English
Chinese
Op-ed: How bad could it be if we have two or more Bitcoins
in
Bitcoin
6
41
57590
Note:Author of this op-ed is Laomao, founder of Yunbi, which recently announced ETH connected with MLM.He is also a Chinese columnist on 8btc.
The recent plummet of BTC price is because some people worried that Bitcoin may split due to the scaling divergence and they dumped their coins on the market.
In fact, I am afraid to talk about this topic, because my readers’ understanding on Bitcoin varies a lot. If I intend to elaborate on the difference between the different scaling roadmaps and the logic behind these roadmaps, and even talk about the origin of different scaling programs and the implication of collisions from political, economic, humanities and value perspective, I could have written a book. Those who may have the patience to go through such lengthy contents could be numbered by fingers.
While many of my followers are mostly blockchain investors, therefore I just say something about BTC scaling from an investor’s perspective.
There is no doubt that investors are facing an awkward situation because of the sharp decline of BTC. If they continue to buy, they are afraid to be long-term holder with book value loss. If they choose to sell, they are afraid that there will not be enough price spread to buy them back.
I know that some friends show no different to the Bitcoin price fluctuation as it’s only an asset in their investment portfolio. They even made a significant gain from the rise of hedging assets. But let’s keep in mind that BTC is still the most important asset in terms of blockchain investment, no one of them. Therefore, it is necessary to fully explore the investment logic of Bitcoin.
If the investment time span is confined to a few months, people, especially rookies, may be a bit overwhelmed. But viewing from a longer period of time, I, as a observer of Bitcoin scaling issue, think that the market is over-reacting. Bitcoin scaling itself is a constant topic like “Big Auntie” (Chinese metaphor for menstruation), which often appears as a debate. Last time it showed up in March 2016 centering around Bitcoin Classic. We might be dealing with “Big Auntie” in an annual scale instead of months?
The purple line on the figure above is the number of Bitcoin Classic nodes. In March 2016, the numbers of Classic nodes amounted to over 50% to that of the Core nodes, much more than the current number of BU nodes. Meanwhile, the price of Bitcoin was tanked to 2,500-2,700 from 3,400 at the end of 2015. It was around 26% loss and many people who had been holding Bitcoin chose to dump their coins as well.
As for this round of scaling drama, Bitcoin has fallen around 30% from the relative high price, combined with Chinese authority regulation. At the point, before you choose to dump your coins, you had better figure out whether the scaling debate is a life and death war or another drama that is being pulled off by well-trained actors.
In addition, let’s have look at the situation from another point of view. What is the worst case even if Bitcoin did hard fork? You may get 2 kinds of Bitcoin! Ethereum hard forked and ETC was born. But still ETH made all time high recently because the market would eventually attribute value to valuable things. If Bitcoin is viewed as a kind of “stock”, the spinoff of Bitcoin hardfork may be considered as some kind of dividends. So what? In the long run, the future growth of Bitcoin could be guaranteed as long as the scaling is resolved no matter which way it takes.
The market has demonstrated that a fork was not the end of the world. Those who are truly afraid of the fork are the capitals and the interest-groups. It’s a war that they couldn’t afford to lose. If the ordinary melon-eating people (Chinese metaphor for bystanders) buy and sell following the tides, they were just like “eating gutter oil and worrying about national policy”.
Bitcoin scaling issue will be resolved eventually, but we don’t know when and how? We do not know if there is a hardfork. We don’t know whether the issue will come back like “Big Auntie”. But I do know that the final solution will simply not be earth-shattering as you had expected. It is just like the millennium bugs that people worried about in 1998, or the doomsday prophecy of 2012 that worried people in 2008. Finally, nothing could stop the pace of the world evolution.
Little advice from me at the end of this article:
Internet has the property of value because of blockchain, which has expedited human migration from real world to internet. As the hedging tool against the fiats with infinite supply, it’s worthwhile to take risks of holding some assets with core values. How bad a few price crash could be?
COMMENTS(41)
We should have minority against majority I guess, that could make things better, If It was equal that could screw things up over time as they will have less value then they would have If one of them had majority of the demand, having two cheap and low value coins could result into people not trusting bitcoin anymore and switching to something else (alt).
