Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is Bitcoin breaking up?

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 100 posts

Re: Is Bitcoin breaking up?

#31

Post by wemysh »

rntz wrote: post #27
wemysh wrote: post #21

The current situation reminds me a lot of the time when Firefox replaced Internet Explorer as the most popular browser. And of the time when Chrome replaced Firefox as the most popular browser. Currently there is only one Bitcoin implementation. And the developers a) refuse to implement what users want. And b) implement bloat that users dont't want. So Bitcoin will "break up" in a similar way the WWW "broke up" when…

The WWW's fundamental job is not to establish consensus. It is to communicate information. Incompatible changes to the web and incompatible changes to the bitcoin protocol have very different significance.

    different significance
Citation needed.

Its not as if somebodies coins will suddenly become worthless.

Bitcoin has a lot of actors. Users, investors, miners, exchanges, shops... And everybody will have some hassle with a fork.

Just like on the WWW where there are webmasters, webdesigners, users, browser vendors, shops... And every has some hassle with browser compatibility.

Re: Is Bitcoin breaking up?

#32

Post by Animats »

The block size issue is missing the point. The use case that matters for Bitcoin right now is converting yuan to Bitcoins, then Bitcoins to dollars. That's one way people in China get around China's exchange controls. (Note that mining in China also is used to move yuan to dollars.) Those are big transactions. They'll get through regardless of the block size.

Bitcoin as a retail currency doesn't seem to be going anywhere. Robocoin, the Bitcoin ATM company, just went bust. Lots of companies nominally accept Bitcoin, but that's just a shopping cart program talking to Coinbase or Bitpay for immediate conversion. The retail transaction volume is small. Given the volatility problem, the conversion costs, the risk of loss, and the general headaches, Bitcoin is a lose vs. paying 1% - 3% for credit card processing.

Re: Is Bitcoin breaking up?

#34

Post by rntz »

wemysh wrote: post #31
rntz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WWW's fundamental job is not to establish consensus. It is to communicate information. Incompatible changes to the web and incompatible changes to the bitcoin protocol have very different significance.

different significance Citation needed. Its not as if somebodies coins will suddenly become worthless. Bitcoin has a lot of actors. Users, investors, miners, exchanges, shops... And everybody will have some hassle with a fork. Just like on the WWW where there are webmasters, webdesigners, users, browser vendors, shops... And every has some hassle with browser compatibility.

> Its not as if somebodies coins will suddenly become worthless.

I think this is in fact the nightmare scenario that some folks are worried about.

I agree with you it's unlikely to happen, because it's in very few people's interests, but I think that the degree of danger is exactly what's causing people to try so vigorously to find ways to co-operate on this matter.

And it's true that browsers also have incentive toward compatibility. But the fact is, despite this incentive, browsers remain in many ways incompatible. And for the most part, nobody notices, because minor incompatibilities in browsers do not "fork" the web the same way an incompatibility in bitcoin protocol forks the blockchain.

Re: Is Bitcoin breaking up?

#35

Post by datapat »

wemysh wrote: post #21

The current situation reminds me a lot of the time when Firefox replaced Internet Explorer as the most popular browser. And of the time when Chrome replaced Firefox as the most popular browser. Currently there is only one Bitcoin implementation. And the developers a) refuse to implement what users want. And b) implement bloat that users dont't want. So Bitcoin will "break up" in a similar way the WWW "broke up" when…

>The current situation reminds me a lot of the time when Firefox replaced Internet Explorer as the most popular browser. And of the time when Chrome replaced Firefox as the most popular browser.

Firefox never replaced IE as the most popular browser and to this day has never been the most popular web browser.

And regardless of whether Bitcoin will break up for whatever reason, it is not analogous to the Internet or the Web; you don't do yourself any favours making such comparisons.

Re: Is Bitcoin breaking up?

