[2016-02-28] Bitcoin Consensus, Core vs Classic Debate & Bitcoin Price: An Interview with BTCC COO Samson Mow

[LiteCoinGuy]

Bitcoin Consensus, Core vs Classic Debate & Bitcoin Price: An Interview with B T C C COO Samson Mow

Bitcoin Roundtable Consensus, a Milestone

Mr. Mow believes that the single most important outcome of last weekend’s Bitcoin Roundtable Consensus meeting is the clarification of intent. He says that people came together and have the intent to end this debate. They’re eager to move forward. Miners, exchanges, businesses, and developers have the unified intention to move ahead. He said, “Other people are throwing things, shouting and yelling. I value the intent to come together more than just words.”

We managed [to] reach an agreement. The code will come next.

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin ... amson-mow/

[arnoudk]

Thanks for the article.

I have quickly read it on my phone, and will not attempt to write a detailed response.

I notice that Mr Mow does not address the issue of transaction delays that are happening as we speak. He offers no solution other than 'wait for core'. He admits that SegWit is not a scaling solution. He wrongly claims it does compression - it does not. It offloads some data to a different file and it needs both files to verify transactions. The sum of both files is larger with SegWit as having the tx on chain. There is only a saving if you don't want to validate transactions. But then you are not running a full node. SegWit fixes tx malleability and for that it must be applauded. It is also a small block size increase due to accounting tricks. But how much of an increase depends on the type of transactions and how many people will use SegWit transactions.

It is a much more complex change than the block size doubling. I fear it will either be rushed into production with risks, or it will be implemented after transactions become too expensive for regular purchases.

I like a lot of what the core devs do and they offer great solutions (and a few terrible ones). I too would have preferred they increased the size as they have themselves stated many times in the past that such change would be possible and risk free. Now they changed their minds and want SegWit. This would have been acceptable if it was not so urgent an issue.

The issue is urgent. Blocks are full. Transactions are delayed. Businesses are at risk of losing customers.

There is also the hidden cost. What businesses do we not see, what growth do we not see, what people are not on boarded, because of this issue? I personally am not recommending bitcoin to anyone at this time. I am not asking businesses I visit to accept it anymore. I can't explain to them why they should use it as it really is inferior, from their perspective, to cash. It is quickly becoming expensive, unreliable. On top of the volatility risk, regulatory risk and 'new is scary' mentality there is just no good reason for them to get excited.

This is a hidden cost of this debate. I wonder how many other people like me have this idea.

When (if) it scales, I will be at it in full force again.

Mr Mow does absolutely nothing to address this. All he says is 'trust core'. And that is the exact wrong statement. Trust has no place in a decentralised system like bitcoin.

Sorry for the rant!

[BitcoinXio]

I have quickly read it on my phone, and will not attempt to write a detailed response.

Says will not write a detailed response, proceeds to respond with a 430 word rant! LOL

Anyways, you're spot on with many of your points. The funny thing about btcc is that they have a something to gain by keeping the blocks small: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2015/11/prweb13095040.htm

They also are partners with Blockstream with their sidechain Fluid http://bitcoinx.io/news/articles/severa ... liquidity/

[arnoudk]

Yes I got carried away

[arnoudk]

Let me add the following great quote: "My apologies for sending you a long memo. I did not have time to write a short one."

There is a lot of truth to that.