question

[Nxtblg]

Ah, hell; I bit. Now, I'm synchronizing my first ever Bitcoin-qt wallet.

[maltrox]

I have a lot of doubts.

First, my BTC before the fork can be translated to XT any time (if its my will). I have a BTC mining contract, after fork BTC mined cannot get converted to XT, am I right?

What happen if I buy BTC on a exchange after fork, I'll be able to convert it to XT?

What would happen if I dont like XT or XT crash, may I come back to BTC?

It is possible a market manipulation? Example: A group of guys make buying pressure to pump BTC-XT, they convince a lot of people to change to XT because have best prices, then dump the price and run out?


 

[achow101]

This all assumes that there will be two chains, which will only happen if the fork is done without consensus.

I have a lot of doubts.

First, my BTC before the fork can be translated to XT any time (if its my will). I have a BTC mining contract, after fork BTC mined cannot get converted to XT, am I right?

It depends on what chain your mining contract is mining on, but yes, any BTC mined after the fork cannot be exchanged between the two chains unless an exchange is willing to do it.

What happen if I buy BTC on a exchange after fork, I'll be able to convert it to XT?

Only if another exchange is willing to exchange it.

What would happen if I dont like XT or XT crash, may I come back to BTC?

Yes, if you did not touch the BTC chain after the fork. If your Bitcoin was only transacted on the XT fork, then if you decide to use the old BTC chain, you will have however many BTC you had prior to the fork.

It is possible a market manipulation? Example: A group of guys make buying pressure to pump BTC-XT, they convince a lot of people to change to XT because have best prices, then dump the price and run out?

Yup. Its called a pump and dump. Happens all the time with new altcoins.

[canth]

None of this 'chaos' is going to happen. Bitcoin XT isn't going to allow for 20MB blocks once its released - it'll have a date (block height) where it'll allow for blocks w/ larger than 1MB blocks to be produced, likely sometime in mid 2016. By then we'll know if this has consensus or not - if it does, Bitcoin Core will go to 20MB blocks and there will be no significant contention.

Basically, chill and let the consensus process, otherwise known as Proof of Work, do its job.

[bitnanigans]

What's the status on this? I'm thinking of spinning a few Bitcoin XT nodes on some geographically distributed VPSes.

[Nxtblg]

What's the status on this? I'm thinking of spinning a few Bitcoin XT nodes on some geographically distributed VPSes.

You'll be pleasantly surprised in one respect: BitcoinXT nodes are head-scratchingly fast to sync. On my old desktop rig, running more than one altcoin's node, I synched Bitcoin XT from 6+ years ago to current in ~30 hours continuous. And that, with home Internet!

[Amph]

What's the status on this? I'm thinking of spinning a few Bitcoin XT nodes on some geographically distributed VPSes.

You'll be pleasantly surprised in one respect: BitcoinXT nodes are head-scratchingly fast to sync. On my old desktop rig, running more than one altcoin's node, I synched Bitcoin XT from 6+ years ago to current in ~30 hours continuous. And that, with home Internet!

30 hours really? it seems too much to me, i can sync the whole chain in less than 1 hour or so, i think you have a poor hd or a very bad bandwidth

and a part from two new features xt should not bring fast synching at all, it should be same as core

if that was the case, then xt should be really considered an altcoin, and this is why it will not happen, because it isn't an alt, but just an upgrade to the existing core

if you move your 10 btc, they will be moved from any qt or xt client at the same time
it's like having two client running with the same wallet

No. That's not how forking works. Doing a hard fork doesn't mean that we're upgrading the current chain, but rather starting a new one from some point (e.g. after a certain block; or when consensus is reached) with some changes/additions to the code.
As I've already stated: if you have 10 BTC on Bitcoin core, you're going to have 10 BTC on XT too. Moving your coins on Bitcoin Core won't move your coins on XT.

upgrading in the sense that it will not be an altcoin

i don't think you're right about the movements of coins, otherwise everyone could double spend if what you describe is the true

[Nxtblg]

30 hours really? it seems too much to me, i can sync the whole chain in less than 1 hours or so, i think you have a poor hd or a very bad bandwidth

You're more-or-less right. I was surprised at the speed because I had assumed it would take me weeks to synchronize a Bitcoin full node with the rickety old rig I've got. Most likely, that would be my fate if I had downloaded & synched up the Litecoin qt.

So, props to the XT devs for speeding up the synching.

[Lauda]

No. That's not how forking works. Doing a hard fork doesn't mean that we're upgrading the current chain, but rather starting a new one from some point (e.g. after a certain block; or when consensus is reached) with some changes/additions to the code.
As I've already stated: if you have 10 BTC on Bitcoin core, you're going to have 10 BTC on XT too. Moving your coins on Bitcoin Core won't move your coins on XT.

upgrading in the sense that it will not be an altcoin

i don't think you're right about the movements of coins, otherwise everyone could double spend if what you describe is the true

The only difference from XT and other altcoins that were forked from Bitcoin is that Gavin and Mike are doing it and calling it an upgrade (and obviously the name).
That's not what a double spend is.