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?
Miners will determine their fates and chain with major support will survive while minority will suffer from 51% attack for several times. Worst-case could be complete centralization and bitcoin network with some inflation if BTU become the majority chain.
Quote from: SONG GEET on March 27, 2017, 09:22:00 AM
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?
Miners will determine their fates and chain with major support will survive while minority will suffer from 51% attack for several times. Worst-case could be complete centralization and bitcoin network with some inflation if BTU become the majority chain.
Then market will the dump the centralized fork and turn to the decentralized one?
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:26:47 AM
Quote from: SONG GEET on March 27, 2017, 09:22:00 AM
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?
Miners will determine their fates and chain with major support will survive while minority will suffer from 51% attack for several times. Worst-case could be complete centralization and bitcoin network with some inflation if BTU become the majority chain.
Then market will the dump the centralized fork and turn to the decentralized one?
It might take a while for centralization to occur and for people to realize it. In the meantime the decentralized chain might be abandoned.
I guess the majority of its users dictates if it will be acceptable as a currency that holds great value in the future. Bitcoin’s price is volatile since the beginning so i could say that the price is dropping right now is a chance to buy some cheap BTC. Saving and investing in bitcoin is still a good move cause this crypto curenncy has survived through many years since satoshi nakamoto introduce it.
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?The market seems to be over-reacting.
Cryptocurrency is about transferring value without censorship. Many coins can do it, and there is no reason to believe that two varieties of Bitcoins will do worse than one variety. It may only seem worse to those who subscribe to the unsubstantiated “one winner take it all” theories.
Why to bother about the market when it doesn’t have any dependence upon the same. When the world economy was struggling bitcoin was experiencing a growth. There is nothing to happen as a worst case scenario, because every user know why is all about and how valuable it is.
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:26:47 AM
Then market will the dump the centralized fork and turn to the decentralized one?
Most likely the opposite: centralized systems being more easily manipulated and steered, they will outperform decentralized “random” systems in a highly speculative market any time.BTW, you see this with ETH/ETC too.
Quote from: KennyR on March 27, 2017, 10:32:31 AM
There is nothing to happen as a worst case scenario, because every user know why is all about and how valuable it is.
Actually OP is talking about possible hard fork which will result two different bitcoin blockchain. When there will be network split, most of the people will simply dump all those free BTU just like people have dumped free ETC.
worst case scenario is you lose your Bitcoins or they are close to nothing not a life killer at current price
Here is the link to the original comment thread. Or you can comment here to start a discussion. Author: 8btccom
There can be no two bitcoin, it will just be confusing to the public especially those who are not familiar to cryptocurrency or those just starting to be aware of it. The other one should be demoted to an altcoin.
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?The market seems to be over-reacting.
i don’t think that this will end, as far as market can still online, then we don’t have to worried and if there is still many traders doing trade crypto currency then i think there is still a way to make money from trading crypto currency. i don’t think too much about hard fork and i am sure that if hard fork is really happen, then traders especially market will make decision about this. we only should wait for this and keep doing trading as much as we can.
Here I have outlined four scenarios that could transform into reality after a hard fork.For me, the worst case would be a “permanent indecision” scenario or at least indecision for several months. That would be the case if none of the two implementations could score a clear “win” against the other one. Market cap would be divided (at least, more than a third for one, less than two thirds for the other).I think this scenario is not totally unrealistic if we take into account two things:1) many players of both sides would try to “dump” the other currency to accelerate a win of the “own” chain. That would favour Bitcoin Core, because the economic majority is there, as far as I know. So termporarily, first the BTC price will be well over the BTU price.2) but miners that have decided to adhere to Bitcoin Unlimited won’t change back to the Core chain that fast after achieving 75% of the hashrate, because they would lose money. That could lead to the BTC blockchain to get slower and less usable until the next difficulty adjustment. In this case, a part of the “apolitical” users – above all, merchants – could change to BTU. That would mean the “economic majority” assumption for Core would not be that clear anymore.Why is it a worst case? Because none of both coins could emerge as a clear leader and group together the network effect advantage Bitcoin currently has with respect to other coins. That could lead to an erosion of this advantage.I for myself consider a scenario where Core retains more than 75% of the economic power more probable (a scenario similar to the “ETH/ETC” fork) but this worst case scenario should not be ruled out.
