Nope, just a fork in the chain. If something like 5% of nodes run the old BTC chain and don't update to the newest revision, you wouldn't call that revision BTC just because it was older, you would call the 95% BTC. So its all about what the nodes do, with extreme emphasis on what the nodes ran by exchanges do and what the nodes ran by miners do. If you have a raspberry pi running a node, you get a vote, but its a VERY small vote because you don't contribute much to the overall economy, especially if you don't mine.
These contentious forks just get different names because they are different development groups with vastly different ideas about key features. If the Bitcoin Core devs decided to support 8mb blocks and all relevant parties agreed, they would just release a new revision of the bitcoin client and everyone would signal support and pick an adoption block, bang, she forks, and no one knows the difference
|
-
11-10-2017, 12:28 PM #7441We are all gunna make it
-
11-10-2017, 12:43 PM #7442
-
11-10-2017, 12:44 PM #7443
-
11-10-2017, 12:46 PM #7444
-
-
11-10-2017, 12:47 PM #7445
-
11-10-2017, 12:48 PM #7446
-
11-10-2017, 12:48 PM #7447
https://github.com/elastos
Will use Bitcoin as the parent chain, strategic partnership with NEO (i'm speculating that they need NEO's infrastructure to register assets and IDs etc - i'm not a compsci brah though so if you have better insight please share it with us).
The whitepaper states they will generate new blocks of the platform's currency annually (literally inflation) which has me slightly nervous. The dev team seems to be under the misapprehension that currencies need to inflate.
But still, decentralized internet and smart economy is on the way
If you're not writing notes to tell your grandkids about the coming years I feel bad for themNatty poverty maintenance crew
Actual economist crew
Austrian school crew
-
11-10-2017, 12:50 PM #7448
-
-
11-10-2017, 01:01 PM #7449
-
11-10-2017, 01:04 PM #7450
-
11-10-2017, 01:06 PM #7451
-
11-10-2017, 01:14 PM #7452
lol read both articles
https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitco...le-in-6-months
also arab said BTC was scam and got cucked hard....
-
-
11-10-2017, 01:14 PM #7453
-
11-10-2017, 01:17 PM #7454
"The reason bitcoin core has not changed is because it cannot get 95% consensus to change. I like that. Unless virtually everyone agrees it will stay the same."
So it's 95% or is that just a rough number?
Now I understand this a bit better, I'm more convinced BCH will crash.𝕮𝖍𝖆𝖘𝖊 𝖆 𝖈𝖍𝖊𝖈𝕶, 𝖓𝖊𝖛𝖊𝖗 𝖈𝖍𝖆𝖘𝖊 𝖆 𝖇𝖎𝖙𝖈𝖍
█▓▒▒░░🧵Make trolls invisible: https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=180234573 ░░▒▒▓█
-
11-10-2017, 01:25 PM #7455
-
11-10-2017, 01:26 PM #7456
I don't know if 95% is hardcoded, stated, or just a good rule of thumb due to game theory. Just know thats the benchmark for consensus I've heard.
The thing you need to remember is that miners aren't just concerned with the price of the coin, they are concerned about price vs difficulty. Just because BCH cost less, doesn't mean its not massively easier to mine. So its more profitable. Nodes with no miners are not a secure network, so what the nodes say is not nearly as important as what the miners say. Miners are the ones burning massive $$$ daily into the electrical grid, they keep this wheel spinning. Bitmain is one of the major if not THE major ASIC provider, and they are backing BCH, they are only accepting BCH for purchase of new miners if I understand correctly. So its really not that hard to envision a scenario where BCH wins over BTC. I won't go so far as saying this is likely. But I wouldn't dismiss it entirely. Miners get a bigger vote than your raspberry pi node, and if miners see BCH as more profitable, they just need to figure out how to get the money to that side of the fence without crashing the market.We are all gunna make it
-
-
11-10-2017, 01:33 PM #7457
-
11-10-2017, 01:41 PM #7458
-
11-10-2017, 01:41 PM #7459
-
11-10-2017, 01:44 PM #7460
-
-
11-10-2017, 01:46 PM #7461
-
11-10-2017, 01:55 PM #7462
-
11-10-2017, 01:56 PM #7463
-
11-10-2017, 01:59 PM #7464
-
-
11-10-2017, 02:02 PM #7465
-
11-10-2017, 02:08 PM #7466
-
11-10-2017, 02:10 PM #7467
Bitconnect might be shutting down? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DOSa60xW4AEXuUB.jpg
If this were to happen that would either screw the ppl holding ethconnect into making it even more obvious it's a scam or have a whole bunch of people jumping over to ethconnect. Either way I still don't mind the gamble with ethconnect.
-
11-10-2017, 02:11 PM #7468
-
-
11-10-2017, 02:19 PM #7469
-
11-10-2017, 02:23 PM #7470
Realize that the whitepaper for BTC came out in like 2009. There was no "other coin". The idea was novel, and the guy (if it was one guy) was a savant, but can we really expect him to have made EVERY choice for us from day one, and correctly? 1Mb blocks... kludge to keep the network bandwidth requirements in check. POW algorithm, probably the most secure, but maybe not most efficient. He probably viewed this all as an experiment. The entire point of consensus is to allow democratic change. Unfortunately some elements are baked into the brand identity, and thus will be hard to change.
We are all gunna make it
Bookmarks