Frankly, I don't see how the hell he may find an alternative to the full nodes system validating all the transactions. How would be the chosen the good and the bad ones ?

Because there is no better solution than the nodes we have now. I see a node as some sort of vote. With that "vote" I can show everyone else what client I am supporting, and so can other people. I have 2 nodes running on VPS'es, and will continue to do so. Other than that, I block/ban nodes being from the other "parties" such as classic.

And expect another round of altcoin pumping as the ecosystem becomes just like Wall St. with all the fake news and fake infighting to back the price fluctuations.

 

MySpace indeed.

The whole thing.

This isnt the first time the core of bitcoin developement hasnt agree, we had already  a problem with them, and who paid the bill were bitcoin, because people need stabillity, if Gavin doesnt like the way bitcoin is advancing just left the project, making a thread saying it will end as myspace or anything else looks like a child crying because they arent supporting him.

Satoshi expected the block size to be limited to 1MB for all time, that's why it is a consensus rule. It couldn't be changed even if Gregory wanted it to.

What does this mean for us?

Well, as the throughput of Bitcoin is about on par with a medium sized shopping centre... demand for the use of cryptocurrency will spread to other networks, like Monero (XMR), which has an adaptive blocksize.

In a sense, satoshi was brilliant to set 1MB in stone to encourage increased demand to move to other networks. It widens the attack surface, and now we will be decentralized because if Bitcoin remains fairly irrelevant due to its crippled capacity, thousands of other networks will rise to take its place.

Incredible guy, that satoshi, sacrificing his own potential personal wealth to keep our rasb pi nodes on costa rican dialup safe n sound.

I think Gavin does not need a blockchain for his idea of a payment platform. Maybe what he needs really is a database? Or some sort of private blockchain where he can do whatever he wants in it. But that defeats the purpose of why a blockchain is a "blockchain".

Anyhow maybe bitcoin is not where he is supposed to be and maybe he will fit right in with other development teams like the one in Ripple.

Bitcoin isn`t "the Myspace of cryptocurrencies" bitcoin is "the facebook".

Btc is failing to scale because of people like this one.

I don`t care about his "theory".

Popular opinion is bitcoin is too big to fail or too big to become irrelevant, well, plenty of bigger enterprises have failed or are now irrelevant, myspace is a good example.

Concerns expressed by Gavin are shared amongst many of us for at least a couple years now, I'm of the opinion we've already passed the no return line some time ago, as people cannot build on the bitcoin network and many have been pushed out and had to build their own blockchains or build in some other blockchain, this is reflected on the current low value and the occasional pump without the possibility for growth.

I honestly belive that the current nodes are working absolutly fine and if geven tryed to replace or wants to experiment something new then first should do it in a demo mode it will save his and our time

Bad business models fail. Good businesses adapt, others will go bankrupt. Why didn't we change the consensus rules to encourage the Satoshi Dice model? Why should we change them for the likes of Coinbase and Bitpay? They are here to make money, and may be willing to do so at the cost of long term network health. What matters are p2p users. In the long term, sustainable business models will survive.