3 ms·

> due to block size disagreements There were no block size disagreements going on when gavin wound down his involvement-- but now you've moved from "blockstrea

by nullc 6y ago

> due to block size disagreements There were no block size disagreements going on when gavin wound down his involvement-- but now you've moved from "blockstream" to block size disagreements. Regardless of the history, -- bullet dodged there considering what eventually happened. > Mike Hearn are the big ones yeah The sum total of hearn's contributions to Bitcoin core were a dozen commits which were mostly one line string changes. To have left he would have had to have started rather than a couple drive-by tweaks. https://web.archive.org/web/20170809023814if_/http://s12.postimg.org/cqy6boot9/bitcoin_core_analysis.png https://web.archive.org/web/20170809023814if_/http://s12.pos... > the developers that cared about bitcoin have left Just repeating it doesn't make it true. Pretty ironic to say you rarely "hear anything new coming from the bitcoin camp, no development discussion" on a thread exactly about such a thing. I dunno what if it's you or I that inhabit a weird alternative reality, but one of us does because there is constant exciting Bitcoin news... and sure, a lot of memes too, they're often pretty funny even if a bit much. But over time the character of the news will become different as Bitcoin becomes more ubiquitous.

ur-whale 6y ago
> exciting Bitcoin news I think you're being disingenuous. We're talking about the speed and volume of new tech being added to the Bitcoin ecosystem, not just about the fact that one such feature is (trying) to be added. The reality is: if you compare the speed at which and the amount of new stuff being built in and atop the ethereum ecosystem to the innovation in the Bitcoin ecosystem, the difference is absolutely striking. And BTW, IIRC, Vitalik walked away from Bitcoin and went on to create ETH for exactly the reasons outlined by the GP: a power grab by a small clique of fanatics that led to stagnation.
- dmaharding 6y ago
  > The reality is: if you compare the speed at which and the amount of new stuff being built in and atop the ethereum ecosystem to the innovation in the Bitcoin ecosystem, the difference is absolutely striking. Here's a list of technical developments related to Bitcoin (including LN) grouped by month and topic as covered by a single publication over the past three years: https://bitcoinops.org/en/topic-dates/ https://bitcoinops.org/en/topic-dates/ I'd be interested in seeing a similar such list for Ethereum or any other cryptocurrency that shows a similar pace of development. Edit: removed paragraph based on accidental misattribution.
  - ur-whale 6y ago
    > Your earlier post seemed to indicate that you only scan "the big crypto subreddits" Nice and well-formed ad hominem, but before proceeding, I'd suggest re-reading the name of the user that made the claim about crypto sub-reddits.
    - nullc 6y ago
      Okay, so he's mistaken about the author of the comment but how is > Your earlier post seemed to indicate that you only scan "the big crypto subreddits" for news; may I suggest that maybe popular subreddits aren't the best place for news about research and development. In any way an ad hominem? Check out his link, it stands on its own. If you're surprised about that level of activity it might just be that you're not reading the places where that sort of thing is discussed. But there is nothing bad or insulting about that suggestion.
      - ur-whale 6y ago
        Neither he or you have any idea where I gather information on cryptos. You are both essentially speculating and accusing me of being ill-informed without providing a shred of evidence. [EDIT]: And even if you were correct, you're both attacking the messenger and not the message. That pretty much fits my definition of an ad-hominem. I claim (I might be wrong, please provide counter-evidence) that there is more innovation in the Ethereum ecosystem than in the Bitcoin ecosystem. As proof, I offer, however misguided these efforts might be (you can't innovate if you don't try "silly" things), sorted by more to less silly: - cryptokitties - NFTs - DeFi - scalability via layer 2 solutions - scalability via sharding - actually working smart contracts instead of a vague promise of their eventual feasibility based on a yet-to-be-deployed piece of infrastructure - a concerted effort to move to PoS - ongoing work on integrating ZK (zcash, beam, grin, monero)-type transactions. Many of these things don't seem to have an equivalent in the Bitcoin space (except L2 scaling). The list provided by the GP (https://bitcoinops.org/en/topic-dates/ https://bitcoinops.org/en/topic-dates/) IMO very much falls in the "polishing the turd" category: many tiny improvements that very few people care about and show the disconnect between Bitcoin development and what the market wants. The fact is : ethereum is here, it has real smart contract, it is well on its way to have PoS, and it's slowly gaining market shares over Bitcoin because they move faster. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Bitcoin and its ecosystem, but the pace at which innovation occurs in there is probably my number one peeve about it: if Bitcoin doesn't get its act together it will get the rug pulled from under it by Ethereum.
- nullc 6y ago
  > And BTW, IIRC, Vitalik walked away from Bitcoin and went on to create ETH for exactly the reasons outlined by the GP: You've been fed a marketing pitch that doesn't have a lot to do with reality. The only 'bitcoin development' Vitalik did before creating eth was running an investment scam for developing "quantum miners" -- no joke. What you were led to believe here is simply false, a convenient excuse for an embarrassingly massive premine.

