreeable noises. Garzik, Hearn, Andresen. Gone.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
nullc 9y ago
This is simply untrue, and not a claim that even any of those people have had the audacity to make. The extent of Hearn's involvement in the project was a couple commits in 2013 and 2014. Gavin-- once a fairly active and appreciated contributor-- sunsetted himself years before, primarily to focus on creating the "Bitcoin Foundation" though he later alienated himself completely after the foundation discredited itself and largely imploded with rather abusive public attacks ("should be fired") and by vigorously backing a pretty obvious scammer. But in spite the bad blood there, you don't see support for your conspiracy theories -- because there really just isn't any substance to them. If you look at active project competition most of the same people who are most active today have been most active pretty much all along: /----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Non-merge commits in Bitcoin project git | 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 All | Active months |----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |Wladimir 1 349 159 115 384 193 197 93 1491 | 73 |Pieter 0 51 227 111 170 89 156 112 916 | 75 |Matt 0 101 71 38 25 54 100 143 532 | 66 |Gavin 17 152 139 112 47 17 1 2 487 | 61 |Garzik 0 38 106 35 48 7 0 0 234 | 36 |Hearn 0 0 1 7 2 1 0 0 11 | 8 ...
- needs 9y ago
  Just for the reader awareness: this guy right here in Gregory Maxwell, a key person working for Blockstream. Nullc actively support 1Mb block to artificially cripple the blockchain and thus create artificial demand for their centralized and bank-like product: side chains and LN hubs. That's said, Gavin was driven out of Bitcoin development at the time by you and your team blocking any block size increase with dumb arguments. The interested reader will search bitcointalk for such recurring discussion. He then created Bitcoin XT wich included a voting system for miners to vote for bigger blocks. XT nodes were the target of massive Ddos attacks, and some miners were as well. XT failed because of that, despite a growing support for big blocks. From that day Gavin and Mike gave up knowing that small blockers had taken control of Bitcoin, thanks to the $70'000'000 AXA and other investors put into Blockstream. The whole Bitcoin foundation was a side project of him, and did not discredit itself. But since /r/bitcoin and bitcointalk was already controlled by people supporting small blocks, and very complaisant with Blockstream, you and Luke Jr and others used those channels to spread misinformation about this foundation run by people supporting big blocks. Today, such discussions channels are so censored that only remains (probably paid) trolls, small blockers and newcomers completely lost in this shitshow. Banned people created /r/btc and this sub is growing quite fast and sometime has more active users than /r/bitcoin does. Fun fact about you: you used the same kind of practice when you were contributing to Wikipedia. Indeed, you were aggressively blanking user page because of supposed copyright violation no one but you cared about. After dozens of complaints you received a ban but in the meantime you automated the process using a sock puppet account. Hopefully at the end they got you out, the "toxic" and "insane" "gmaxwell". Last but not least, comparing commit number does not highlight the role of each individual. Gavin was a project leader and could see the big picture. It's like saying Linus Torvalds is useless because he barely does non-merge commit. Gavin saw the small block shitshow coming from miles away, he saw the fee rising from miles away. Bitcoin is in a very poor state, blocks are full, the fee market makes no sense ans is quite unstable, sides chains were proven impractical to reach VISA level of transactions, and LN is no more than a take over of banks on Bitcoin. We are talking of fees bigger than a dollar for a classic transaction, already micro transactions are not possible anymore with Bitcoin. No wonders why Ethereum is taking the lead. Anyway I will stop here, it's a pain to write comments on mobile phones. If this interests you, have a look to the sticky post in /r/btc, it contains sourced and well written links about the current Bitcoin situation and how we got there.
  - grubles 9y ago
    It's always interesting seeing the conspiracy theorists emerge on Hackernews, of all places. Gavin himself stated he should have removed his own commit access due to inactivity. Of course, it was removed for him due to being social engineered by Craig Wright (the fake Satoshi guy evading taxes). >Banned people created /r/btc and this sub is growing quite fast No, Roger Ver uses that subreddit to advertise his commercial website - breaking reddit.com's terms of service. Also, Ethereum is in a quagmire regarding scaling. In fact, I do believe it's cheaper to spend bitcoin now than it is ether ($0.25 in gas per transaction).
    - carver 9y ago
      > Also, Ethereum is in a quagmire regarding scaling. "Quagmire" is a bit provocative, but yes scaling is a serious problem that needs to be solved. > In fact, I do believe it's cheaper to spend bitcoin now than it is ether ($0.25 in gas per transaction). This is no longer true. Since the recent fork/upgrade, it's been consistently cheap. Specifically, an ether transfer with an $0.001 fee rarely takes more than a few minutes to confirm.
    - ericb 9y ago
      Try posting in r/bitcoin favoring larger blocks. Be as logical as you want. Try disagreeing with anything about the fee market, or saying something critical about core's approach. See if your comment disappears. Hint: it usually will. You might get downvoted, but in /btc you can say what you want. I have trouble believing that leaders that rely on censorship are good stewards for censhorship resistant currency. A good indication you don't have valid criticism is when your reasoning falls back to the reddit terms of service.
      - grubles 9y ago
        Why would my comment disappear? People in r/bitcoin have been excited about bigger blocks (Segregated Witness) for nearly two years. In r/btc, if you happen to have an opposing opinion you will be scolded, insulted, and more than likely put on some targeted harassment list [0]. [0] https://np.reddit.com/r/TWHB/comments/7627ok/mass_troll_list/ https://np.reddit.com/r/TWHB/comments/7627ok/mass_troll_list...
- uncletammy 9y ago
  I don't know how you're able to look yourself in the mirror every day. You joined a project that promoted freedom of speech and liberty. Now you endorse and benefit from the disgusting censorship taking place on /r/bitcoin and the bitcointalk forum. Its censorship on a scale suitable for the history books. Instead of loudly denouncing it, youre smug about it. You're the very thing Bitcoin was made to destroy and you should be ashamed of your actions.
  - grubles 9y ago
    >Its censorship on a scale suitable for the history books. It's a subreddit. Subreddits are moderated. Stop misusing the word "censorship". Calling moderation of a subreddit "censorship" flies in the face of those actually affected by the suppression of information by their governments.
- ericb 9y ago
  Just chance that the big-block folks happen to be gone? Nice table, but LoC is way different (and less important) than being the person deciding what gets merged. Show me the merge commits table. Hearn: https://blog.plan99.net/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experiment-dabb30201f7 https://blog.plan99.net/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experi... Andresen: https://cointelegraph.com/news/andresen-proposes-block-increase-leading-to-very-important-debate https://cointelegraph.com/news/andresen-proposes-block-incre... Garzik: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-core-dev-jeff-garzik-block-size/ https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-core-dev-jeff-garzik...
e3b0c 9y ago
They sought to promote themselves to the managerial/business roles that no longer required to write much code. That makes them less involved with the development, not the other way around. I don't think the reason for them to start a business is because someone else urges them to stop writing code for bitcoin.