Worst case? People will leave both of them and go to altcoins instead.Best case for bitcoin is one or both chains survive and remain useful. Look at ETH and ETC. ETH is still the second most valuable crypto by far, and even ETC is in the top 10. People were crying about how ETH got ruined by the fork, but it’s still one of the best altcoins.Bitcoin might be the same, and all this FUD is more damaging than any fork will be.
Quote from: zimmah on March 27, 2017, 07:11:38 PM
Worst case? People will leave both of them and go to altcoins instead.
I don’t think so that altcoins will be winners here, there will be war between BTC and BU, not mass exodus to ETH or DASH.Quote from: zimmah on March 27, 2017, 07:11:38 PM
Best case for bitcoin is one or both chains survive and remain useful.
Like ETH and ETC – there will be only one serious alternative. Time will tell what will it be.Quote from: zimmah on March 27, 2017, 07:11:38 PM
People were crying about how ETH got ruined by the fork, but it’s still one of the best altcoins.Bitcoin might be the same, and all this FUD is more damaging than any fork will be.
Totally agree. Amount of cries and FUD is overwhelming. But that was always the case with bitcoin, nothing will change that.
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:26:47 AM
Quote from: SONG GEET on March 27, 2017, 09:22:00 AM
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?
Miners will determine their fates and chain with major support will survive while minority will suffer from 51% attack for several times. Worst-case could be complete centralization and bitcoin network with some inflation if BTU become the majority chain.
Then market will the dump the centralized fork and turn to the decentralized one?
You would think that, but I don’t trust in people enough to actually make the smart decision.People have the tendency to willingly give up their freedom all the time.Quote from: Snorek on March 27, 2017, 07:24:48 PM
Quote from: zimmah on March 27, 2017, 07:11:38 PM
Worst case? People will leave both of them and go to altcoins instead.
I don’t think so that altcoins will be winners here, there will be war between BTC and BU, not mass exodus to ETH or DASH.Quote from: zimmah on March 27, 2017, 07:11:38 PM
Best case for bitcoin is one or both chains survive and remain useful.
Like ETH and ETC – there will be only one serious alternative. Time will tell what will it be.Quote from: zimmah on March 27, 2017, 07:11:38 PM
People were crying about how ETH got ruined by the fork, but it’s still one of the best altcoins.Bitcoin might be the same, and all this FUD is more damaging than any fork will be.
Totally agree. Amount of cries and FUD is overwhelming. But that was always the case with bitcoin, nothing will change that.
He asked about the worst case scenario, not about the most realistic scenario.Worst case is that bitcoin dies and altcoins take over.Also, considering ETC is still the #7 crypto, I think it’s not at all useless.
Quote from: zimmah on March 27, 2017, 07:30:31 PM
Also, considering ETC is still the #7 crypto, I think it’s not at all useless.
Compared to other altcoins ETC is not useless at all. It is just vast disproportion between price of ETC – $2.20 and ETH – $50 which makes ETC pretty insignificant from economic point of view.And I expect in case of bitcoin split we might see similar trend happening.
Quote from: SONG GEET on March 27, 2017, 09:22:00 AM
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?
