Mageant (OP)
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1145
Merit: 1001
|
 |
February 27, 2017, 12:36:53 PM |
|
What if we prepared for a three-way hardfork (Segwit, BU, and the Bitcoin client as it is now) for a certain date (or block height) and then let the market decide on how Bitcoin should proceed further? The resulting market competition would then basically decide how to proceed with Bitcoin. Alternative bitcoin chains would probably continue to exist though.
If everyone knew about a certain date in advance then all the software could be prepared accordingly (including safeguards against replay attacks on the other chains).
A possible date could be a few months after the current softfork expiration date for Segwit (around November 2017).
|
cjgames.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bitcoin software, network, and concept is called "Bitcoin" with a capitalized "B". Bitcoin currency units are called "bitcoins" with a lowercase "b" -- this is often abbreviated BTC.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Carlton Banks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3074
|
|
February 27, 2017, 12:55:17 PM |
|
What if we prepared for a three-way hardfork (Segwit, BU, and the Bitcoin client as it is now) for a certain date (or block height) and then let the market decide on how Bitcoin should proceed further? The resulting market competition would then basically decide how to proceed with Bitcoin. Alternative bitcoin chains would probably continue to exist though.
If everyone knew about a certain date in advance then all the software could be prepared accordingly (including safeguards against replay attacks on the other chains).
A possible date could be a few months after the current softfork expiration date for Segwit (around November 2017).
An amicable chain fork was suggested by the Bitcoin Core devs to the Bitcoin XT devs, the Bitcoin Classic devs AND the Bitcoin Unlimited devs. All gave essentially the same reply "we're the Real Bitcoin, so there's no need" |
Vires in numeris
|
|
|
Hydrogen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1441
|
|
February 27, 2017, 02:39:50 PM |
|
Those who support a btc fork, should create their own alt coin & invest the time and energy necessary to build it up.
There are too many people with strong opinions on block size who lack the experience or technical background to do a legitimate job with a bitcoin fork.
I think they would only succeed in ruining bitcoin's credibility if they forked it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adelajda
|
|
February 28, 2017, 03:47:08 PM |
|
If they do that and let the market suggest about what to decide then Segwit will be the winner as more miners have opted to go with Segwit. I am not sure whether BU will the answer for the issues we have at the moment as we do not want to fork every now and then.  |
|
|
|
|
franky1
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4214
Merit: 4475
|
|
February 28, 2017, 04:00:35 PM |
|
the term "hardfork" is over used and in the wrong context.
if your talking about 3 splits with 3 chains.
use the term bilateral splits..
|
I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
|
|
|
|
Rockie1234
|
|
February 28, 2017, 04:39:51 PM |
|
This idea of forking different ways would just hinder Bitcoin. First of all, it would split up its very large community, and then Bitcoin begins to lose power and companies lose interest. It would likely confuse many, and I'm guessing many would not find out about the fork for a while. Strength in numbers, as they say.
|
|
|
|
|
Carlton Banks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3074
|
|
February 28, 2017, 05:32:46 PM |
|
First of all, it would split up its very large community, and then Bitcoin begins to lose power and companies lose interest. It would likely confuse many, and I'm guessing many would not find out about the fork for a while. yep, creating division and uncertainty amongst Bitcoiners is the raison d'etre of all the fork coups proposed so far. |
Vires in numeris
|
|
|
odolvlobo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4298
Merit: 3214
|
|
February 28, 2017, 05:54:53 PM |
|
Anyone can fork Bitcoin at any time. There is no need for coordination. You simply add or change a block validation rule in your client to make your blocks permanently incompatible with Bitcoin. If you want to avoid replay attacks, then you do the same for transactions.
|
Join an anti-signature campaign: Click ignore on the members of signature campaigns.
PGP Fingerprint: 6B6BC26599EC24EF7E29A405EAF050539D0B2925 Signing address: 13GAVJo8YaAuenj6keiEykwxWUZ7jMoSLt
|
|
|
Holliday
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1010
|
|
February 28, 2017, 06:18:52 PM |
|
Anyone can fork Bitcoin at any time. There is no need for coordination.
/thread |
If you aren't the sole controller of your private keys, you don't have any bitcoins.
|
|
|
Kprawn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1073
|
|
February 28, 2017, 06:32:26 PM |
|
I think most people has already shown where they stand on this subject.... They do not want SegWit and they do not want BU, but they know the status quo is also not the way forward. I would rather say, we include a single block size upgrade alone, as the 3rd option. { without the bells 'n whistles } Let people decide on their own, if they want the other fixes that are necessary at a later stage.  |
|
|
|
Carlton Banks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3074
|
|
February 28, 2017, 06:43:53 PM |
|
I would rather say, we include a single block size upgrade alone, as the 3rd option. { without the bells 'n
whistles }
You don't understand what you're talking about, and that doesn't bode well considering how often you post here. Characterising BU or Segwit as "bells & whistles" is moronic, both purport to lay the groundwork, the foundations, for scaling. One-off blocksize isn't going to work, it's too easy to attack |
Vires in numeris
|
|
|
|
