~~



~~

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/428d0x/antonopoulus_i_support_both_core_and_classic/cz8gwo4

AA: we can everything...core, classic, litecoin

REDITOR: NO!  ONLY CORE!

 

I agree that supporting a variety of reputable digital currencies is a good thing. We need multiple blockchains to mitigate the risks of having a single point of failure in Bitcoin. It's true, Altcoins provide yet another layer of decentralization.

However, Bitcoin is also a "consumer brand" and creating three different variations is going to cause dilution, and make things extremely confusing for exchanges, merchants, pool operators, and end users.

So while part of Antonopoulos' statement is correct, in my mind there can only be one authentic Bitcoin. Supporting both Classic and Core is supporting Bitcoin's ultimate destruction.

Yes, there will be - even more.

Alternative currencies will become much like webpages are today in terms of valuations. Some will be mere parked pages, others perpetually under construction, some pornographic, all ranges of colors and flavors of complexity. And there will be a few Googles and Facebooks in the bunch as well.

When the people of this planet wake up to the Ponzi scheme that's been perpetrated upon them by the central banks for decades, they won't want US Dollars, Euros, or Yen. The people will demand digital currencies.

In a way I agree with what he is saying.... Alt coins is the breeding ground for innovation and Bitcoin can adopt and change ANY of this innovation, if it needed to do that. We

should embrace all Alt coins under one umbrella and invest in what we want. How boring will this technology be, if we only had one coin? Imagine walking into a Sweets Shop, and

you only had the option to buy one type of sweet.  Just give everyone a change to shine and everyone a option to choose. Our task must be to sort the bad from the good.

I understand his position, Andreas is a nice guy and believes in people choosing what's better for them, unfortunately most people are stupid and don't understand the details, and the big blocks and cheaper fees are way easier to sell than some technical stuff about the node decentralization aspect.

Lets just hope things turn out ok and we stay with Core.

This video explains why Core is so stubbornly sticking with 1MB blocks. This overly-complex Blockstream scheme will have far less demand if Core hard forks to 2MB.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE_elgnIw3M

Maybe these guys will eventually decide to do the right thing and, "put the needs of the wider bitcoin community ahead of their own personal Blockstream ambitions?"

Andreas is the ultimate politically correct Bitcoiner. This is just his way of not having to choose a camp and with that choice pissing someone off. There's nothing wrong with being neutral but he does it a little too much for my taste. Of course he knows all these different versions of the blocksize solution can't coexist so he's pandering to the entire community.

The's not exactly decisive, but some devs have had death threats over their support for a particular flavor of wallet, so he's playing safe and supporting both everything and nothing. He could have stayed silent, or said he was neutral, but now he can say he supported whichever wallet wins after its won.

If the people of the planet adopted the 1000 shitcoins we now have, their demand for digital cash will be fleeting imo.
The 1000 shitcoins we have are MOSTLY worse than the sick dollar.


Refreshing to see someone not trying to control every aspect of bitcoin, not trench digging, not panicking. Not thinking only his camp are right.