Miners will determine their fates and chain with major support will survive while minority will suffer from 51% attack for several times
Miners would be irrelevantI mean miners from the opposing camp after the split comes about. It is actually not about whose… chain is longer. If you were a miner you could continue or start mining any chain of your preference, and as long as you won’t be alone, there shouldn’t be any issues with that. After the split a new altcoin (or just coin) will be born, and their paths won’t intersect in the future. In fact, the chains could be reemerged later but that is said to wreak total chaos in Bitcoin and unless someone is actually looking to kill Bitcoin, that’s unlikely to happen either
I am not a techcie as I dont even understand what the controversy is all about no matter how hard I try to but from my elementary knowledge from the way I see it, any other bitcoin will be like the case of ETH and ETC in which we all know the answer to that and even people coming in new that have been able to be exposed to ETH might even not know the existence of ETC…
Quote from: d5000 on March 27, 2017, 07:06:31 PM
1) many players of both sides would try to “dump” the other currency to accelerate a win of the “own” chain. That would favour Bitcoin Core, because the economic majority is there, as far as I know. So termporarily, first the BTC price will be well over the BTU price.2) but miners that have decided to adhere to Bitcoin Unlimited won’t change back to the Core chain that fast after achieving 75% of the hashrate, because they would lose money. That could lead to the BTC blockchain to get slower and less usable until the next difficulty adjustment. In this case, a part of the “apolitical” users – above all, merchants – could change to BTU. That would mean the “economic majority” assumption for Core would not be that clear anymore
I don’t quite agree with the emphasized partThe difficulty should adjust in about two weeks (the worst case scenario), but we should understand that there still will be enough hash power remaining to support the Bitcoin network even if two thirds of all miners choose to leave. Apart from that, I don’t really think that the psychotic types will change to BTU. If they will ever be switching to anything that will certainly not be BTU (since otherwise they wouldn’t switch at all). If ever, they will either move to fiat (most likely), i.e. disable Bitcoin payments altogether until the dust settles, or to some other altcoin (less likely)
If I had two bitcoins, I would take the 2000 USD and get something nice.
Having more than two bitcoins is better than having two bitcoins. Satoshi has a million bitcoins and people consider him a god.
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?The market seems to be over-reacting.http://news.8btc.com/op-ed-how-bad-could-it-be-if-we-have-two-or-more-bitcoins
Quote from: d5000 on Today at 12:43:39 AM
Quote from: deisik on March 27, 2017, 08:12:44 PM
Quote from: d5000 on March 27, 2017, 07:06:31 PM
2) but miners that have decided to adhere to Bitcoin Unlimited won’t change back to the Core chain that fast after achieving 75% of the hashrate, because they would lose money. That could lead to the BTC blockchain to get slower and less usable until the next difficulty adjustment. In this case, a part of the “apolitical” users – above all, merchants – could change to BTU. That would mean the “economic majority” assumption for Core would not be that clear anymore
I don’t quite agree with the emphasized partThe difficulty should adjust in about two weeks (the worst case scenario), but we should understand that there still will be enough hash power remaining to support the Bitcoin network even if two thirds of all miners choose to leave.As BU supporters said, they will fork if they have more than 75% of the hashrate. I consider it very probable that they will intentionally choose a point in time where they could harm the Core chain, so they would most probably fork just after a difficulty adjustment
In for a penny, in for a poundIf you seriously think that they are going to choose the date to hurt Bitcoin most, you should necessarily come to the conclusion that they will hit whenever their chances to succeed start to surpass their chances to fail. So no one will be really waiting for 75% of the hashrate. They will likely hit as soon as they get a little over 50% of the hashrate. And that would be a rational choice since they may never reach 75% in the first place and thus hitting fastest seems to be the best approach. But this is also less risky for Bitcoin Core too (which is a bit paradoxical if we don’t take into account time frames of events) since having a little less than 50% of hashing power is still big enough to support the NetworkQuote from: d5000 on Today at 12:43:39 AM
Quote from: deisik on March 27, 2017, 08:12:44 PM
Apart from that, I don’t really think that the psychotic types will change to BTU.
Psychotic? Do you mean users that are scared by the fork?I think the users that would be tempted to change to BTU would be those who use Bitcoin regularly as a currency. For example, remittance senders and online gamblers. As major exchanges (excluding the Canadians) have said they will support BTU “as an altcoin”, they could use BTU for that purposes. They could also change to ETH or other altcoin, but BTU would be more familiar for them. And for merchants in a “undecided” scenario it would be rational to support both chains (like for the exchanges) so they can get sales from all users.
I refer to nervous types which get scared by the gust of wind, burst of thunder and stroke of lightning
Bitcoin may be only one. What you are calling other bitcoins are just alts e.g. BTU, XT etc…
I happen to notice the 10x rise of Bitcoin plus, bitcoindark etc that utilize the name of bitcoin. Look like the market has already displayed warm welcome.
