Bitcoin XT Discussion: "Have Wallets Refuse To Send To Known-Non-Compliant Wallets" -

Bitcoin XT Discussion: “Have Wallets Refuse To Send To Known-Non-Compliant Wallets”

Bitcoinist_The Big Debate Bitcoin XT

Trouble is brewing in the world of Bitcoin and digital currencies now that wallet provider and exchange platform Coinbase started running the Bitcoin XT client as part of their production servers. As many of you are well aware, Bitcoin XT is considered a fork of Bitcoin Core and was launched to address the upcoming block size debate issue. Another discussion has spawned forth from this decision, even though it was announced weeks ago.

Also read: Coinsilium’s London Blockchain IPO Begins

Coinbase and Bitcoin XT Could Shake Things UpBitcoinist_Bitcoin XT

Putting all egos aside for a minute – quite a monumental task in the Bitcoin world, mind you – Bitcoin XT is listed as a “hard fork” of Bitcoin. As a result, Bitcoin XT is  – technically speaking – a different currency from Bitcoin itself, and dubbed as an “altcoin”. Many people fear the battle between Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT will divide the Bitcoin community, and spell the downfall of this popular digital currency.

The question then turns to who would end up on the “right” Bitcoin blockchain. A hard fork would split the existing Bitcoin blockchain into two separate ones, creating chaos and confusion. However, the blockchain with the highest network hashrate will automatically be deemed to be the correct one.

What most people tend to overlook is how there is quite a bit of support for Bitcoin XT, even though a lot of people have taken a liking to the recent Bitcoin Core proposal to gradually increase the block size. Both solutions have their advantages and disadvantages, which makes reaching consensus quite difficult.

While this debate is still going on, a GitHub proposal has been made to remove Coinbase from the “Choose Your Wallet” page on There does not seem to be an immediate reason to do so, as there is no reason not to run either Bitcoin Core or Bitcoin XT at this time. Once we get closer to the hard fork date, however, this discussion should be reignited.

The Clash of Bitcoin EgosBitcoinist_Bitcoin XT Coercion

It goes without saying that the people in favor of this decision are not the best at aptly voicing their thoughts. One user went as far as stating how Coinbase “needs to be coerced into switching back to Bitcoin Core”. The entire concept of Bitcoin is built upon decentralization and voluntary interaction, coercion shouldn’t even cross the mind of anyone who has Bitcoin’s best interests at heart.

But if that wasn’t worrying enough, the user then continues to state:

“It is about sending a strong message. I think we may need to start an accreditation scheme for Bitcoin-consensus compliant wallets and services. Through code signing and use of multisig, we can even distinguish transactions made by compliant wallets and non-compliant wallets, and have pools not mine them (or wallets refuse to send to known-non-compliant wallets).”

Needless to say, this is a clear example of someone who either doesn’t have the best interests of Bitcoin at heart or needs to get emotions in check before given access to a keyboard. Granted, Bitcoin Core versus Bitcoin XT is an intriguing and worrying topic, but cooler heads will prevail, rather than those with pitchforks and obnoxious statements.

What are your thoughts on this proposal to remove Coinbase from the listed wallet providers on Should coercion become a factor in the Bitcoin ecosystem?

Source: GitHub

Images courtesy of Shutterstock, Bitcoin XT

Jp Buntinx

Jp Buntinx

JP Buntinx is a freelance Bitcoin writer and Bitcoin journalist for various digital currency news outlets around the world. In other notes, Jean-Pierre is an active member of the Belgian Bitcoin Association, and occasionally attends various Bitcoin Meetups in Ghent and Brussels

  • > However, the blockchain with the highest network hashrate will automatically be deemed to be the correct one.

    No wonder so many users are confused — even those who are supposed to know about that which they write appear to be confused.

    The “highest hashrate wins” is per-Bitcoin protocol. Bitcoin-XT is not compliant with the current Bitcoin protocol as implemented by Bitcoin Core. Therefore, it doesn’t matter how much hashrate is on Bitcoin XT, as long as mining continues on Bitcoin Core (original chain). Even 25% of the current hashing level is perhaps enough — though blocks take longer (40 minutes each) at that hashing level until difficulty adjust lower many weeks later.

  • Andrea van de Kleut

    I my humble opinion there should be no such thing as letting one person rule over well thought out businesses. The free market will let us know who or what will prevail. The very nution of any person saying things like this is reason enough to bar him or her from any “reindeer games”due to not having a brain.

  • Erik

    The problem is that the Democratic process is very slow, and is unable to keep up with the pace needed. And this truly bad as it slows down global adoption.

    There are better coins out there but bitcoin is in affect working as a blockade towards the adoption of better coins.

    People think because the 1mb limit has not yet been hit that, that is still not a problem. But allot of smart money has gotten out of bitcoin for the time being, and will remain out until the block-size problem has been resolved. In other words bitcoin could have been allot bigger already

  • Erik

    No that completely incorrect !!!

    Bitcoin XT does it in the following way, every new block mined via the bitcoin XT protocol, will included some sort of message/tag, that will say “hey I have been mined by an XT compatible miner/node. Now at least 75% of the previous blocks of ? time period (I forgot what time period). Must have been mined with XT compatible miners/nodes. From that point on bitcoin XT will implement the use of 8mb blocks, and actually that will only cause problems for none compatible nodes as soon as 1mb+ have been created.

  • thirdalbum

    If BIP 101-compatible blocks become the 75% majority, then it WILL be the correct network to be using. As the majority player, businesses would scramble to implement support for BIP 101 and so would most wallets.

    Non-BIP-101 systems would be a small minority and would become the “altcoin” as most economic activity would take place on the BIP-101 network.

    Calls to coerce somebody into using Bitcoin Core are typical drug-abuser/anarchist rantings.

  • It makes no matter what Bitcoin Client Coinbase is using as Coinbase is not mining bitcoin. Only bitcoin miners can vote to accept Bitcoin XT by mining blocks using XT.

  • Cyberdexter

    XT and BIP101 are a terrible idea. Doubling the block size every two years to 8,16,32,64,128,256,512,1024 MB (and so on) is not a viable solution. China doesn’t have the infrastructure to mine blocks of that size (which could actually turn out to be a good thing) and who with a sane state of mind is going to run full nodes? I’m certainly not sustaining my nodes if we were to reach 32MB blocks. The chains size would be ridiculous. So what would be the result? A centralization of the network by only a few FULL nodes being sustained by “someone”. Totally defeats the concept of a decentralised network but then again a lot of other things we’re currently witnessing do the same.

  • What is not correct?

    The original chain (where the 1MB limit is enforced) can persist even after the Bitcoin-XT/big blocks hard fork. Even if it only has 100,000 Th/s (of the current 700,000 Th/s total mining), blocks will still be mined.

    The opposite is not true. If miners that were supporting Bitcoin-XT and revert back to the original chain to such a degree that it regains the “longest chain” status, a block reorg would “disappear” the hard fork — confirmed transactions and all.

  • Erik

    If you believe having enough full nodes without a paid incentive from the bitcoin network of itself, you should take a look different coins that do offer that solution. A really good one to start is DASH with there masternode solution