A double spend is an attack where the given set of coins is spent in more than one transaction. We are talking about a set of coins within the same chain. What I described were 2 chains: Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT.
Once we get to the situation where we have 2 chains, moving coins on 1 won't move them on the other.

[danielpbarron]

What would happen if I dont like XT or XT crash, may I come back to BTC?

Yes, if you did not touch the BTC chain after the fork. If your Bitcoin was only transacted on the XT fork, then if you decide to use the old BTC chain, you will have however many BTC you had prior to the fork.

This is not true, and anyone who follows this advice will lose their funds for sure. Unless you go out of your way to double-spend your pre-fork coins so that they end up in different outputs on each chain, it is very likely that any transaction you make on one chain will be mirrored on the other. Since the ledger and the unconfirmed transaction pool are public, anyone can copy your transactions and broadcast them on the competing chain. If you plan to keep funds on the real chain as a backup for your XT derpitude, you should better split them first so that it is impossible for others to mirror your transactions in the future.

[canth]

What would happen if I dont like XT or XT crash, may I come back to BTC?

Yes, if you did not touch the BTC chain after the fork. If your Bitcoin was only transacted on the XT fork, then if you decide to use the old BTC chain, you will have however many BTC you had prior to the fork.

This is not true, and anyone who follows this advice will lose their funds for sure. Unless you go out of your way to double-spend your pre-fork coins so that they end up in different outputs on each chain, it is very likely that any transaction you make on one chain will be mirrored on the other. Since the ledger and the unconfirmed transaction pool are public, anyone can copy your transactions and broadcast them on the competing chain. If you plan to keep funds on the real chain as a backup for your XT derpitude, you should better split them first so that it is impossible for others to mirror your transactions in the future.

There isn't going to be a fork. Come early 2016 either most will support > 1MB blocks or most won't. No one is going to be want to be on the wrong side of the argument - it's just a losing proposition.

[MicroGuy]

There isn't going to be a fork. Come early 2016 either most will support > 1MB blocks or most won't. No one is going to be want to be on the wrong side of the argument - it's just a losing proposition.

Then there might be a fork. Any change to the max block size will require a fork.

[canth]

There isn't going to be a fork. Come early 2016 either most will support > 1MB blocks or most won't. No one is going to be want to be on the wrong side of the argument - it's just a losing proposition.

Then there might be a fork. Any change to the max block size will require a fork.

No. Introducing a software change that has the *potential* for a hard fork does not mean that there will be one. Ask yourself this: If 90% of nodes are supporting > 1MB blocks, including miners - would you hold tight and not upgrade? Same will be true for vice versa. Once > 50% of the nodes go one way, everyone else will too.

[Amph]

No. That's not how forking works. Doing a hard fork doesn't mean that we're upgrading the current chain, but rather starting a new one from some point (e.g. after a certain block; or when consensus is reached) with some changes/additions to the code.
As I've already stated: if you have 10 BTC on Bitcoin core, you're going to have 10 BTC on XT too. Moving your coins on Bitcoin Core won't move your coins on XT.

upgrading in the sense that it will not be an altcoin

i don't think you're right about the movements of coins, otherwise everyone could double spend if what you describe is the true

The only difference from XT and other altcoins that were forked from Bitcoin is that Gavin and Mike are doing it and calling it an upgrade (and obviously the name).
That's not what a double spend is.

A double spend is an attack where the given set of coins is spent in more than one transaction. We are talking about a set of coins within the same chain. What I described were 2 chains: Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT.
Once we get to the situation where we have 2 chains, moving coins on 1 won't move them on the other.

this mean that you will have doubled the coin, so you can spend your original coins two time, which don't sound right at all

only one fork will be operative in the end, the one with more consensus, the second ones will just fade away

we had already an hard fork in the past(2013), it isn't something new, if there are still some users using the chain before that hard fork, i'm sure they won't be able to spend their coins, because they would be orphaned or they block rejected

[Westin Landon Cox]

What would happen if I dont like XT or XT crash, may I come back to BTC?

Yes, if you did not touch the BTC chain after the fork. If your Bitcoin was only transacted on the XT fork, then if you decide to use the old BTC chain, you will have however many BTC you had prior to the fork.

This is not true, and anyone who follows this advice will lose their funds for sure. Unless you go out of your way to double-spend your pre-fork coins so that they end up in different outputs on each chain, it is very likely that any transaction you make on one chain will be mirrored on the other. Since the ledger and the unconfirmed transaction pool are public, anyone can copy your transactions and broadcast them on the competing chain. If you plan to keep funds on the real chain as a backup for your XT derpitude, you should better split them first so that it is impossible for others to mirror your transactions in the future.

