Published on: 2017-01-08T01:58:27+00:00
In leaked email conversations from January 7, 2017, members of the bitcoin-dev mailing list discussed concerns about the number of full nodes and the potential control of a majority of them. Eric Lombrozo reminded the group that the mailing list is for discussing new proposals and ideas, not rehashing old discussions. In July 2017, Eric Lombrozo criticized the release announcement of Bitcoin Classic version 1.2.0 for being incompatible with the current Bitcoin network and its consensus rules. He argued that it constituted a hard fork without safe activation and lacked evidence of community-wide consensus. Some members pointed out that Bitcoin Core had also implemented hard forks without activation or public debate.The discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list continued with concerns about the control of a majority of full nodes. Eric Voskuil argued that control over a majority of nodes is irrelevant because someone could easily spin up more nodes at a trivial cost. The discussion was redirected to focus on new ideas and proposals.In another email thread, Chris Priest argued that Bitcoin Classic's block format change only affects miners, not nodes or wallets. Others disagreed, stating that a decentralized system should affect everyone. The debate also touched on the potential weakness of the system if a few people control the majority of hashpower.Tom Zander sent an email stating that there is no formal activation threshold in Bitcoin Classic, but some argued that there exists an informal and practical threshold. Zander viewed Bitcoin Classic as a tool for achieving specific ends rather than a solution itself.Bitcoin Classic released version 1.2.0, which included bug fixes, performance improvements, and a decentralized block size solution. However, concerns were raised about the lack of community-wide consensus and clear labeling as a hard fork on mainnet with no safe activation. The release notes and changelog were also lacking in detail.Chris Priest stated that the fact that a few people control 75% of hashpower is a bug, not a feature.The ongoing debate between Bitcoin Classic and SegWit focused on the different approaches to block format changes. Bitcoin Classic required 75% miner adoption for activation, while Eric Lombrozo criticized its lack of compatibility with the current network and consensus rules. Tom Zander announced Bitcoin Classic version 1.2.0, highlighting the decentralized block size solution. Concerns were raised about the lack of community-wide consensus and clear labeling as a hard fork.Eric Lombrozo expressed concern over the clarity and safety of Bitcoin Classic's latest release. The release notes lacked detail, making it difficult for users to understand the changes. Tom Zander responded by stating that Bitcoin Classic is compatible with the current network and consensus rules. However, concerns remained about the lack of transparency and evidence of community-wide consensus for the hard fork.Bitcoin Classic version 1.2.0 was released with new features, bug fixes, and performance improvements. The release aimed to provide a high-quality validating node for various use cases. However, concerns were raised about the lack of community-wide consensus, clear labeling as a hard fork, and the absence of release notes and changelog in the GitHub repository.Members of the mailing list warned against posting release announcements for software that is incompatible with the current Bitcoin consensus rules. Despite this, Bitcoin Classic version 1.2.0 was released, marking a change in strategy for the company. The release included various bug fixes and performance improvements, as well as a decentralized block size solution. Bitcoin Classic aimed to provide users with a high-quality validating node and offered various projects with the beta label. More information about the release and Bitcoin Classic can be found on their GitHub page.In summary, the leaked email conversations highlighted debates about the number of full nodes and control over them. There were criticisms of Bitcoin Classic's release announcement for being incompatible with the current network and lacking community-wide consensus. Concerns were raised about the lack of transparency, clear labeling, and documentation for Bitcoin Classic's hard fork. The ongoing debate between Bitcoin Classic and SegWit centered around different approaches to block format changes. Overall, the cryptocurrency community continues to discuss these issues and the implications for the Bitcoin network.In the latest release, v1.2.0.Classic, Bitcoin users can expect a range of high-quality processes to enhance their experience. This update is designed to provide support and assistance to anyone utilizing Bitcoin. For further insight into this release and the Classic platform, a detailed video can be accessed at the following link: https://vimeo.com/192789752.The v1.2.0.Classic release aims to offer top-notch quality processes that will benefit all Bitcoin users. By implementing these improvements, the developers of Classic seek to provide enhanced functionality and efficiency for individuals involved in Bitcoin transactions. The release focuses on refining existing features and introducing new capabilities to ensure a seamless user experience.To gain a better understanding of the developments within this release, it is recommended to watch the informative video available at the provided link.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T19:24:04.901288+00:00