by nullc 6y ago

ur-whale 6y ago

> exciting Bitcoin news I think you're being disingenuous. We're talking about the speed and volume of new tech being added to the Bitcoin ecosystem, not just about the fact that one such feature is (trying) to be added. The reality is: if you compare the speed at which and the amount of new stuff being built in and atop the ethereum ecosystem to the innovation in the Bitcoin ecosystem, the difference is absolutely striking. And BTW, IIRC, Vitalik walked away from Bitcoin and went on to create ETH for exactly the reasons outlined by the GP: a power grab by a small clique of fanatics that led to stagnation.

dmaharding 6y ago
> The reality is: if you compare the speed at which and the amount of new stuff being built in and atop the ethereum ecosystem to the innovation in the Bitcoin ecosystem, the difference is absolutely striking. Here's a list of technical developments related to Bitcoin (including LN) grouped by month and topic as covered by a single publication over the past three years: https://bitcoinops.org/en/topic-dates/ https://bitcoinops.org/en/topic-dates/ I'd be interested in seeing a similar such list for Ethereum or any other cryptocurrency that shows a similar pace of development. Edit: removed paragraph based on accidental misattribution.
- ur-whale 6y ago
  > Your earlier post seemed to indicate that you only scan "the big crypto subreddits" Nice and well-formed ad hominem, but before proceeding, I'd suggest re-reading the name of the user that made the claim about crypto sub-reddits.
  - nullc 6y ago
    Okay, so he's mistaken about the author of the comment but how is > Your earlier post seemed to indicate that you only scan "the big crypto subreddits" for news; may I suggest that maybe popular subreddits aren't the best place for news about research and development. In any way an ad hominem? Check out his link, it stands on its own. If you're surprised about that level of activity it might just be that you're not reading the places where that sort of thing is discussed. But there is nothing bad or insulting about that suggestion.
    - ur-whale 6y ago
      Neither he or you have any idea where I gather information on cryptos. You are both essentially speculating and accusing me of being ill-informed without providing a shred of evidence. [EDIT]: And even if you were correct, you're both attacking the messenger and not the message. That pretty much fits my definition of an ad-hominem. I claim (I might be wrong, please provide counter-evidence) that there is more innovation in the Ethereum ecosystem than in the Bitcoin ecosystem. As proof, I offer, however misguided these efforts might be (you can't innovate if you don't try "silly" things), sorted by more to less silly: - cryptokitties - NFTs - DeFi - scalability via layer 2 solutions - scalability via sharding - actually working smart contracts instead of a vague promise of their eventual feasibility based on a yet-to-be-deployed piece of infrastructure - a concerted effort to move to PoS - ongoing work on integrating ZK (zcash, beam, grin, monero)-type transactions. Many of these things don't seem to have an equivalent in the Bitcoin space (except L2 scaling). The list provided by the GP (https://bitcoinops.org/en/topic-dates/ https://bitcoinops.org/en/topic-dates/) IMO very much falls in the "polishing the turd" category: many tiny improvements that very few people care about and show the disconnect between Bitcoin development and what the market wants. The fact is : ethereum is here, it has real smart contract, it is well on its way to have PoS, and it's slowly gaining market shares over Bitcoin because they move faster. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Bitcoin and its ecosystem, but the pace at which innovation occurs in there is probably my number one peeve about it: if Bitcoin doesn't get its act together it will get the rug pulled from under it by Ethereum.
nullc 6y ago
> And BTW, IIRC, Vitalik walked away from Bitcoin and went on to create ETH for exactly the reasons outlined by the GP: You've been fed a marketing pitch that doesn't have a lot to do with reality. The only 'bitcoin development' Vitalik did before creating eth was running an investment scam for developing "quantum miners" -- no joke. What you were led to believe here is simply false, a convenient excuse for an embarrassingly massive premine.