core has economic power?

last thing i read is that the exchanges would accept and trade both coins of any split that may occur.. so the 'economic' power is equal.

as i said in last post its more complex.
for instance if the BScartel only allowed their portfolio of exchanges to only allow deposits and withdrawals of segwit(AKA BScoin) .. THEN core would have economic power. but by exchanges allowing all forks to be traded. the ecomonic power is equalised

as for core having node power.. as of today cores nodes are empty flagging segwit without even having a node ready to make a segwit tx on the main net. (that will come as a later release after activation) so technically core has zero node power in true support of segwit. its just meaningless hand waving right now with promises of a proper version release after activation.

if you think that segwit tx's are going to occur overnight after activation. think again. even litecoin hasnt bothered to even get the segwit supporting pools to use segwit tx's. let alone the wider community..

all in all.. nothing is set in stone.. whether its
november-soft-segwit
august-hard-segwit
segwit-and-2mb-lagacy
1mb-legacy
dynamic-legacy

its still all up in the air, and going to be a clusterf**k of orphans for everyone.

bitcoin will only remain number 1 if
merchant services (bitpay/coinbase) stick with only offering bitcoin as the 'we accept' payment network for the hundreds of thousands of merchants around the world.

price is meaningless/temporary drama.. but if the merchant adoption flips over to another coin due to the payment processor (shoppingcart API services) then bitcoin will lose its number 1 status

some exchanges are already moving to mbtc right now. then later drop again to ubtc(bits)

where the fee is 'commonly discussed' as ~1000bit($2) per tx, instead of 0.001btc(~$2)
meaning people in conversation and website/app display visualise it as ~1000bit($2) per tx, instead of 0.001btc(~$2)

the logic would be that if price goes up.. the 'unit of measure' for everything goes down.


then when lets say btc price goes to $20k
the fee becomes ~100bit($2) per tx, (0.0001btc~$2)


then when lets say btc price goes to $200k
the fee becomes ~10bit($2) per tx, (0.00001btc~$2)

if you think that if BTC went upto $20k people would spend $200 a TX... then you might aswell call bitcoin useless
no one would spend $200 a tx

until the code is developed there is no consensus. any "flagging" done before there is code is just propaganda.
real consensus is about actually using an implementation that can do the job actually announcing it can do the job and wants the job
wasting months flagging for something that has no code available to actually do the function is an empty promise.

EG
imagine people al flag 2mb+segwit.. it gets the threshold needed. and then at the grace period. some a-hole in the BScartel releases 'the 2mb+segwit' but it has a 2mb activates in 2018 'as promised' ... but then(luke Jr style of bait and switch) drops to 500kb by 2019

..
so until there is actual CODE. a promise is meaningless

if

but even these very new proposals that just this last month are 'promising' such... are still being coded as segwit.

a few people jumped onto the githubs and plop in code for the 2mb to be activated at X .. and those requests get deleted.. so even in these new proposals they are so far just empty promises.. only really coding different times to activate segwit sooner than november

60%+ of the mining network and many nodes are waiting for there to be some real code of a real coded implementation that includes a legacy block increase..

Barry coin IS the same as corecoin..

they are all the same BS cartel
its just a bait and switch to gather more momentum to push through segwit.. the other stuff of promises of 2mb is the same empty promise being mentioned since 2015..

all it is is to have 4 different implementations of segwit to FAKE free choice.. where all the choices still end up being segwit

unlike the egyptians which measured gold in tonnes people now measure gold in ounces and soon grams will become common.


as for the bitcoin world bits (100sats) will become common

price crashing via dumping is temporary drama.. it will just be known as mega discount day..

think of it this way.. go back a couple years
do you think satoshi dumping his stash will suddenly revive the chain pre v0.8 that was compatible with satoshi's 0.1-0.3 implementations.. answer no.

its more complex then that, its about realising the symbiotic relationships between pools and nodes.. and then realising the many mechanisms and scenario's that can play out within the real understanding of the consensus network

such as if pools went in direction X but the nodes rejected blocks.. pools cant move their funds because none of the nodes recognise the block rewards because they are not held in the chain which the nodes have

also you have to interplay what node versions the gateway infrastructure is using. which means the ways in-out of bitcoin.

for instance the BScartel has puppet strings conncting to bitpay, bitpesa, coinbase, kraken, purse, shapeshift xapo amungst others.
so that too can decide which lasts longer..

and ofcourse there is the technical side. of which chain has most nodes and biggest chainwork/height with the LEAST headaches of orphans occuring that can sway people to trust one side or another..

the 'price' drama stuff is just temporary compared to consensus and security of the network

writing something and then saying the original writer wrote it(facepalm).. bad on so many levels. thats like rewriting history to pretend the holocaust didnt happen

anyway you cant read more than a paragraph, so ill keep this short.. in your own time learn these words
plagiarism - bad
citation - good

have a nice day

seriously you gonna continue harping on with the now 3year old empty FUD script found on reddit.

have you actually noticed that 8mb is now deemed as safe compared to 2009

its devs that are holding things back, not tech
devs wanna push people into corporate hubs and offchain services so they can grab fee's

please do research that its not tech holding things back.. but devs

1.
it was not the pools that caused the fee war.. devs REMOVED fee control mechanisms

2.
segwit is not a solution, its just a empty gesture of half baked promises.. that even if everyone used segwit would still only have the HOPE of 7tx/s, which is the same hope of 2009-2015

3. the other things segwit promised to offer wont happen. EG eradicate quadratics.. sorry but quadratic spammers gonna continue quadratic spamming on native keys. and yes it only takes 5-20 tx's to fill a block using many diffrent forms of bloat attacks. so segwit isnt solving crap

4. if you think segwit is the hope for LN.. well you might as well use multisig contracts with bitgo or xapo or coinbase as it will end up being the same thing once you wash all the glitter off.

