Bitcoin Forum

I understand BCC/BCH is similar to lumen (but 1:1 ratio based airdrop).
BCC/BCH is just an altcoin is being created with air drop plans based on snap shot of blockchain as of August 1st 2017 12:20 UTC.

Yes, it will be a new altcoin with exact specifications similar to bitcoin but with 8MB block size and with other segwit proposals and finally it will start its life with pre-mined blocks. (pre-mined blocks are being copied from bitcoin's blockchain).

Why big hype on BCC/BCH and how they will survive 51% attack ?

Great question. Bitmain the chines ASIC manufacture and mining pool operator are the main party pushing for this alt-coin. I belive they hold over 60% of all mining hardware and may have backdoors/kill switches in the vast majority of privately owned mining hardware.
Depending on how much of their mining hardware is redirected toward this new altcoin could cause temporarily a slow down in the Bitcoin Netowrk transaction confirmation mechanism. The creation of new Blocks will be slowed from its current time of like 7 to 10 minutes to hours.
This is what has people worried.

isn't BCC or BTC a altcoins?  ::) there is no BTC forever.

fork is a programming term, which means something like "copy the code and change some stuff and release a new version".
here is an example from github. this is the trending repository of the day:
https://i.imgur.com/TsoeBjk.jpg

if you click the fork button, you create a fork of this repository. then you can change what you want in its code and release your own version.

with bitcoin, your fork and change needs to be accepted by the majority of the people on this decentralized system to become bitcoin. SegWit was the fork that got this majority support.
bitcoin classic, bitcoin xt, bitcoin unlimited, bitcoin cash, ... are the forks that never got anywhere near majority support and that is why there is a lot of fuss about it. but you can always fork and even mine your own version of bitcoin as long as you have money to burn on mining, electricity,...

indeed, fork means copy and improved, but the forked thing is quite different from the original

BITMAIN do not support BCH.  Their proposal was only for if UASF succeeds - it has, but only due to BIP 91.  While they could be doing anything in the future, they're still directing their hashrate for the New York agreement for now.
BCH does not involve SegWit.  SegWit is potentially being activated on the current chain, but not on BCH.  They are opposed to SegWit.
Good point.  I would say that after the split, some mining pools will dedicate portions of their hashrate to BCH depending on the price, and shitty cloud miners like Genesis Mining will most likely be offering BCH contracts.  If the hashrate is too low relative to the price, it's likely that people will reuse their old SHA-256 ASICs that are no longer profitable on BTC, which would push up the hashrate somewhat.

If BITMAIN were to ever change their stance and begin supporting BCH as well as possible, they may be able to do 51% attacks, but considering that it would make all mining on that chain unprofitable for them and the people mining at their pools, I consider it unlikely.

Because Roger Ver and Jihan Wu probably pay trolls to spread out on social web and forms screaming how amazing this new coin is, and how it is going to take over BTC.

It's all a load of horse shit, we'll see in a couple of hours.

It's not though.

BCH keeps the entire Bitcoin transaction history and simply diverges from the Bitcoin blockchain by introducing blocks with a different ruleset after the 12:20 UTC. This is exactly the definition of a fork. A BCH full node will be able to verify the entire transaction history from Satoshi's Genesis block to the present. The ruleset it will check will change from time to time, including a change after 12:20 UTC on August 1st.

There's nothing preventing a large Bitcoin miner from 51% attacking BCH. It'll cost them a considerable amount of money in lost mining income, so I guess that's what the BCH folks are banking on.

The difference between altcoins that use BTC addresses for airdrop and BCH/BCC is that BCH/BCC copies Bitcoins blockchain and uses it as its own. To claim BCC you need to import your private keys (which might endanger your BTC wallet in the future), while in altcoin airdrop you need to sign a message with BTC address. This is because BCC/BCH code is very close to Bitcoin, while other altcoins can have major differences.
So, BCC/BCH is an airdrop altcoin, but a bit different from other altcoins. For example, you can claim it anytime you want after the fork, while other airdrop altcoins have centralized distribution which is active only during some time frames.


There's no hype for it, so far only some exchanges accept it. As for 51% attack - just as the other altcoins. No one is going to bother attacking them.

Bitcoin is an project without an owner. And is open to everybody. So, anyone can fork it and has been done many times.
What makes this fork especial is the involvement of majority of miners. And it surely done to address their in

I think of any fork of Bitcoin's code as a "fork"... Bitcoin Cash takes it a step further than other altcoins by fully leaving the UTXO set and ledger history intact.

But when you think about it, isn't that what any hard fork is? A hard fork changes/removes the consensus rules, making it incompatible with the original blockchain, while retaining the UTXO set and ledger history. I see no fundamental difference here. If anything, the airdrop/altcoin comparisons show exactly what a hard fork really is.