by ericb 9y ago

They've managed to kick or drive out anyone who has disagreed, so yeah, the sheep that are left are not problematic and produce only the appropriate agreeable noises. Garzik, Hearn, Andresen. Gone.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

nullc 9y ago

This is simply untrue, and not a claim that even any of those people have had the audacity to make. The extent of Hearn's involvement in the project was a couple commits in 2013 and 2014. Gavin-- once a fairly active and appreciated contributor-- sunsetted himself years before, primarily to focus on creating the "Bitcoin Foundation" though he later alienated himself completely after the foundation discredited itself and largely imploded with rather abusive public attacks ("should be fired") and by vigorously backing a pretty obvious scammer. But in spite the bad blood there, you don't see support for your conspiracy theories -- because there really just isn't any substance to them. If you look at active project competition most of the same people who are most active today have been most active pretty much all along: /----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Non-merge commits in Bitcoin project git | 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 All | Active months |----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |Wladimir 1 349 159 115 384 193 197 93 1491 | 73 |Pieter 0 51 227 111 170 89 156 112 916 | 75 |Matt 0 101 71 38 25 54 100 143 532 | 66 |Gavin 17 152 139 112 47 17 1 2 487 | 61 |Garzik 0 38 106 35 48 7 0 0 234 | 36 |Hearn 0 0 1 7 2 1 0 0 11 | 8 ...