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?The market seems to be over-reacting.http://news.8btc.com/op-ed-how-bad-could-it-be-if-we-have-two-or-more-bitcoins
The article was a bit short for the question here is some supplementationhttp://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-19/bitcoins-fork-roadhttps://magnr.com/blog/bitcoin/bitcoin-fork/https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-fork-segwit-vs-bitcoin-unlimited-explained-simply/Worst Case Pretty much a run back to fiat while the dust settles which is a fun way to look at it since we ran from fiat to crypto ^^.Ofir did 3 simple enoughDo nothing If you believe that the fork isnt going to happen or that in the long run things will straighten themselves out through market forces you can just ride out the storm. Once the dust settles youll still have all of your coins (assuming you moved them to a self hosted wallet).Convert your Bitcoins into altcoins If you dont want to be part of the drama but still need to use cryptocurrencies you can convert your Bitcoins into reputable altcoin like Ethereum, Monero or Litecoin.Sell all of your Bitcoins If you are holding an amount in Bitcoin that you can not afford to risk at any cost perhaps it would be best to sell all of them right now and not take any part in this. Once the drama is over youll be able to buy Bitcoins again. However, no one really knows when the drama will end or what will be the price when that happens.
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?The market seems to be over-reacting.
Because of the introduction of some altcoins or the competitiveness of etherium and other cryptocurrencies to Bitcoin bitcoins prices are decreasing drastically within a few days. But in my opinion it is nothing new, Bitcoin has been like that since the beginning. The stability we’ve been hoping can only be achieved if Bitcoin will be accepted as a world currency legally. I mean even the great dollars fall down sometimes.Worst case scenario? I’ve seen my friends worrying about how money they’ve lost when bitcoins value decrease. The impact of bitcoins price hike in the past months make them but BTC because they thought the price would be higher and will double at the end of the year. And since bitcoins price decrease they have lost a 100 dollars or more. This over reaction made by these price hike and down affected few of us and turn to other cryptocurrencies instead, and that’s a bad scenario. Since we’ve been in these field we must accept the fact that we win some and we lose some. Since Bitcoin is not yet well known to everyone and been fighting for survival till now we must know that these happenings are common. We will all lose if this twist of events make us to give up and I hope that won’t happen.
Quote from: deisik on March 27, 2017, 08:12:44 PM
Quote from: d5000 on March 27, 2017, 07:06:31 PM
2) but miners that have decided to adhere to Bitcoin Unlimited won’t change back to the Core chain that fast after achieving 75% of the hashrate, because they would lose money. That could lead to the BTC blockchain to get slower and less usable until the next difficulty adjustment. In this case, a part of the “apolitical” users – above all, merchants – could change to BTU. That would mean the “economic majority” assumption for Core would not be that clear anymore
I don’t quite agree with the emphasized partThe difficulty should adjust in about two weeks (the worst case scenario), but we should understand that there still will be enough hash power remaining to support the Bitcoin network even if two thirds of all miners choose to leave.As BU supporters said, they will fork if they have more than 75% of the hashrate. I consider it very probable that they will intentionally choose a point in time where they could harm the Core chain, so they would most probably fork just after a difficulty adjustment. A difficulty period are 2016 blocks. That are two weeks if the hashrate corresponds to the difficulty, but in the case I outlined hashrate will be about a third than before. That would mean that we would have ~30 minutes between blocks for about six weeks. Perhaps Core supporters would buy hashrate but that won’t be cheap and I don’t think they would succeed easily – because then, why don’t have they done the same with Segwit? That scenario would drive transaction fees to the moon, because there would be three times less capacity.Quote
Apart from that, I don’t really think that the psychotic types will change to BTU.
Psychotic? Do you mean users that are scared by the fork?I think the users that would be tempted to change to BTU would be those who use Bitcoin regularly as a currency. For example, remittance senders and online gamblers. As major exchanges (excluding the Canadians) have said they will support BTU “as an altcoin”, they could use BTU for that purposes. They could also change to ETH or other altcoin, but BTU would be more familiar for them. And for merchants in a “undecided” scenario it would be rational to support both chains (like for the exchanges) so they can get sales from all users.
