The only people who won't like this are the hardline small blockers and the hardcore Blockstream/Core centralists. Don't forget the people who think Emergent Chaos is complete garbage. |
|
|
|
I am in to trade my possible BTU to BTC 1:1
you'll be able to do so on exchanges if a market exists. Stop bothering the whales. If only... 1:1 is a bargain. I seriously doubt we'd see that. Yeah, I'm pretty certain it won't be 1:1. LOL! |
|
|
|
|
We can have both. BU wants to attack any chain which isn't BU though.
Obviously supporters of each side are going to call the other side the "altcoin".
|
|
|
|
Forget my hero status (means fuck all a sort from posting crap for a long time)
This is a complete none techy question as I am purely a hodler.
With regards to a possible fork, what happens to us non techy guys who just hodl bitcoin long term on paper wallets? I've said I'm not techy numerous times so no dickhead comments please.
How does all this work?
Thank you.
During a contentious hard fork, you would have access to the same coins on both chains, and to trade them properly you would have to disassociate them one way or another. If one chain wins and the other goes the way of the Dodo, you have nothing to worry about holding a paper wallet. If two chains continue to exist, at some point down the road you will probably want to disassociate your coins to prevent replay attack (a transaction on one chain is also valid on the other chain). |
|
|
|
::sigh:: once more, into the breech .... BUcoin crashed last night to 200 nodes after the the new bug was discovered,
Yes, a new bug was discovered by someone desirous of performing a DoS attack upon BU. This bug was exploited by such attackers to cause a number of nodes to crash. While a temporary inconvenience, we welcome this assistance in hardening the BU system before flag day. and then the developers had the great idea of releasing a closed source patch.
Well, not exactly. I mean, if your definition of 'closed source' is delayed release of the source, I guess so. While I was not part of the decision process, it seemed to be predicated on the fact that immediate release would reveal the precise nature of the vulnerability to additional attackers. It was done to create a window for the patch to propagate. Whether or not that was the proper course of action is something that can be debated. Indeed, it is still being debated within the BU community. But your characterization of 'they've gone closed source' is beyond the pale.  |
|
|
|
I say the longest chain (most hashpower) is Bitcoin. I know that doesn't fit your narrative that Core/Status Quo = Bitcon, but hey... you say Tomato , I say Tomahto.
You have no idea which chain is going to be the longest and neither do I (although I know what I'll be doing). I do know, however, that the miners won't be the ones deciding. |
|
|
|
Core will have to capitulate or fork off.
We have a status quo now. The first dude to make a block bigger than 1 MB is the one forking off... I know that doesn't fit your narrative that BU = Bitcoin, but it's the reality of the situation. I mean, afaik BU doesn't even have a plan to roll out a hard fork for a smooth transition. Just randomly dropping it on users when they see fit. Emergent Chaos if you ask me. Exactly what I want from systems that protect my money. |
|
|
|
but its written by thezerg  LOL. That's great. Might as well just let him hold your money for you! |
|
|
|
my node crashed  It's cool, just grab the closed source patch. i'll just wait till a few days after the releases... for node my node is "gimped" to avoid the crash I added a sarcasm tag in case it wasn't obvious. Bleh... test is so boring... I would definitely not recommend anyone use a closed source patch for software holding private keys. |
|
|
|
my node crashed It's cool, just grab the closed source patch. /sarcasm |
|
|
|
Problem is Roger will have a BU node to accept the payment and it is only a 50/50 chance it will be online when they trade. How will Roger verify the coins were sent?
Don't worry, I'm sure Ver's node is one of the "critical nodes". |
|
|
|
Unlimited is no less decentralization or trustless than Core.
Except for that time BU released a closed source patch. And anyone can release a closed source patch of Core if they want to. Doesn't mean users will choose to run it. Yes, anyone can. No, it certainly doesn't. |
|
|
|
Unlimited is no less decentralization or trustless than Core.
Except for that time BU released a closed source patch. |
|
|
|
Could be done fairly trustlessly with lets say 10k coins.
A sends B 10 core coins,
B sends A 10 unlimited coins.
repeat 1000 times, just keep hitting the mouse buttons for a day. The idea here, I imagine, is the locking in of exchange rate pre fork.  Post fork, one can simply use the market in a normal fashion. |
|
|
|
Reddit seems to have caught that post in a spam filter, it shows up when I'm logged in. I lost the password to my other reddit account.
60K is personal holdings, possibly up to an additional 70K in client funds depending on their sentiment, which pretty strongly leans Core.
Escrow wise, I would hope someone could come up with an atomic swap method.
No split, no transaction. If there is a split, I'd love to double up.
BitcoinUnlimited can end costing more than Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin core will end costing 1/10 of BU price and will be renamed to Bitcoin classic just like Ethereum- In which case Ver would be insane not to take this deal. |
|
|
|
pretty sure this is 'loaded' or else why is he re-posting it here.
I'm glad they are not dumping
Loaded is just trying to get a good deal for his BUtcoins because he expects he won't get 1:1 on the market post fork. If Roger truly believes that BUtcoins are the future he would be wise to jump on this deal. Granted there are other difficulties that make this deal cumbersome. You'd have to either rely on escrow (and lose control of your coins) or a legally biding contract (and all the things which that entails). |
|
|
|
|
There are basically two reasons, off the top of my head, that people consider a contentious fork as dangerous.
One is that two coins competing for Bitcoin's market share will both be using the same proof of work, which could get ugly when it comes to 51% attacks, et cetera.
Another is that the resulting chaos will erode Bitcoin's value entirely, regardless of the outcome.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
