jbreher
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1660
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
|
 |
August 21, 2017, 06:55:13 PM |
|
A serious attempt would have included replay protection by default, from the start.
Disagree. There was enough controversy over Bitcoin Cash such that we knew it would not have majority out of the chute*. But S2X has -- or at least had -- overwhelming support. If you think the change is likely to capture the majority by the outset, you do not implement replay protection. You let the to-be-minority implementation act to protect itself best it can. Best case, the legacy implementation dies near-immediately. Has core implemented replay protection for any of their changes? *over the coming months is another story altogether. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you see garbage posts (off-topic, trolling, spam, no point, etc.), use the "report to moderator" links. All reports are investigated, though you will rarely be contacted about your reports.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Last of the V8s
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 4392
Be a bank
|
|
August 21, 2017, 06:57:17 PM |
|
I keep looking at the sun but I simply can't see anything.
@JennnQuinn Aug 20
Why is it when the sun blacks out on a Monday afternoon it's an "amazing natural phenomenon" but when I do it's a "problem"
|
|
|
|
|
conspirosphere.tk
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2352
Merit: 1064
Bitcoin is antisemitic
|
|
August 21, 2017, 06:58:08 PM
Last edit: August 21, 2017, 07:23:06 PM by conspirosphere.tk |
|
Now it gets interesting. Imho if support at $3960 does not hold next stop is $3340.  edit: everybody do a big breath and HODL! |
|
|
|
|
Last of the V8s
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 4392
Be a bank
|
|
August 21, 2017, 07:09:59 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CoinCube
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
|
August 21, 2017, 07:37:22 PM |
|
One thing would be to get more BTC with your BCH, another would be to sell part of the BCH into dollars, and another (that you are assuming) is that they are selling more than the BCH dollar amount, which is a bit larger of an assumption....
Does not have to be more. If BCH is being pumped with BTC but the pumpers are using older saved BTC and the sellers of BCH are converting to fiat it could put substantial downward pressure on the Bitcoin price. This is what I think is actually happening but that is just speculation. Having your funds in long term cold storage can make for a fairly powerful psychological barrier to selling. As holders breach cold storage on a large scale to cash out BCH it will probably will push some people to sell who would not otherwise. How much and how relevant this will be is unknown. Honestly, given these negative pressures I believe the simple fact that the price has not totally crashed is a very bullish indicator over the medium term. I put my money where my mouth is and I am now 1% fiat 99% BTC and 0% BCH so perhaps that makes me biased  |
|
|
|
|
rjclarke2000
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1016
|
|
August 21, 2017, 07:46:18 PM |
|
Advice on electrum please.
Is this a good wallet to use to be middle man when creating a new paper wallet?
I.e. Moving coins from one paper wallet to a new one.
|
|
|
|
|
d_eddie
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2492
Merit: 2899
|
|
August 21, 2017, 07:55:59 PM |
|
Advice on electrum please.
Is this a good wallet to use to be middle man when creating a new paper wallet?
I.e. Moving coins from one paper wallet to a new one.
Quite good IMO. |
|
|
|
|
CoinCube
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
|
August 21, 2017, 07:56:53 PM
Last edit: August 21, 2017, 08:11:29 PM by CoinCube |
|
Advice on electrum please.
Is this a good wallet to use to be middle man when creating a new paper wallet?
I.e. Moving coins from one paper wallet to a new one.
Electrum works well for this. If you are not in a rush you can even load the private keys from the paper wallet directly into the electrum wallet instead of sweeping them and then just pay a single tx fee to move them directly from one paper wallet to another but that process is more complex and takes longer. Easiest thing to do is to just sweep the private keys into your electrum wallet and then send it on from there to you new paper wallet ie two transactions. If you are worried about your computer being compromised you can even have an online electrum wallet on your normal PC and an offline electrum wallet on a cheep laptop that only signs transactions and transfer the transactions back and forth from online to offline computer with a USB stick so you private keys are never connected to the internet but that is not required. Make sure to get the wallet from the official site electrum.org as there is at least one scam site out there peddling malware. |
|
|
|
|
d_eddie
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2492
Merit: 2899
|
|
August 21, 2017, 07:59:13 PM |
|
A serious attempt would have included replay protection by default, from the start.
Disagree. There was enough controversy over Bitcoin Cash such that we knew it would not have majority out of the chute*. But S2X has -- or at least had -- overwhelming support. Overwhelming support behind closed doors. They could run their fork on a LAN in that room without a condom, no problem with that. I was talking about real transactions going around in the wild, on the - you know - Internet. |
|
|
|
|
Meuh6879
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1011
|
|
August 21, 2017, 08:20:08 PM |
|
Can you please ask her if she's planning to show us some boobage when BTC price starts rising again?
 Perhaps ... |
|
|
|
|
erre
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1205
|
|
August 21, 2017, 08:25:36 PM |
|
I already sold all my bcc, not intend to buy back.
Given that segwit2x will have some design bug (I don't think it will be so, replay is known so it should be fixed), I think that hold legacy bitcoin will still be the best solution to avoid every 2x bug.
|
|
|
|
|
|
machasm
|
|
August 21, 2017, 08:35:50 PM |
|
If there was a significant switch of hashrate from BTC to 2x or bch such that it caused BTC to stall for a significant time, couldn't core implement something similar to bch where the diff adjusted down quicker to compensate? If so shouldn't they be thinking of that now just in case this scenario plays out? Or is this unacceptable for some reason?
|
|
|
|
|
gentlemand
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2590
Merit: 3013
Welt Am Draht
|
|
August 21, 2017, 08:48:08 PM |
|
If there was a significant switch of hashrate from BTC to 2x or bch such that it caused BTC to stall for a significant time, couldn't core implement something similar to bch where the diff adjusted down quicker to compensate? If so shouldn't they be thinking of that now just in case this scenario plays out? Or is this unacceptable for some reason?
That would require another hard fork. Then we'd end up with four Bitcoins to play with. |
|
|
|
|
conspirosphere.tk
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2352
Merit: 1064
Bitcoin is antisemitic
|
|
August 21, 2017, 08:55:54 PM |
|
If there was a significant switch of hashrate from BTC to 2x or bch such that it caused BTC to stall for a significant time, couldn't core implement something similar to bch where the diff adjusted down quicker to compensate? If so shouldn't they be thinking of that now just in case this scenario plays out? Or is this unacceptable for some reason?
Slower blocks may help us to hodl harder. It's a feature, not a bug. |
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115
|
|
August 21, 2017, 09:00:11 PM |
|
If there was a significant switch of hashrate from BTC to 2x or bch such that it caused BTC to stall for a significant time, couldn't core implement something similar to bch where the diff adjusted down quicker to compensate? If so shouldn't they be thinking of that now just in case this scenario plays out? Or is this unacceptable for some reason?
That would require another hard fork. Then we'd end up with four Bitcoins to play with.  |
|
|
|
|
erre
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1205
|
|
August 21, 2017, 09:14:59 PM |
|
As far as I can understand, everybody pumping bcc is either a fool or in bad faith  via Imgflip Meme Generator |
|
|
|
|
|
fluidjax
|
|
August 21, 2017, 10:26:03 PM |
|
If there was a significant switch of hashrate from BTC to 2x or bch such that it caused BTC to stall for a significant time, couldn't core implement something similar to bch where the diff adjusted down quicker to compensate? If so shouldn't they be thinking of that now just in case this scenario plays out? Or is this unacceptable for some reason?
Its a last resort, and will require a hard fork. After the difficulty change the BTC chain will be open to 51% attacks (by the massive mining power on the other chain) trying to put the final nails in the coffin, so there will need to be a POW change also, and this will alienate any miners who had stayed on the original BTC chain. I don't think an emergency hard fork is going to be easy to get installed by everyone, but there may be no choice. |
|
|
|
|
|
machasm
|
|
August 21, 2017, 10:29:24 PM |
|
If there was a significant switch of hashrate from BTC to 2x or bch such that it caused BTC to stall for a significant time, couldn't core implement something similar to bch where the diff adjusted down quicker to compensate? If so shouldn't they be thinking of that now just in case this scenario plays out? Or is this unacceptable for some reason?
That would require another hard fork. Then we'd end up with four Bitcoins to play with. How are improvements/changes made to BTC without hard forking? Are there certain criteria set in stone that cannot be altered without forking? I guess tinkering with the diff retargeting is one of them. Is there something I can read to help me understand what can and can't be changed without a fork so I can stop asking stupid questions on the forum 😊? |
|
|
|
|
|
fluidjax
|
|
August 21, 2017, 10:43:12 PM |
|
If there was a significant switch of hashrate from BTC to 2x or bch such that it caused BTC to stall for a significant time, couldn't core implement something similar to bch where the diff adjusted down quicker to compensate? If so shouldn't they be thinking of that now just in case this scenario plays out? Or is this unacceptable for some reason?
That would require another hard fork. Then we'd end up with four Bitcoins to play with. How are improvements/changes made to BTC without hard forking? Are there certain criteria set in stone that cannot be altered without forking? I guess tinkering with the diff retargeting is one of them. Is there something I can read to help me understand what can and can't be changed without a fork so I can stop asking stupid questions on the forum 😊? A restriction on the current ruleset can be a soft fork. Loosening the rules would need to be a hard fork. So setting block size down to 500K is a soft fork, up to 2MB is a hard fork. 500K is less than the current rules, so its more restrictive. |
|
|
|
|
sirazimuth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3346
Merit: 3485
born once atheist
|
|
August 21, 2017, 10:44:25 PM |
|
If there was a significant switch of hashrate from BTC to 2x or bch such that it caused BTC to stall for a significant time, couldn't core implement something similar to bch where the diff adjusted down quicker to compensate? If so shouldn't they be thinking of that now just in case this scenario plays out? Or is this unacceptable for some reason?
That would require another hard fork. Then we'd end up with four Bitcoins to play with. How are improvements/changes made to BTC without hard forking? Are there certain criteria set in stone that cannot be altered without forking? I guess tinkering with the diff retargeting is one of them. Is there something I can read to help me understand what can and can't be changed without a fork so I can stop asking stupid questions on the forum 😊? well if all miners suddenly on a whim said "right chaps, we all mine bitcoincash from now on!! " so then theres this this death spiral and bitcoin chain will die we all go to helland the world will end in a big giant fireball...... Amen   |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