5. if you still want to blame pools just for not voting for it, ask the hard question WHY. and also realise again it was the devs that decided the stupidest route to implement something

6. if you still want to blame pools and say they are objecting to something for fee's then you shuold never blame the same pools for doing empty blocks. because they cant be doing both, logically

if people actually ready the details of AML/KYC requirements. they would see many ways to implement it without causing all the headaches

EG not even have a deposit fiat/withdraw fiat facility for the customer until ID is given. that way there wont be any hold ups of 'freezing' funds

"regulations" are too hyped up for what they actually offer.. id prefer "consumer protections" where the business has to identify itself and can be prosecuted if they do naughty things.. that is what would help bitcoin alot.

sounds good

secure it all

its best to have your access to your funds secured in different formats incase one goes missing/lost/corrupted/forgotten.

but generally seeds are better to handle

a seed is better. because you can hide it much better. both in the electronic form and physical form
design a crossword
hide the words it as a grocery shopping list
a christmas wishlist

that seed is yours for life
..
wallet.dats can get corrupted. data loss, physical loss of usb memory stick, virus, electrical surges killing memory storage
and every time you use a new address or move funds to a new change address you usually end up needing to re-backup the wallet

regulation is not the problem

here are the real problems
1. bitcoin is not ready to jump to 3.5bilion users over night.
2. thinking anything should jump to 3.5billion users over night is a stupid mindset to have anyway(even facebook didnt predict that)
3. current 10mill people only caring about 3.49billion new purely for a price spike so the 10mill can exit back to fiat
4. thinking reducing functionality and halting growth is good
5. devs removing code of fee control and replacing it with wallstreet economics of 'just pay more'
6. devs think bitcoins solution is to divert people away from bitcoin and to use alternative networks instead
7. availability of access(buying in local currency via bank notes in a town people live in)
8. understandability for common man

alot of people will argue "we just need to advertise it more"
to which i will refer them to points 1,2,3,8

alot of people will argue bitcoin cant cope
to which i will refer them to points 1,4,6,7


but here is the thing. blaming regulation is foolish.
many things that are not regulated can get success, as long as they do something, each person that gets it can continue using it HAPPILY even after the first try/use

take fidget spinners. simple, does not need a manual. does exactly what people expect.

alot of people talk to newb's by talking about bitcoins old ethos or the utopian revolution.. which bitcoin has lost
alot of people talk to newb's by talking about bitcoins get rich quick.. which is the 'too good to be true' red flag style of advertising
alot of people talk to newb's by talking about bitcoins bnfits for the unbanked.. but bitcoin has lost that (remember its the POOR who are most unbanked)

until people admit that bitcoins functionality has DROPPED. and stop just thinking just about price..
until people stop only caring about how soon they can run back to fiat with their pockets full as the only reason to advertise
...
then bitcoin should not yet spread to mainstream.

(facepalm)
sounds like people what new versions to replace the original as if its the true clean 'original' version

how about
'then advertise a new and different version that is not an just "an alternative for original version"'


movie analogy
highlighted and noted as being a reboot... not a remaster of the original

funds are not moved to your computer. they are on the blockchain.

electrum is just the tool to view and communicate with the blockchain. but you dont need to be permanently connected to 'accept' payment.

the network accepts the payment by confirming transactions into blocks. the blockchain is not in one place, never shuts down it is 24/7 network..
you can view your funds on any blockchain viewer (node/explorer) but only move funds if you provide your private key

your private key is your proof that you have the authority to move funds... all you need to worry about is having the private key to that public address to prove that you are the one thats allowed to spend it, whenever you want to spend it at a later date

wording it another way(fiat analogy)

telling your employers your bank details that are wrote on your debit card. does not mean you can only get paid by having to have your debit card permanently inserted into an ATM. or by having a sleeping bag and sleeping inside the local bank. or by having to log into your online bank and stay logged in

you can get paid whenever.. by whomever and however much they want to pay you..


your private key is like your ATM pin number. dont tell anyone it. but you will need it when its time to spend the funds

if you stop thinking about WHO deserves the funds and WHO deserves to decide the rules and look at the security of CODE
PoW is more resistant than PoS

why do you think PoS changes happen so easily compared to PoW changes...
if something is harder to change, it means its more secure.

im not interested in altcoins... but lets reword the OP's question.. just for fun
if we were in 2009 and wanted to rebrand bitcoin.. what would some options be

for instance some people know there is no actual 'coin'.
a real world wallet stores bank notes but a bitcoin wallet stores keys.

so some would say rebrand it to something like

upay - to signify that YOU pay people without middlemen
keyring- the better analogy instead of 'wallet'
            so you can than duplicate your keyring instead of backing up a wallet....... it makes more analogical sense.

then the unit of measure(value) not being called the same thing as the network/protocol/software.
for instance call them satoshi's for the minimal and for what would be bitcoin becomes..  megahectsat, commonly "mehesa's"... or MHS

..
i say this so that if making an altcoin.. atleast make it have some form of easy understanding. where the buzzwords actually have some realistic meaning if you dig deep enough.. none of this pick a random name out of a hat crap and then need to spend an hour explaining it