Quote from: Snorek on March 27, 2017, 07:42:48 PM
Quote from: zimmah on March 27, 2017, 07:30:31 PM
Also, considering ETC is still the #7 crypto, I think it’s not at all useless.
Compared to other altcoins ETC is not useless at all. It is just vast disproportion between price of ETC – $2.20 and ETH – $50 which makes ETC pretty insignificant from economic point of view.And I expect in case of bitcoin split we might see similar trend happening.
So bitcoin split into two would be the best case?
I think the worst case will be people dumping bitcoin and look for another alt coin to invest, and bitcoin will not as strong as it used to be because there will be splitting user, so if we had more than one bitcoin then we will see two weak coins instead of 1 strong coin
Quote from: deisik on March 28, 2017, 07:50:52 AM
So no one will be really waiting for 75% of the hashrate. They will likely hit as soon as they get a little over 50% of the hashrate. And that would be a rational choice since they may never reach 75% in the first place and thus hitting fastest seems to be the best approach.
A little over 50% will be contentious in the eyes of BU supporters themselves so miners won’t do it.2/3 of the hashrate over last 1000 blocks is a sweet spot.
Quote from: deisik on Today at 06:32:45 AM
And how are they going to attack it?When they would (should) be busy mining their new longer chain to keep it longer? As soon as they start attacking the shorter chain their own chain may become shorter in a very short time, and then their attack is set to lose while their efforts ultimately wasted. You seem to look at only one factor while in reality you should consider all relevant factors and take into account all possible combinations of them as well as their interdependence. This is not to say that my assumption is right, I just point out where yours has gaping flaws
If the hashrate on both chains are very close. It would be too risky for the longer-chain miners to point their miners to attack the shorter chain.
the worst case would be a split, on which you can dump 2x the amount of coin, nd destroy the value of bitcoin, no one would hold in a “double spending” scenario like thatQuote from: deisik on March 27, 2017, 07:48:37 PM
Quote from: SONG GEET on March 27, 2017, 09:22:00 AM
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?
Miners will determine their fates and chain with major support will survive while minority will suffer from 51% attack for several times
Miners would be irrelevantI mean miners from the opposing camp after the split comes about. It is actually not about whose… chain is longer. If you were a miner you could continue or start mining any chain of your preference, and as long as you won’t be alone, there shouldn’t be any issues with that. After the split a new altcoin (or just coin) will be born, and their paths won’t intersect in the future. In fact, the chains could be reemerged later but that is said to wreak total chaos in Bitcoin and unless someone is actually looking to kill Bitcoin, that’s unlikely to happen either
well miners can attack the short chain and make it irrelevant, so miners being irrelevant is a moot point, they always retain their power, unless you chage the algo, but you are effectively making an altcoin
Quote from: Amph on Today at 05:57:11 AM
the worst case would be a split, on which you can dump 2x the amount of coin, nd destroy the value of bitcoin, no one would hold in a “double spending” scenario like thatQuote from: deisik on March 27, 2017, 07:48:37 PM
Quote from: SONG GEET on March 27, 2017, 09:22:00 AM
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?
Miners will determine their fates and chain with major support will survive while minority will suffer from 51% attack for several times
Miners would be irrelevantI mean miners from the opposing camp after the split comes about. It is actually not about whose… chain is longer. If you were a miner you could continue or start mining any chain of your preference, and as long as you won’t be alone, there shouldn’t be any issues with that. After the split a new altcoin (or just coin) will be born, and their paths won’t intersect in the future. In fact, the chains could be reemerged later but that is said to wreak total chaos in Bitcoin and unless someone is actually looking to kill Bitcoin, that’s unlikely to happen either
well miners can attack the short chain and make it irrelevant, so miners being irrelevant is a moot point, they always retain their power, unless you chage the algo, but you are effectively making an altcoin
And how are they going to attack it?When they would (should) be busy mining their new longer chain to keep it longer? As soon as they start attacking the shorter chain their own chain may become shorter in a very short time, and then their attack is set to lose while their efforts ultimately wasted. You seem to look at only one factor while in reality you should consider all relevant factors and take into account all possible combinations of them as well as their interdependence. This is not to say that my assumption is right, I just point out where yours has gaping flaws
Quote from: OmegaStarScream on March 27, 2017, 09:09:50 AM
We should have minority against majority I guess, that could make things better, If It was equal that could screw things up over time as they will have less value then they would have If one of them had majority of the demand, having two cheap and low value coins could result into people not trusting bitcoin anymore and switching to something else (alt).