#36

Post by someguydave »

pash wrote: post #9

The Bitcoin community is rapidly coalescing around an effort to increase the maximum allowed blocksize to 2MB as soon as possible. This increase is being implemented in a new client, Bitcoin Classic [0], which is a fork of Bitcoin Core that changes only the single line of code that sets the blocksize limit. Bitcoin Classic was created by Jonathan Toomim, an American miner and developer who went to China to talk direc…

> That means that Bitcoin Classic is very likely to break Core's monopoly on the protocol soon.

As far as I'm concerned, neither side 'has a monopoly' on the protocol because they haven't documented the protocol with a proper specification.

Forking Bitcoin today to 'solve' contingent future problems seems like the height of folly.

Re: Is Bitcoin breaking up?

#37

Post by Lazare »

pash wrote: post #9

The Bitcoin community is rapidly coalescing around an effort to increase the maximum allowed blocksize to 2MB as soon as possible. This increase is being implemented in a new client, Bitcoin Classic [0], which is a fork of Bitcoin Core that changes only the single line of code that sets the blocksize limit. Bitcoin Classic was created by Jonathan Toomim, an American miner and developer who went to China to talk direc…

The way XT seems to have failed yet Classic seems to be suceeding seems odd to me.

Is all it took really just to have a developer fly out to China and talk to a hanful of people? Seems like there's a lot more politics going on behind the scenes.

In any case, fixing the blocksize limit will be good, but I think the real value in Classic is breaking the perceived monopoly Core has and moving to a healthier political setup. Many people were absolutely unwilling to even talk about XT (or as you mention, allow others to talk about XT) because "OMG it's not Core!". That argument will be a lot less viable if everyone's moved to Classic.

Re: Is Bitcoin breaking up?

#38

Post by RockyMcNuts »

Animats wrote: post #32

The block size issue is missing the point. The use case that matters for Bitcoin right now is converting yuan to Bitcoins, then Bitcoins to dollars. That's one way people in China get around China's exchange controls. (Note that mining in China also is used to move yuan to dollars.) Those are big transactions. They'll get through regardless of the block size. Bitcoin as a retail currency doesn't seem to be going anyw…

> They'll get through regardless of the block size.

They'll get through until China bans it.

China has a classic trilemma : let the currency depreciate, give up on monetary stimulus, or institute capital controls.

Pick any 2 : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impossible_trinity

To date, they've shown pretty good success in controlling the Internet and Bitcoin is no different.

I don't think Bitcoin advocates have necessarily thought through the implications if countries were no longer able to control capital movements, hence pursue independent monetary and currency policies. As the euro experience has shown (also the history of the gold standard), it's not necessarily an improvement in monetary arrangements.

Re: Is Bitcoin breaking up?

#39

Post by dwaltrip »

Animats wrote: post #32

The block size issue is missing the point. The use case that matters for Bitcoin right now is converting yuan to Bitcoins, then Bitcoins to dollars. That's one way people in China get around China's exchange controls. (Note that mining in China also is used to move yuan to dollars.) Those are big transactions. They'll get through regardless of the block size. Bitcoin as a retail currency doesn't seem to be going anyw…

Bitcoin's appeal as an alternative value store only grows the longer the network continues to keep chugging along, and as the price grows less volatile (year to year). It is still very unique as an asset in terms of the properties it offers.

Re: Is Bitcoin breaking up?

#40

Post by [deleted] »

Lazare wrote: post #37
pash wrote: post #9

The Bitcoin community is rapidly coalescing around an effort to increase the maximum allowed blocksize to 2MB as soon as possible. This increase is being implemented in a new client, Bitcoin Classic [0], which is a fork of Bitcoin Core that changes only the single line of code that sets the blocksize limit. Bitcoin Classic was created by Jonathan Toomim, an American miner and developer who went to China to talk direc…

The way XT seems to have failed yet Classic seems to be suceeding seems odd to me. Is all it took really just to have a developer fly out to China and talk to a hanful of people? Seems like there's a lot more politics going on behind the scenes. In any case, fixing the blocksize limit will be good, but I think the real value in Classic is breaking the perceived monopoly Core has and moving to a healthier political se…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN