Why not treat BU as Alt?

[DomainMagnate]

When we can have both btc and BU co exist, why not treat BU like another Altcoin similar to btc?.
Why can't both compliment each other?

[shinratensei_]

Because the Bitcoin Unlimited is a fork from the bitcoin itself. It's mean if that will disrupt the crypto community.
We do not need the Bitcoin Unlimited coin. It will be worthless in the future.

There will be BUcoin and it means if there will be the hardfork for the bitcoin. With the bug on the bitcoin unlimited and a lot of the people are being scared if the hardfork will fail.

They can't drive the hardfork for well. The both are the opposite things.

[franky1]

BU is just a code implementation,

there are MANY
core, knots, fibre, bitcoinj, bitcoin ruby, BTCd, nbitcoin, statoshi, bitcoinxt, bitcoin classic, bitcoinunlimited... and so on.

bitcoin unlimited has set no deadlines, set no schedule of activation. has no zealous banscore tricks, no intention to cause a split.
bitcoin unlimiited wants consensus of many diverse nodes all on one PEER network. (bitcoin remaining diverse open and decentralisation)

however core feel its a threat to their segwit plans of a TIER network of core being the upstream filters, in control of validation and changes in future direction. so core are on the rampage fearing their loss of control..
(there should be no control anyway so anyone arguing core deserve control doesnt understand bitcoin. and is obviously involves in centralising bitcoin)

core first intentionally avoid hard(node+pool) consensus(vote) and went only for soft(pool) vote
then core uses bip9 that has some intentional banning pool/block features to turn their majority to 100% by killing off the opposition.soft(pool) contraversial

core next realised that pools were still unofficially(but a good reasoned safeguard) waited to see what node counts suggested before deciding.
so now core are going heavy. UASF and even as far as PoW algo changes hard(node+pool) bilateral split. to threaten the pools to vote for core or be struck off the network.

and now core see BU as a threat, because its giving the community another option. and risking cores dictatorship.

funny parts to remember.
1. core gave pools the vote so dont blame pools for saying no to core
2. core failed at bribing the community with fee discounts. while cunningly pushing fee's up to counter the discount
3. core will be the ones triggering the splitting of the network rather than accepting a no answer,
4. core are ignoring community views of wanting something else. because it doesnt follow the core corporate roadmap of centralised LN services to repay their $70m+ debt

meanwhile BU will keep on plodding along with no intention to do anything unless there is majority consent

[gentlemand]

Because the Bitcoin Unlimited is a fork from the bitcoin itself. It's mean if that will disrupt the crypto community.
We do not need the Bitcoin Unlimited coin. It will be worthless in the future.

Well, if I were in charge of Unlimited I would start it off as a fresh alt and forget forking completely. Their blockchain could start in a similar way to Clams, take an image of every BTC balance and start from there.

They'd have plenty of mining grunt to get up and running and no shortage of awareness. If people like what they see then they can buy in with their BTC.

Exchanges have already stated they'll list in the case of a contentious fork, no doubt they'll be delighted to list something that isn't the child of strife. If it really is superior to its daddy then the market will naturally migrate with no risks to anyone or anything.

[franky1]

Exchanges have already stated they'll list a contentious fork, no doubt they'll be delighted to list something that isn't the child of strife. If it really is superior to its daddy then the market will naturally migrate with no risks to anyone or anything.

emphasis contentious fork.

but what if BU has consensus..
.. remember BU has been around for 2 years and has set no agenda to split or do things contentiously. otherwise they would have.
also even when being offered by cores overlord and CTO gmaxwell to split officially, the community that want diverse opn dcentralsied onchain base block growth said no to him.

so although the core fanatics keep screaming about contentious forks, the only way it will happen is if core trigger it... which they seem to be planning on (UASF + PoW algo change)

which
if there was a CONTENTIOUS FORK (meaning controversial which then triggers core to open up their ban hammer) bu would be treated as the alt by not having majority..
but
if consensus occurs (the thing BU have in mind all along..) with BU having majority.. core actually becomes the altcoin.

bitfinex actually went into deeper detail
core having minority core = BCC
BU having minority bu=BCU

https://twitter.com/bitfinex/status/843226656940679170


devil is in the details of the announcement... "contentious"

[mrcash02]

I think if BU were an alt coin the name would be Bitcoin-BU, and we would have two currencies, the original Bitcoin and the new one with BU implement without the majority community endorsement. I don't think it's a good idea, the BTC price could decrease a lot and we would have an unstable situation, very risky...

[Omega Weapon]

When we can have both btc and BU co exist, why not treat BU like another Altcoin similar to btc?.
Why can't both compliment each other?

I’m not an expert but from what I have read BU does not want a hard fork they want to reach consensus but since their solution runs contrary to the devs then a battle has erupted about the direction bitcoin is going to take.

[ASHLIUSZ]

I think if BU were an alt coin the name would be Bitcoin-BU, and we would have two currencies, the original Bitcoin and the new one with BU implement without the majority community endorsement. I don't think it's a good idea, the BTC price could decrease a lot and we would have an unstable situation, very risky...

It's been very clearly described in the previous post what is Bitcoin unlimited. It's just a code implementation that's been focusing to get consensus from the entire bitcoin community. Listing it to the altcoins is not a good decision because the bug crash can be felt often with it causing a collapse to the entire crypto community.

[d5000]

BU is just a code implementation,

there are MANY
core, knots, fibre, bitcoinj, bitcoin ruby, BTCd, nbitcoin, statoshi, bitcoinxt, bitcoin classic, bitcoinunlimited... and so on.

That's a bit [purposefully!] inexact, don't you think? Most of the implementations you mention do not alter the protocol. Bitcoin Unlimited does, and in a way that's incompatible with the existing protocol. That is not "just another implementation".

Such dramatic changes should not be tried without a discussion and majority acceptance. I think even if the "censorship" problem was that dramatic as BU supporters describe, we're far away from that. Bitcoin's design has the flaw that it allows miners to change the protocol. If Bitcoin was Proof of Stake, then BU probably would have no chance to get near 50% of adoption - even considering Roger Ver.

Well, if I were in charge of Unlimited I would start it off as a fresh alt and forget forking completely. Their blockchain could start in a similar way to Clams, take an image of every BTC balance and start from there.

I would fully support that solution. I am currency agnostic, so if "BU-altcoin" is done that way (without premine or ICO or so) and really works as expected for a long time and I consider inappropiate the direction BTC (Core) is heading, I would perhaps consider even to change my usage from BTC to BU (if there is acceptance at the place where I am).

[jonald_fyookball]

I would fully support that solution. I am currency agnostic, so if "BU-altcoin" is done that way (without premine or ICO or so) 

No one who really supports BU would support that, as we obviously want the legacy blockchain and everything that comes with it, including an undiluted asset. We want Bitcoin to scale , not an alt.

[raphma]

if the fork happen..

When we can have both btc and BU co exist, why not treat BU like another Altcoin similar to btc?.

thats exactlyprobably what will happen. Most exchanges already said that.

Are you going to support Bitcoin Unlimited or Bitcoin Core?
We will support Bitcoin Core continuously as BTC. In line with our current internal policy, if you have Bitcoin on balance at the time of the fork, we will make Bitcoin Unlimited available for withdrawal provided it is safe to do so.
https://poloniex.com/press-releases/2017.03.17-Hard-Fork/

and just like poloniex, most exchanges will follow core as bitcoin and BU as an altcoin.

Because the Bitcoin Unlimited is a fork from the bitcoin itself.

yeah... just like most altcoins...

[jonald_fyookball]

if the fork happen..

When we can have both btc and BU co exist, why not treat BU like another Altcoin similar to btc?.

thats exactlyprobably what will happen. Most exchanges already said that.

Are you going to support Bitcoin Unlimited or Bitcoin Core?
We will support Bitcoin Core continuously as BTC. In line with our current internal policy, if you have Bitcoin on balance at the time of the fork, we will make Bitcoin Unlimited available for withdrawal provided it is safe to do so.
https://poloniex.com/press-releases/2017.03.17-Hard-Fork/

and just like poloniex, most exchanges will follow core as bitcoin and BU as an altcoin.

Because the Bitcoin Unlimited is a fork from the bitcoin itself.

yeah... just like most altcoins...

Do  you  realize that if BU forks with majority hash power, it will be the longest chain... but also the 1mb version will be 4-5x as slow (40-50 minute blocks) and difficulty wont adjust for as long as 8-10 weeks?

[gentlemand]

No one who really supports BU would support that, as we obviously want the legacy blockchain and everything that comes with it, including an undiluted asset. We want Bitcoin to scale , not an alt.

But let's assume that the Unlimited alt works great and people find it more useful than Core. Over time more and more people move across and it usurps Core. It could happen more rapidly than anyone expects.

It would be out there. It would be working. Its creation wouldn't be mired in contention and it's based on something everyone's already familiar with. People could make what they wanted out of it without endless conjecture.

In that scenario it started off with a snapshot of the original chain and eventually it squirts past it out of pure merit and in circumstances with no baggage whatsoever.

If it's founded on the original chain, attracts most of the users and miners from the original chain, it becomes the daddy chain by market consensus. It would be hard for anyone to question or resent its success in that scenario.

[jonald_fyookball]

No one who really supports BU would support that, as we obviously want the legacy blockchain and everything that comes with it, including an undiluted asset. We want Bitcoin to scale , not an alt.

But let's assume that the Unlimited alt works great and people find it more useful than Core. Over time more and more people move across and it usurps Core. It could happen more rapidly than anyone expects.

It would be out there. It would be working. Its creation wouldn't be mired in contention. People could make what they wanted out of it without endless conjecture.

In that scenario it started off with a snapshot of the original chain and eventually it squirts past it out of pure merit and in circumstances with no baggage whatsoever.

If it's founded on the original chain, attracts most of the users and miners from the original chain, it becomes the daddy chain by market consensus. It would be hard for anyone to question or resent its success in that scenario.

I could agree with that.  You might even say that it would be even more respected and 'cleaner' since it would have none of the tainted history of Bitcoin (mt gox, etc).  (Doesn't mean forking off will get much support though.)

[Sadlife]

Will the exchanges already declared that BTU will be treated as an altcoin. Dont know if a fork is good for bitcoin but these is the solution chose with the scaling problem.
BU was good at the start before it had some critical bugs that shutdown it's nodes and now another recent attack just occurred.

[DomainMagnate]

Because the Bitcoin Unlimited is a fork from the bitcoin itself. It's mean if that will disrupt the crypto community.
We do not need the Bitcoin Unlimited coin. It will be worthless in the future.

Well, if I were in charge of Unlimited I would start it off as a fresh alt and forget forking completely. Their blockchain could start in a similar way to Clams, take an image of every BTC balance and start from there.

They'd have plenty of mining grunt to get up and running and no shortage of awareness. If people like what they see then they can buy in with their BTC.

Exchanges have already stated they'll list in the case of a contentious fork, no doubt they'll be delighted to list something that isn't the child of strife. If it really is superior to its daddy then the market will naturally migrate with no risks to anyone or anything.

That would have been a better idea as instead of trying to replace bitcoin or forking it,build a better crypto and let people decide which one they want to use.
Forking has started unnecessary confusion and division among community and is not good for either btc or BU.

[buwaytress]

Do  you  realize that if BU forks with majority hash power, it will be the longest chain... but also the 1mb version will be 4-5x as slow (40-50 minute blocks) and difficulty wont adjust for as long as 8-10 weeks?

That's interesting... although with the blocks taking four to five times as long to find, perhaps it will need a bit of time before it can overtake core as the one with the longest chain. Also, I predict a lot of people who had held off getting into mining will jump in to fill the void left by BU jumping ship... so perhaps hashpower will only be a temporary issue for core.

[Rude Boy]

Bitcoin Core was Satoshi’s implementation of his novel Nakamoto consensus algorithm.
Bitcoin Unlimited is an attempt to utterly destroy Nakamoto Consensus in Bitcoin.
The new bitcoin unlimited implemented without community standards.It developed to destroy the original bitcoin core.Now a days forking affects the bitcoin price,this is the reason bitcoin price decrease a lot and the situation is unstable.This condition very risk for traders and minors.Finally,Bitcoin unlimited is just a diversion not a alternative.

[Xester]

When we can have both btc and BU co exist, why not treat BU like another Altcoin similar to btc?.
Why can't both compliment each other?

It is easy to say but it is hard to do. Creating codes such as segwit codes, bitcoin unlimited and other codes is a very complex job and how much more integrating them. The much easier choice is to create a consensus that all miners will use one universal code so that bitcoin will solve its problems.  But even reaching a consensus is hard then how much more it is to synthesize all codes into one.

[paul gatt]

BTU is a subdivision of BTC, however, I think it's just an alt coin. Because we do not need such a kind of money, I think it will be useless in the future, and its value will never be equal to bitcoin. The BTU was created only to satisfy the greed of the miners, so it would not last long. I believe that is true. I always hope bitcoin is a single currency, it should not be divided