 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
Something else came to my mind:
If both chains continue to exist, would it be possible to do 'merged mining' on both blockchains,
similar to merged mining of BTC and NMC today ?
No one has answered this. The answer must be yes, it would be possible with a modified client. Another scenario comes up when you consider the shadow miners, all the at-home ASIC owners who turned off their machines as they lost out to the mega-miners. They'd surely consider turning them back onto mining on the "losing" fork at reduced value, because the difficulty will drop dramatically as well. Shadow miners are mostly from the idealistic phase of Bitcoin, so their incentive to continue on Core if XT wins out will be great. Both forks continue, one will not die to zero. One may become sub $1 again, but that's OK for some people. OK - this actually made me think of something I haven't seen elsewhere..... Let's assume the above scenario does occur - a fork where both chains survive. What happens to the "finite number" of Bitcoin. I mean, say you have 15 million Bitcoin at Zero Hour. Then say XT Fork wins, and the vast majority of Bitcoins choose that chain. But say 1 Million of those Bitcoin Holders choose the Core Chain. Does that mean that the New Finite number of bitcoins that will ever exist on XT will now be 20 million?NOTE: I also still can't understand what is going to drive people to stay on Core IF XT Chain wins and takes off. Because in that scenario there is almost a 100% chance that Bitcoin XT will start moving up in value, and Bitcoin-Core will start devaluing massively in the immediate aftermath. I just am trying to imagine sitting there looking at my wallet with a Bitcoin in it, and saying if I take the right hand path I get $200+ and if I go left I get $20 - and then deciding to do the STUPID thing. I mean - why wouldn't I just go to XT for a lot more value, then sell for dollars, then go back and buy TEN (10) Bitcoin-Core (now a minor fork altcoin). I mean - I am thinking that is the path people would take??? I would. No, it doesn't. That's like saying "Will LiteCoin reduce the amount of Bitcoin?" If there is a fork, it doesn't care about the other fork, it's really just as easy as that. This is right. Don't think of a fork as dividing bitcoin into two pieces. Think of it as creating a parallel universe. (The fiat money invested would divide though.) |
|
|
|
Something else came to my mind:
If both chains continue to exist, would it be possible to do 'merged mining' on both blockchains,
similar to merged mining of BTC and NMC today ?
I read somewhere that BTC-XT is programmed to disconnect from BTC-core once it reaches the 75% threshold, so it would be two separate networks. Someone else can confirm? |
|
|
|
So as I understand it: I have 1BTC. The blockchian forks, I now have 1BTC-core + 1BTC-XT. I continue to do nothing, and this balance remains. After a time, the value of these different coins (in fiat terms) diverges. Someday, I decide to sell for fiat. If I've waited long enough, I think one of those coins is probably worthless, so I probably don't want to bother separating them. If I want to separate them, I can do so by the method in the OP.
There is no a way for the market to instantly decide which coin is worthless, this can be done only via trading. If you have balls of steel and can wait long enough then you indeed don't need to bother separating your bitcoins. I think waiting as long as possible is the most conservative and least ballsy action. I believe that 1 BTC-prefork = 1 BTC-core + 1 BTC-XT. Both of these values can go up and down since bitcoin is very volatile, but by doing nothing, I wouldn't expect to gain or loose (unless I have a prediction of which way the marked is going, but I'm not a market analyst.) If I were to sell one or the other right away (or as soon as possible), I'd be gamboling on which fork will hold the value in the long run. I might (roughly) double my money, or I might loose it all. |
|
|
|
So basically, if I understand correctly, this is a hack that favours the miners.
And obviously, miners would be motivated to make a fork happen.
Am I correct?
What do you mean "hack"? If you are talking about the guide - it's a necessary thing to do for everyone who wants to save as much money as possible. If you are talking about the trick of creation of exclusive coin inputs - yes, it favours the miners because gives them a way to sell 1 BTC for 1000+ BTC. Well, since I doubt anyone will be selling these newly generated coins or be lucky enough to get his transaction in only one chain, it is logical to assume that we will see a lot of this hack (or trick if you prefer) happening by miners. The question is: Where does that leave the average Bitcoiner who is not aware of it or lucky enough to get them coins and attempt to double them? So as I understand it: I have 1BTC. The blockchian forks, I now have 1BTC-core + 1BTC-XT. I continue to do nothing, and this balance remains. After a time, the value of these different coins (in fiat terms) diverges. Someday, I decide to sell for fiat. If I've waited long enough, I think one of those coins is probably worthless, so I probably don't want to bother separating them. If I want to separate them, I can do so by the method in the OP. It is worth noting that BTC-XT is not necessarily the one that gets the value (even though it has greater than 75% of the network). If the people who are buying bitcoins with fiat are more confident in btc-core, than that is where the money will go, and that is the version that will have more value (even though it's network is smaller). |
|
|
|
Heck we got the message the first time, don't do it again.
Right? What is the point? Everyone knows. We all know something needs to be done. Why shoot bitcoin in the foot to get it done? Maybe they want the btc price to plummet, and shut down other miners to decrease difficulty, then they can mine some blocks, and get ahead of the game? I am in favor of larger block sizes, but this is not the way to make it happen. In fact, if everyone disagrees with me then the end result will be higher fees imo resulting in BTC becoming a storage of wealth and LTC becoming the major coin for transactions. But No one should try to force the issue. We need a community decision, consensus, not a rogue company trying to prove a point that has already been proven. Stupid is as stupid does. In this case, why wouldn't people move their wealth to LTC? And why wouldn't LTC have the same problem as its transactions increase? |
|
|
|
|
This has actually been quite useful. Electrum is pretty much what I was looking for (or paper wallets, which I've learned a little bit about as well). Since the address is generated offline, I don't have to trust anyone other than myself to hold the bitcoin. I know that I have to trust someone when I buy them, but I don't mind that since it's only for a short period of time. I can just buy and then transfer to the address that I control. What I wanted to avoid was a situation where I buy some bit coin, and then someone holds it and I have no way of knowing if they actually bought it, or if they still have it, or if they could walk off with it.
This is the case with Xapo for example. I'm not saying they are risky, I don't know. Based on the interview with their founder that got me thinking about bitcoin, I'm guessing they are okay, but I want to take the risk myself, otherwise, I'm happy just keeping my fiat currency in the bank.
For those who got into things like "technically not encrypted" or "linux distro" you're on the edge of my technical understanding, and if bitcoin is ever going to take off, it'll have to be accessible to people much less technically inclined than I am. I hope that is the direction it goes. If so, it's a good time to get into it.
Thanks for your help all.
|
|
|
|
|
So I'm looking to get some bitcoins securely, but I'm not sure how to go about it.
Whatever site I use, how can I be sure that they won't run off with my bitcoins like Mt. Gox? I just read recently that there may be issues with blockchain.info. I'd like to know how to get bitcoins without having to trust ANYONE. This is one of the most appealing aspects of bitcoin, but I haven't been able to figure out how to do it. Everywhere I look, it seems like I'd just be opening a "bank" account that would hold bitcoins for me. Maybe I could then transfer them to a different "bank", but how do I get the "cash". (I think this would mean having the address and private key, but I don't know if this is totally correct.)
(This seems like a simple question that must have been covered before, but I haven't found anything by searching.)
Thanks for your help.
|
|
|
|
|
