Bitcoin Is Forking Again(motherboard.vice.com)
motherboard.vice.com
Bitcoin Is Forking Again
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/bjjmy8/bitcoin-is-forking-again
50 comments
In particular, whether it can gain enough mining power to survive. Currently, SegWit2x (the fork discussed here) has 92% of miners signalling that they'll support it[1].
The question in this case is whether the original Bitcoin could survive after the fork if this support is maintained.
[1] https://coin.dance/blocks
The question in this case is whether the original Bitcoin could survive after the fork if this support is maintained.
[1] https://coin.dance/blocks
This is interesting. If this is correct, it amounts to a power grab, transferring decision power from Core maintainers to the miners consensus.
However, algorithmically speaking, miners consensus _is_ Bitcoin. The only authority Core developers have is rooted in tradition. So far, it was enough to get miners to agree with their point of view... but it will be challenged eventually.
However, algorithmically speaking, miners consensus _is_ Bitcoin. The only authority Core developers have is rooted in tradition. So far, it was enough to get miners to agree with their point of view... but it will be challenged eventually.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but they also control the software and could divert the users to a different fork if they wanted, right?
Well, no. They can release the reference client, but most users rarely employ it for transfers (most Bitcoins are either in cold storage, or in online wallets like Coinbase).
Anyway, after the hardfork, you'll get your balance in duplicated both chains (as all transactions before the hardfork are visible). The market forces will decide then how much each part costs.
Anyway, after the hardfork, you'll get your balance in duplicated both chains (as all transactions before the hardfork are visible). The market forces will decide then how much each part costs.
> The question in this case is whether the original Bitcoin could survive after the fork if this support is maintained.
When I read this kind of statistic, I'm a bit confused about why not, unless the 92% are planning to use some of their resources to try to actively disrupt the original chain (by censoring 100% of transactions or something).
When I read this kind of statistic, I'm a bit confused about why not, unless the 92% are planning to use some of their resources to try to actively disrupt the original chain (by censoring 100% of transactions or something).
If the new chain gets, say, 1% of the hashing power, then blocks will be found on average 100 times less often, which extends the time to reaching a new adjustment period from two weeks to 200 weeks...enough to arguably kill it.
Thanks for that observation.
It seems like this sort of "make the adjustment period take a horrifically long time to reach" effect only happens if the cutover is very abrupt and includes the overwhelming majority of hashpower, and if people are persuaded enough of the outcome of the fork that they don't speculatively bring new hashpower online to take advantage of the suddenly-easier-to-earn block rewards.
It seems like this sort of "make the adjustment period take a horrifically long time to reach" effect only happens if the cutover is very abrupt and includes the overwhelming majority of hashpower, and if people are persuaded enough of the outcome of the fork that they don't speculatively bring new hashpower online to take advantage of the suddenly-easier-to-earn block rewards.
No, the difficulty can be adjusted at fork time so it doesn't matter. Literally anyone can fork.
That would ALSO be a hard fork though.
IE the legacy chain would be dead.
Yes, the legacy chain people can create their own new fork, but then it has to deal with all the disadvantages of being a hard fork, and the old chain will be dead.
IE the legacy chain would be dead.
Yes, the legacy chain people can create their own new fork, but then it has to deal with all the disadvantages of being a hard fork, and the old chain will be dead.
Why would the legacy chain be dead? Bitcoin Cash is a hard fork of Bitcoin, both still run.
Currently 93% of the hashpower is signaling that they will switch from the legacy chain to the new hard fork.
If the main chain has a very low hashpower, then anybody and their mother can attack it/double spend/ ect very easily.
The miners on the fork could even commit some hashpower on their own to attack the old chain, so as to make sure that the new one wins.
Bitcoin cash never has the support of any significant amount of hashpower, so of course the main chain is still around.
If the main chain has a very low hashpower, then anybody and their mother can attack it/double spend/ ect very easily.
The miners on the fork could even commit some hashpower on their own to attack the old chain, so as to make sure that the new one wins.
Bitcoin cash never has the support of any significant amount of hashpower, so of course the main chain is still around.
True, but event 7% of the BTC hashpower is quite significant, and we may find that the 'old' branch lives on as another "Classic" or something.
Guess we'll see.
Guess we'll see.
They report on it because it drives traffic. BCH had major media coverage and I had people with no understanding of cryptocurrency asking me questions about it.
I'll start mining atemerevCoin, launch my ICO and become rich. But in all seriousness, you are correct, and I think this is a good thing. If they can't decide what Bitcoin should look like, fork it, launch all three, and we will soon find out which one people want. However in my opinion, Bitcoin is also an evolutionary dead-end, and the future is Ethereum.
Both Bitcoin and Ethereum have merits, which is reflected in their corresponding market prices. (Bitcoin is perfect for value storage; Ethereum is becoming an universal financial applications platform).
Market prices are propped up propaganda at this point. Universal what? Please, no.
Financial markets in general are propped up propaganda. We trade expectations. If the prices agree with the propaganda content, most market participants believe it to be true... until something unexpected shatters their belief.