Yes maybe if we have a 1 or more bitcoin we would take more risk on such things like tradings. We may forgot the risk because of the bigger income we could have. Majority will do the same cause most of people do trading is the risk takers. But for me we should always remember to hold some earnings on trading so we could have extra capital if we would lose some on trading. Then continue to work hard and focus so you can always have a source of income on the near future. Panic buying may be a problem to especially when the price increased on the moment you thought that it will drop so if the increase the continue and you already trade bitcoin ,you will lose and have a regret.
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?The market seems to be over-reacting.http://news.8btc.com/op-ed-how-bad-could-it-be-if-we-have-two-or-more-bitcoins
It is true that the market will dictate the price of bitcoin. It simply means that it is the users that will have the say as to how to give value to bitcoin. The worst case scenario in bitcoin is the possibility of a market crash when the price will have meltdown. But I dont believe that such scenario will occur to bitcoin. Its value has increased over the years and even there is an even that causes the price to go down but it has recovered the price fast.
2 or more bitcoin is not too much to lose. You will just lose whatever the current USD value is that is all. Those are fear articles who knows why they write things like that . Secret agenda ?
Quote from: deisik on March 29, 2017, 06:32:45 AM
Quote from: Amph on March 29, 2017, 05:57:11 AM
the worst case would be a split, on which you can dump 2x the amount of coin, nd destroy the value of bitcoin, no one would hold in a “double spending” scenario like thatQuote from: deisik on March 27, 2017, 07:48:37 PM
Quote from: SONG GEET on March 27, 2017, 09:22:00 AM
Quote from: hl5460 on March 27, 2017, 09:05:50 AM
Market will determine their fates, right? What is the worst-case scenario? Are they acceptable to you?
Miners will determine their fates and chain with major support will survive while minority will suffer from 51% attack for several times
Miners would be irrelevantI mean miners from the opposing camp after the split comes about. It is actually not about whose… chain is longer. If you were a miner you could continue or start mining any chain of your preference, and as long as you won’t be alone, there shouldn’t be any issues with that. After the split a new altcoin (or just coin) will be born, and their paths won’t intersect in the future. In fact, the chains could be reemerged later but that is said to wreak total chaos in Bitcoin and unless someone is actually looking to kill Bitcoin, that’s unlikely to happen either
well miners can attack the short chain and make it irrelevant, so miners being irrelevant is a moot point, they always retain their power, unless you chage the algo, but you are effectively making an altcoin
And how are they going to attack it?When they would (should) be busy mining their new longer chain to keep it longer? As soon as they start attacking the shorter chain their own chain may become shorter in a very short time, and then their attack is set to lose while their efforts ultimately wasted. You seem to look at only one factor while in reality you should consider all relevant factors and take into account all possible combinations of them as well as their interdependence. This is not to say that my assumption is right, I just point out where yours has gaping flaws
it depend if they have 76% they can direct 26 % which is higher than the remaining 24% and do a 51% to the short chain while maintaining a 50% on the longest which is more tha enough to avoid any counter 51% attack
Quote from: Viscount on March 28, 2017, 12:27:48 AM
Bitcoin may be only one. What you are calling other bitcoins are just alts e.g. BTU, XT etc…
I totally agree that BU is dead, it was not set up to succeed initially and more light has been shed on this but to block SegWit, the code is outdated and no strong coder on the team
Quote from: topesis on Today at 03:29:58 AM
I totally agree that BU is dead, it was not set up to succeed initially and more light has been shed on this but to block SegWit, the code is outdated and no strong coder on the team
Probably. Nevetheless there are a lot of big block supporters and this isn’t going to vanish as simple as that.
Please sign in first