needs 9y ago
Just for the reader awareness: this guy right here in Gregory Maxwell, a key person working for Blockstream. Nullc actively support 1Mb block to artificially cripple the blockchain and thus create artificial demand for their centralized and bank-like product: side chains and LN hubs. That's said, Gavin was driven out of Bitcoin development at the time by you and your team blocking any block size increase with dumb arguments. The interested reader will search bitcointalk for such recurring discussion. He then created Bitcoin XT wich included a voting system for miners to vote for bigger blocks. XT nodes were the target of massive Ddos attacks, and some miners were as well. XT failed because of that, despite a growing support for big blocks. From that day Gavin and Mike gave up knowing that small blockers had taken control of Bitcoin, thanks to the $70'000'000 AXA and other investors put into Blockstream. The whole Bitcoin foundation was a side project of him, and did not discredit itself. But since /r/bitcoin and bitcointalk was already controlled by people supporting small blocks, and very complaisant with Blockstream, you and Luke Jr and others used those channels to spread misinformation about this foundation run by people supporting big blocks. Today, such discussions channels are so censored that only remains (probably paid) trolls, small blockers and newcomers completely lost in this shitshow. Banned people created /r/btc and this sub is growing quite fast and sometime has more active users than /r/bitcoin does. Fun fact about you: you used the same kind of practice when you were contributing to Wikipedia. Indeed, you were aggressively blanking user page because of supposed copyright violation no one but you cared about. After dozens of complaints you received a ban but in the meantime you automated the process using a sock puppet account. Hopefully at the end they got you out, the "toxic" and "insane" "gmaxwell". Last but not least, comparing commit number does not highlight the role of each individual. Gavin was a project leader and could see the big picture. It's like saying Linus Torvalds is useless because he barely does non-merge commit. Gavin saw the small block shitshow coming from miles away, he saw the fee rising from miles away. Bitcoin is in a very poor state, blocks are full, the fee market makes no sense ans is quite unstable, sides chains were proven impractical to reach VISA level of transactions, and LN is no more than a take over of banks on Bitcoin. We are talking of fees bigger than a dollar for a classic transaction, already micro transactions are not possible anymore with Bitcoin. No wonders why Ethereum is taking the lead. Anyway I will stop here, it's a pain to write comments on mobile phones. If this interests you, have a look to the sticky post in /r/btc, it contains sourced and well written links about the current Bitcoin situation and how we got there.
- grubles 9y ago
  It's always interesting seeing the conspiracy theorists emerge on Hackernews, of all places. Gavin himself stated he should have removed his own commit access due to inactivity. Of course, it was removed for him due to being social engineered by Craig Wright (the fake Satoshi guy evading taxes). >Banned people created /r/btc and this sub is growing quite fast No, Roger Ver uses that subreddit to advertise his commercial website - breaking reddit.com's terms of service. Also, Ethereum is in a quagmire regarding scaling. In fact, I do believe it's cheaper to spend bitcoin now than it is ether ($0.25 in gas per transaction).
  - carver 9y ago
    > Also, Ethereum is in a quagmire regarding scaling. "Quagmire" is a bit provocative, but yes scaling is a serious problem that needs to be solved. > In fact, I do believe it's cheaper to spend bitcoin now than it is ether ($0.25 in gas per transaction). This is no longer true. Since the recent fork/upgrade, it's been consistently cheap. Specifically, an ether transfer with an $0.001 fee rarely takes more than a few minutes to confirm.
  - ericb 9y ago
    Try posting in r/bitcoin favoring larger blocks. Be as logical as you want. Try disagreeing with anything about the fee market, or saying something critical about core's approach. See if your comment disappears. Hint: it usually will. You might get downvoted, but in /btc you can say what you want. I have trouble believing that leaders that rely on censorship are good stewards for censhorship resistant currency. A good indication you don't have valid criticism is when your reasoning falls back to the reddit terms of service.
    - grubles 9y ago
      Why would my comment disappear? People in r/bitcoin have been excited about bigger blocks (Segregated Witness) for nearly two years. In r/btc, if you happen to have an opposing opinion you will be scolded, insulted, and more than likely put on some targeted harassment list [0]. [0] https://np.reddit.com/r/TWHB/comments/7627ok/mass_troll_list/ https://np.reddit.com/r/TWHB/comments/7627ok/mass_troll_list...
uncletammy 9y ago
I don't know how you're able to look yourself in the mirror every day. You joined a project that promoted freedom of speech and liberty. Now you endorse and benefit from the disgusting censorship taking place on /r/bitcoin and the bitcointalk forum. Its censorship on a scale suitable for the history books. Instead of loudly denouncing it, youre smug about it. You're the very thing Bitcoin was made to destroy and you should be ashamed of your actions.
- grubles 9y ago
  >Its censorship on a scale suitable for the history books. It's a subreddit. Subreddits are moderated. Stop misusing the word "censorship". Calling moderation of a subreddit "censorship" flies in the face of those actually affected by the suppression of information by their governments.
ericb 9y ago
Just chance that the big-block folks happen to be gone? Nice table, but LoC is way different (and less important) than being the person deciding what gets merged. Show me the merge commits table. Hearn: https://blog.plan99.net/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experiment-dabb30201f7 https://blog.plan99.net/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experi... Andresen: https://cointelegraph.com/news/andresen-proposes-block-increase-leading-to-very-important-debate https://cointelegraph.com/news/andresen-proposes-block-incre... Garzik: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-core-dev-jeff-garzik-block-size/ https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-core-dev-jeff-garzik...

e3b0c 9y ago

They sought to promote themselves to the managerial/business roles that no longer required to write much code. That makes them less involved with the development, not the other way around. I don't think the reason for them to start a business is because someone else urges them to stop writing code for bitcoin.