Bitcoin Forum

I hope they fork off this board too and choke on their large blocks  :D

https://news.bitcoin.com/viabtc-launching-bitcoin-cash-token-mining-pool-bitcoin-abc/

Seriously though, now everyone can kind of get what they want  ::)

Yup ... hello hard fork!

Intention is greater than 80% for Segwit2x but the reality is BIP 141 only has 43% support.

Here's another one, Aug 1st will be fun!

https://www.bitcoincash.org/

This is another major bluff from Jihan. I'm pretty sure he will stick to Core and Segwit.

things are starting to get pretty dumb actually! bitmain says they are supporting SegWit2x with all their nodes running the btc1 client and then they want to support BCC too at the same time! how is that even possible! BCC (bitcoinCash) is not supposed to have SegWit...

the link that article gave calling it "code on github" is just an empty page explaining a bunch of stuff, it is not CODE!

it seems more like ViaBTC is the only one offering any real hashrate and that only comes from the "cloudmining" contracts. LOL

The Jihan cartel just don't give up, you kind of got to admire that (just a little) lol

looks like these stupids want to use that opportunity to launch an altcoin, what a mess it will be.

Bitmain's contingency plan against UASF was UAHF. According to the below statement UAHF would be deployed if Segwit2x fails to activate Segwit or BIP 148 has the majority, right now it is Segwit2x all the way.




ViaBTC's UAHF plan doesn't have Segwit.

If I am right there would be a UAHF only if Segwit2x fails.

Bitmain UAHF, ViaBTC UAHF, let more pools come up with their own UAHF and create Bitcoin ABC, EFG, or XYZ. Still there be only one Bitcoin and rest alts.

I'm against chain splits and I hope it doesn't become the new "norm" to solve a conflict. Now, if this fork happens, at least it seems that it is branded a little bit in a different way than Bitcoin. So it will be clear from the beginning that it's an altcoin.

I don't support it, but I like the idea of a Bitcoin Unlimited/Emergent Consensus altcoin (and have stated that in the past) - simply to test in the wild if it works or not. If they don't try to confuse users that they are the "original"/"real" Bitcoin (and I think they have no chance anyway), then - why not? Let them fork.

Segwit2x is the biggest problem, since it's a direct attempt to takeover Bitcoin, other forks are a smoke screen to scare people from potential forks (all this FUD that Bitcoin will crash if there will be split), while presenting Segwit2x as true Bitcoin. The real fight will be when miners with their 85% hashing power will fork into 2mb blocks in November, I hope people won't get themselves fooled.

This token may be a good instrument to protect their customer of the possible incoming bitcoin split. If ever the split will occur their clients have a token which can be converted back to the winning version of bitcoin.It is a good concept but somehow it is not necessary since it works just like fiat currency. But if you are using ViaBTC then that will be a good sign that the website is thinking of its users safety.

i am very interested to know if they are really going to go through with that or is it just threats to scare people, specially the UASF thing!

when i think about it, forking like this can not be wise nor profitable for them. their fork will surely never gain any decent support no matter what. no support means low price. and with the huge difficuly of bitcoin it is already hard for miners to make money and if their Forked coin value is very low they can never sustain it.

Oh joy, another ignorant fool who doesn't understand the fundamental concepts of "permissionless" or "consensus" that Bitcoin is built upon.  I shall continue to curb-stomp your kind as I find you.  There is no such thing as a takeover in a system where anyone can run whatever software they want.  I'll just have to keep repeating (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2014384.msg20116502#msg20116502) myself (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1928093.msg20026755#msg20026755) until it sinks in.  Your primitive idea of control (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2009856.msg20136795#msg20136795) is wholly and undeniably flawed.

Jihan will stay where the money is.
He tries to play divide et impera games to weaken Bitcoin and the market, trying to accumulate more wealth.
He will position himself good enough to stay on the winning side even if it's not the side his propaganda would "like".

So, the REAL BTC will be that BTC with most hashrate power?

Absolutely true, the guy is a manipulator. No way will he walk away from Core. It'd be business suicide.

I agree with your opinion,we see in recent days how they manipulate with price just to buy more cheap BTC and now price is going up again.There is many games playing in the background and only thing that matters to most big players is how to profit in this situation.

I think that none of them wanted something bad to BTC,although there are those who think they are the smartest and that their thinking is only right.Imagine if all of them try to do something together to the benefit of the total crypto community.

I hope that all will end in the best possible way for users and that BTC will become more stronger then before,no more down-only up :)

not exactly. things aren't as simple as that. so you can't say big hashpower has the most power and small hashpower has the least or no power.
there are a lot of factors that will play a role in this.
the high hashpower helps a lot because it is securing the chain against splitting, 51% attacks, etc.
but as i said other factors such as nodes on the network which are crucial, exchanges to list these and then the price that will be decided on these exchanges, and finally one of the important ones: merchants. which one they choose can easily change a lot of things. and in fact splitting bitcoin, or even threat of splitting can mean they stop using bitcoin for good no matter what happens! so it may end up being a lose-lose scenario instead of one side winning...

Always think of 2 safeties here technical = hash-power  AND economical = long term physical investments + energy

Let's boycott this one. I can't say how happy I would be to see it dying with no real user support.

The "real" BTC will be the one which is adopted by the majority of merchants and has the highest price, after a few weeks from a chain split.  IMO, it'll be extremely clear which one is in charge within a few weeks.

Miners have some level of power, but Bitcoin's power is balanced between several different groups and the succeeding chain is more subjective.

---

Personally, I won't make a judgement and I won't bother fiddling with my Bitcoin Cash, in the same way that I wouldn't have bothered fiddling with Clamcoin if I'd held BTC back in 2014.  I'll just HODL it and spend the other chain.

so core avoids full and real consensus by going soft (facepalm)

and others avoid full and real consensus by going controversial (facepalm)

why are people afraid of just using the real consensus that has been built into bitcoin for 8 years!

seems that all people care about is things to cause drama so they can play the ups and down of the price. or split the coin hoping to double their money.. neither side are thinking about a rational logical attempt to unite the community for a better combined bitcoin with real features everyone can use.

It's hard for your wishes to materialize, things are no longer decided by the developers, it's open to the public, and a vote is going to take place.

I think hard forks will be inevitable now. Some in the community have decided to resolve disputes by virtue of chain-split alt coins. This will just be the beginning, I'm sure more will be coming in the future. Once the market gets use to the idea it will have little effect on the price of "Bitcoin".