This is my impression too. If Alice sends Bob 1 XBTC on the XT-network, Bob can publish the same transaction on the BTC-network and get Alice's 1 BTC too. I assume this will happen if both chains survive. The way to get around this is either easy (don't spend anything) or takes a little work:

Alice could send her 1 XBTC to her address A on the XT-network and her other address B on the BTC-network. At that point the two coins can be spent independently. It might take several tries to do this successfully, since when she spends 1 XBTC to her address A someone might publish the same transaction on the BTC-network before she can send the 1 BTC to address B. If that happens, try again until it doesn't. The point is: don't pay anyone other than yourself until the two coins are separated.

Should be a lot of fun to watch. I guess it's a good reason for people to learn a little more about how Bitcoin actually works.

[tvbcof]

...
Alice could send her 1 XBTC to her address A on the XT-network and her other address B on the BTC-network.  ...

Note that it really doesn't make sense to talk about 'address x on the y-network' absent a change to make formerly legal addresses illegal or vice versa.  Such changes are possible and may be used as tools/weapons when the battle warms up, but that has not been discussed much and is not part of the current conversation.

Also be clear that re-playing a transaction on 'the other chain' (I would anticipate 'the other chainS' being more relevant) does not necessarily do anyone any good unless they control the keys on the recipient end of things.  It is, of course, trivial to send transactions to oneself so that both the sending and receiving keys are controlled and that will be how clued-in people 'double up'.

Should be a lot of fun to watch. I guess it's a good reason for people to learn a little more about how Bitcoin actually works.

Yes!  That would be very wise indeed.

[pereira4]

What's the status on this? I'm thinking of spinning a few Bitcoin XT nodes on some geographically distributed VPSes.

You'll be pleasantly surprised in one respect: BitcoinXT nodes are head-scratchingly fast to sync. On my old desktop rig, running more than one altcoin's node, I synched Bitcoin XT from 6+ years ago to current in ~30 hours continuous. And that, with home Internet!

30 hours really? it seems too much to me, i can sync the whole chain in less than 1 hour or so, i think you have a poor hd or a very bad bandwidth

and a part from two new features xt should not bring fast synching at all, it should be same as core

if that was the case, then xt should be really considered an altcoin, and this is why it will not happen, because it isn't an alt, but just an upgrade to the existing core

if you move your 10 btc, they will be moved from any qt or xt client at the same time
it's like having two client running with the same wallet

No. That's not how forking works. Doing a hard fork doesn't mean that we're upgrading the current chain, but rather starting a new one from some point (e.g. after a certain block; or when consensus is reached) with some changes/additions to the code.
As I've already stated: if you have 10 BTC on Bitcoin core, you're going to have 10 BTC on XT too. Moving your coins on Bitcoin Core won't move your coins on XT.

upgrading in the sense that it will not be an altcoin

i don't think you're right about the movements of coins, otherwise everyone could double spend if what you describe is the true

Wait, you can sync the entire 6+ year blockchain in 1 hour? how's that even possible? what are you system specs and how much does it take to sync the entire network in Bitcoin Core for comparative purposes?

[Amph]

What's the status on this? I'm thinking of spinning a few Bitcoin XT nodes on some geographically distributed VPSes.

You'll be pleasantly surprised in one respect: BitcoinXT nodes are head-scratchingly fast to sync. On my old desktop rig, running more than one altcoin's node, I synched Bitcoin XT from 6+ years ago to current in ~30 hours continuous. And that, with home Internet!

30 hours really? it seems too much to me, i can sync the whole chain in less than 1 hour or so, i think you have a poor hd or a very bad bandwidth

and a part from two new features xt should not bring fast synching at all, it should be same as core

if that was the case, then xt should be really considered an altcoin, and this is why it will not happen, because it isn't an alt, but just an upgrade to the existing core

if you move your 10 btc, they will be moved from any qt or xt client at the same time
it's like having two client running with the same wallet

No. That's not how forking works. Doing a hard fork doesn't mean that we're upgrading the current chain, but rather starting a new one from some point (e.g. after a certain block; or when consensus is reached) with some changes/additions to the code.
As I've already stated: if you have 10 BTC on Bitcoin core, you're going to have 10 BTC on XT too. Moving your coins on Bitcoin Core won't move your coins on XT.

upgrading in the sense that it will not be an altcoin

i don't think you're right about the movements of coins, otherwise everyone could double spend if what you describe is the true

Wait, you can sync the entire 6+ year blockchain in 1 hour? how's that even possible? what are you system specs and how much does it take to sync the entire network in Bitcoin Core for comparative purposes?

yeah i can do it in 45 minutes, and i can fire up the lcient in 23-25 seconds

i7 4790k OC to 4400 + ssd samsung pro 850, the ssd is what matter

[BayAreaCoins]

This thread went from Bitcoin Discussion -> Altcoin Discussion and back to BTC Discussion... why is this not in the Alt part of these forums?

[R2D221]

This thread went from Bitcoin Discussion -> Altcoin Discussion and back to BTC Discussion... why is this not in the Alt part of these forums?

It was never in the altcoin section. What are you taking about?