What? No.
Once you believe that dollars are fictitious propaganda then the companies earning all that money must be likewise.
Any logical counter-arguments?
What's so good about Ethereum that would make it the future (serious question, I don't know much about it)?
IMO these forks do a massive disservice to the mainstream perception of this technology.
From the outside, it looks like technologists are making technical decisions that impact businesses that are taking financial risk by utilizing the cryptocurrency.
Forks like this increase the risk, undercutting the efficacy of the technology.
From the outside, it looks like technologists are making technical decisions that impact businesses that are taking financial risk by utilizing the cryptocurrency.
Forks like this increase the risk, undercutting the efficacy of the technology.
On the contrary these forks have finally clarified for mainstream consumers the ridiculous insanity involved in placing speculation value like this on near-completely illiquid virtual securities.
When the bubble pops, the fact that bitcoin cash was able to magically "invent" 10% of the value of the BTC market overnight will be seen as the jump-the-shark moment.
If this were a rational security with a working market, I'd be telling everyone to get out. But of course it's not, so you can't get out. There aren't nearly enough buyers. This is gonna be a fun ride.
When the bubble pops, the fact that bitcoin cash was able to magically "invent" 10% of the value of the BTC market overnight will be seen as the jump-the-shark moment.
If this were a rational security with a working market, I'd be telling everyone to get out. But of course it's not, so you can't get out. There aren't nearly enough buyers. This is gonna be a fun ride.
Fair point! I've found such a wide spectrum of risk tolerance that I'm curious to hear what returns you normally associate with a market you'd advise everyone to "stay in".
For example, if I can invest <$5k and make my money back on the order of months assuming the exchange rate flatlines, and I know going into it that the exchange rate may very well collapse at some point, I'm OK with that. Slide the amount up to $20k or more and I'm less inclined to take the risk.
But everyone's budget is different!
For example, if I can invest <$5k and make my money back on the order of months assuming the exchange rate flatlines, and I know going into it that the exchange rate may very well collapse at some point, I'm OK with that. Slide the amount up to $20k or more and I'm less inclined to take the risk.
But everyone's budget is different!
what I dislike about crypto curencies beside forking is the size of the chain. Even latest software downloads over 1GB
Then use a light wallet that doesn't download the entire block chain.
recently discussed here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032360
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14924002
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14812445
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14758587
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14788663
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14809259
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032360
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14924002
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14812445
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14758587
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14788663
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14809259
Those links discuss the Bitcoin Cash fork. This article discusses a new, different fork in November.
More free airdrops please. The last airdrop gave a free 5% to 25% to BTC holders.
Recent discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032360
True Satoshi's Vision is finally realized.
Giving more cash to the early adopters and 'investors' again. I suppose it's a neat way to gain some traction - hold BTC, get this for free...
This is exactly why I think of bitcoin as a pyramid scheme. Early adopters buy some entrance into the system (via mining or currency purchase) and then focus on recruiting more people to drive up their purchased value.
I think one day you'll look back and regret this post. Its still an early adopters phase.
Recent transaction sent $160m, the fee was $0.70, it was confirmed within minutes.
Not sure what to say if you can't see value there
Recent transaction sent $160m, the fee was $0.70, it was confirmed within minutes.
Not sure what to say if you can't see value there
It would be more accurate to say, that a recent transaction sent $160M worth of Bitcoin. Tomorrow that might only be worth $150M, who knows?
I guess I'm not a multi millionaire who needs to transfer that kind of money? What exactly are people buying with bitcoin that cannot be done with standard currencies? Unless it offers some radical access to process or markets standard currencies do not, I just can't see the point.
I'm sure the parties involved in transferring $160M via an anonymous and untraceable currency had perfectly legitimate reasons for doing so /s.
Wasn't anonymous OR untraceable, which is clearly evidenced by the fact that we all know about it and can see it on the public blockchain.
Ok, then who has the money now?
Wasn't anonymous or untraceable.
Oh, well, if there is no perceived use case for you, then there must not be any use cases, even though someone just pointed out a very specific and valuable use case. That's logical.
Have you used a bank lately? Tried moving money and buying some stocks? Tell me how long that takes from money leaving your account to settlement.
This "fork" is really just the evolution of the main chain, that's all. It'll have more claim to the Bitcoin name than the "core" Bitcoin with small blocks. Keeping the transaction history is sort of the entire point.
That's somewhat orthogonal to my point - these forks are conjuring money out of thin air for those who already hold the currency.
But can you use this forked version, and normal BTC interchangeably?
It's better to think of it as a hard forked upgrade. Normal BTC won't exist in any meaningful manner after this fork. Just like other coins hardfork all the time to upgrade. The previous chain could still exist if you wanted to run it, but no one does.
Losing anywhere near 90% hashrate means that chain of Bitcoin has no point in being called Bitcoin anymore.
Losing anywhere near 90% hashrate means that chain of Bitcoin has no point in being called Bitcoin anymore.
The only matter if whether the fork can gather enough traction to have value.