Bitcoin Forum

What I am fearing the most is not Unlimited itself, it is the split that could occur. For this, I would like to know what is the set threshold, because while a 52% fork could be devastating, a fork at 80%+, while still problematic, would make less damages. So how much have they chosen ?

Unlike Bitcoin Classic, Bitcoin Unlimited does not have an activation threshold at which point a hard fork is automatically initiated. Once a large enough majority of miners are signalling BU and will accept blocks greater than 1MB in size, any miner may initiate a hard fork by beginning to produce bigger blocks.

Therefore, when the BU groups are satisfy with their latest mining power, they can initiate it anytime. The exchanges must be ready for this, which can be any minute especially the % BU block is approaching 50%.

Anyone can answer me if 50% of BU support is enough to split the Blockchain and if the split is at the same moment that reach 50%? Thanks.

You do realize that miners are earning money from mining right?
and also you do realize that miners have bills such as electricity bill and their employee salary and other maintenance costs right?
and you do realize that forking the way you think (with no support from other miners or nodes or anyone really) and mining a new chain gives them 12.5 units of a new coin that has no value right? in other words they will be throwing away $13000+

if you realize these then yeah you can fork bitcoin even if you have a miner running at your own home with having enough hashrate to mine 1 block and you will be mining on your own chain, alone and happy with some new coins and you can call them whatever you like. for example BTxskl0 ;D

Bitcoin unlimited will be another altcoin just like ETC splitted out of ETH chain. Miners will definitely move towards stronger chain and bitcoin core (BTC) will be the stronger one for sure. Hard Fork FUD for right now was only to create panic among traders to buy cheap bitcoins and some whales have successfully done it.  :D

There's no set limit. However, at 51% they could attack the network and prevent transactions of their choosing from gaining any confirmations, thus making them invalid, potentially preventing people from sending Bitcoins between addresses. They could also reverse transactions they send during the time they are in control (allowing double spend transactions), and they could potentially prevent other miners from finding any blocks for a short period of time. Thus causing a lot of mayhem on the BTC chain. If they choose, they could cause a bloodbath for Bitcoin.

Even if BU is faster and a lot of people choose it for daily  BTC transactions the new BUcoins will be worthless?

Yes, I doubt they will have any value. For exchanges, this is clear, there is only one Bitcoin, and this is Bitcoin Core. Bitcoin Unlimited will be listed as an altcoin, with BTU ticker.

which is why they should never be trusted with bitcoin's future even if unlimited was great.

no responsible person would totally change the bitcoin landscape and not even confirm details like that before the time. it shouldn't even have launched without that.

it's amateur hour at best and potentially nefarious in the extreme.

This is I think what is frightening me. If I knew a planned fork would occur at a set cap of let's say 80%, I would not worry because I would know at how much this would take action and that most people follow it. But done this way, this is like if a terrorist reveled an attack will occur, but without specifying the time and location. So everyone frightens as this can occur anywhere anytime.

They are getting extremely close to 50% right now (check out coin.dance), with strong momentum.

I asked a similiar question over on r/btc recently. As I understand it, rogue miners can start activating the BU hardfork at 51%. The thing to keep in mind is that the BU hardfork evaporates if the Core chain overtakes it in proof of work (not the longest chain but the one with the most work put into it, if you want to be precise about it).

So BU can start hardforking anytime after 51%, with Core struggling to mount a counter-attack each time and destroy short-lived BU forks. But if BU gets substantially beyond 51%, they are probably going to start outpacing Core and the scenario of BTC vs. BTU becomes a reality. Especially if miners who have not declared go with BU's momentum. Given the Coin.dance charts this could happen very quickly - basically any time now.

During an interview on the crypto show i think someone from bitcoin.com said that it would not fork until it had reached 75%.  This is going to be a crazy ride lets be honest.   :o

the 34-35% of miners signalling btu mined 43% of the blocks today. tomorrow that 34-35% might mine 20% or 80%.

the closer they get the harder it's gonna be. it'll stop being a threat and start being a worry.

that's when the numbers plateau and then fall back, or it's finally revealed that this wu guy actually controls a shit ton more hashrate than he thought it was sensible to admit to.

Actually, no. If you want to look at the percentage of miners signaling support, Coindance has estimated hashrate by Bitcoin client.
And Bitcoin Unlimited has 39.3%.
https://coin.dance/blocks

In case they fork at 75%, I might recognise their authority, since they would follow Satoshi's law of main chain, but anything below this is a silliness.

At present, there are many miners who convert technology to bitcoin unlimit, and have a very large proportion to the total. It is almost 50%, an extremely large number and will probably rise even higher. We can see a certain power when it passes 50%, the miners are showing their greed, they choose yield instead of value, Bitcoin is struggling, and its value Is declining when BU appears. Too many miners accept BU, which makes everything difficult.

its greediness that making this problem inside bitcoin we can't do nothing about that and the only thing right now is to keep trusting the system
whether BU will succeed we still need the core to keep moving forward miners really wanted to have big profits and that's life.

bu or any other dynamic implementations have NOT set any threatening deadlines they are plodding along letting network consensus occur
and NOT added anything that would intentionally banscore nodes off the network
and NOT gone 'full wetard' to even threaten removing PoW.
(by core refusing to add a few lines to be part of the peer network that could be dynamic, they will banscore themselves off the network by rejecting majority consensus)
core only want their own TIER network and have gone 'full wetard' to try getting it
SEGWIT rely on ONLY pools vote
dynamics implementations needs nodes AND pools, otherwise nodes will just orphan off the blocks in 3 seconds and stick with things as they are now(as displayed last month).

CORE actively and intentionally bypassed node consensus by going soft.
core have all the ban hammers,
core set the deadlines
core set threats of pool orphaning with bip9,
core set more threats with UASF
core set more threats with changing PoW

it is core that dont want community free choice.. its either get into segwit or have bitcoin ruined into something no longer bitcoin
(total rewrite, different keypair types different mempool strange formation, different full tx data formation, different tier node topology, different 'mining algo)

however dynamic implementations are compatible with several different implementation 'brands' using just a few lines of code.
set no limit
set no agenda,
dont have zealous banscores
havnt threatened anything.

they are just plodding along for the last two years letting natural consensus do its thing.