Because Compact Blocks uses the same communication ID# as XThin, a post criticizing Gaxwell and Lukejr appeared on Reddit

What's happening here ?

As we all know, there has been a debate going on here (/r/btc) over the past few days regarding the decision by Core/Blockstream to steal the XThin identity and use it for their own version of XThin, which they call Compact Blocks.

Once again, Core/Blockstream appears to be in a tough spot.

As usual, the details are technical but not too difficult to understand.

And, as usual, Blockstream CTO Greg “One Meg” Maxwell and the odd Luke-Jr were so caught up in the controversy (and driving more users and developers away from Bitcoin) that they used technical arguments that should never have been used to create more confusion and division in the community.

Meanwhile, the basic facts are simple and clear:

• The community has proposed two improved protocols for compressing blocks: XThin (extremely thin blocks) (from u/Peter__R and another non-Core/non-Blockstream developer) and Compact Blocks (from Core/Blockstream).

• XThin (extremely thin blocks) use an exact ID# and this is the first time it has been used. Using an ID# is standard procedure for these optional features and allows clients to notify each other about the optional features they are using.

• Core/Blockstream didn't like XThin. So, they called their version Compact Blocks, but the ID# they set for Compact Blocks was fundamentally the same as the ID# used by XThin. He stole XThin's ID#.

• You don't need a degree in computer science to know that each optional feature should really get its own unique ID. #ID enables these optional features to do their job better.

• Now u/nullc and u/luke-jr have started their usual technical and semantic analysis, trying to prove that all optional features can use the same ID# (if these features can prove these nodes after longer wires and more information is sent, then the more complicated process is called "handshaking").
  

This is from   u/nullc (referring to gmaxwell) and   Typical vandalism from u/luke-jr .

• First, they introduce unnecessary complexity and confusion into Bitcoin in order to leverage and consume the codebase and features of others (Classic, Unlimited, XT, and XThin) in order to build upon their code and features (Core and Compact Blocks).

• Then they create even more confusion and division in the community, and people waste their time online trying to sort out the whole mess they created, all of which wouldn't have happened in the first place if they had just used a unique ID# in the first place, which is what anyone who is working on improving the Bitcoin protocol would do.
  

Normal developers don't do this kind of shit.

Normal, honest, mature co-developers working on normal healthy projects would never get involved in stealing ID# numbers, nor would they tell such petty, malicious lies and then argue over the whole thing for days wasting everyone's time and causing damage to the community.

This whole thing is further proof that u/nullc (gmaxwell) and u/luke-jr are harmful and toxic developers to Bitcoin. Their unethical and uncooperative behavior is driving away many potential users and developers.

Greg Maxwell , Blockstream CTO and Core Architect (and BIP ID# signatory   u/luke-jr ) needs to stop being toxic to other people.

They need to realize that they are not the ones calling the shots in Bitcoin.

They need to be like developers of all other projects - open and collaborative, not mean and shady.

They need to stop engaging in sneaky behavior and attempting to sabotage other Bitcoin codebases by stealing ID#s, which should be the ID#s that are planned to be assigned to improve Bitcoin with new features.

Greg and Luke Jr have done this kind of shit before.

Sadly, the current mess caused by stolen ID#s is actually just part of a long history of u/nullc and u/luke-jr vandalizing the codebases of others in the community and taking credit for their work.

Luke Jr is already trying to sabotage Bitcoin Classic, first by lying that it has “no economic consensus”, “no consensus on development”, “no one has ever proposed a hard fork” (?!?) - and now trying to scare miners away (kick all miners off the network) by planting a trojan to modify the PoW algorithm. /r/btc/comments/418r0l /lukejr_is_already_trying_to_sabotage_bitcoin/

Greg Maxwell /u/nullc cannot make a statement saying that Bitcoin Classic should adopt Luke-Jr's poison pill plan to modify the PoW algorithm (kick all existing miners out of the network). But if Luke Jr's poison pill plan is so great, why doesn't Core add it?

/r/btc/comments/41c1h6/greg_maxwell_unullc_just_drove_the_final_nail/

If they want to invent their own version of XThin, that's fine. Not only should they give it a different name (Compact Blocks) than XThin, they should also have a different ID # than the one XThin used.

It's just common sense and courtesy, and their refusal to follow simple, standard practice like this (wasting people's time arguing online and trying to defend their actions is indefensible) just further shows that they are bad people.

Greg and Luke will never admit that they did something wrong and they will continue to do so.

Greg's obsessive behavior in wasting people's time arguing about this whole thing also suggests that perhaps he has a similar toxic pathology that Luke Jr has become well known for.

If Greg was a mature project lead, he would have addressed this immediately and said, “OK, sorry about the mix-up, guys! XThin now has its own unique ID#, we’ll use a new ID#, and let’s move on.”

Instead, over the past few days, he and Luke Jr have been desperately trying to find tiny technical details in a petty argument on Reddit, defending their own indefensible early actions and causing more harm to other developers, which in turn has the effect of scaring off more users and developers in the community.

Greg u/nullc   and Luke Jr u/luke-jr   Of course people are welcome to continue with the Eight Gates.

The result will simply be that more and more users will find that no one needs to use the "One Meg" Greg version of Bitcoin Core, with its artificially limited "max block" of 1MB. (And that controversial ID# in XThin and Compact Blocks).

Users can install (or even already have installed) other clients, such as Bitcoin Classic or Bitcoin Unlimited, which are now 100% compatible and run on the Bitcoin network, ready to provide larger blocks and on-chain expansion (for different optional features, without using controversial ID#).

More and more developers will find that they don’t need to go through Luke-Jr to get an unreliable ID#. They also don’t need to post Bitcoin Improvement Proposals on unwelcome Core-controlled mailing lists, IRC channels, and other forums.

Bitcoin will bypass the   u/nullc   (referring to gmaxwell ) and   u/luke-jr That's unethical, deliberate sabotage by harmful developers.

Like most other software on the web (like browsers), Bitcoin (and improvements to Bitcoin) can, should, and will be defined, not by a single “reference implementation”, but by publishing a set of specifications or protocols that different developers are free to implement, in different codebases, using different (decentralized, open, honest, ethical) codebases and forums.

Therefore, Greg and Luke can continue to use "their" Bitcoin core code repository, artificially limit the maximum block size of Bitcoin Core to 1MB, and continue to create unnecessary conflicts and confusing ID#s. .

In the meantime, serious, open-minded Bitcoin developers will continue to decentralize and use simpler, more secure on-chain scaling methods, such as using larger blocks and assigning unique ID#s using a standard procedure.