Bitmain announces plan to create altcoin if BIP148 succeeds

[deisik]

Majority hashrate + original blockchain = Bitcoin

Majority can only be economic

Economic majority doesn't mean shit unless they put their money where their mouths are and start mining. You could have 90% of all BTC and be completely unable to stop a hardfork because it's secured by proof of work, not proof of stake. And it's the hashrate that gives users the ability to trust the network. A minority fork is worthless because it's easily subject to a 51% attack giving users no reason to trust it

You didn't answer my question

Namely, what's the purpose of mining a coin which no one is going to use? Look, you tell about 51% attack which is possible due to aggregating enough hash power in a few hands but you fail to see how this entirely nullifies your own claim that hash rate is giving users "the ability to trust the network". What trust are you talking about if all hash rate is accumulated in just a pair of hands? It is not hash rate itself that matters, it is its proper distribution that secures the network (read decentralization). Further, if I had 90% of all coins, I could easily sell your fork into oblivion (and bid up the price of the genuine coin with the proceeds, hahaha)

[intense]

Majority hashrate + original blockchain = Bitcoin

Majority can only be economic

Economic majority doesn't mean shit unless they put their money where their mouths are and start mining. You could have 90% of all BTC and be completely unable to stop a hardfork because it's secured by proof of work, not proof of stake. And it's the hashrate that gives users the ability to trust the network. A minority fork is worthless because it's easily subject to a 51% attack giving users no reason to trust it

You didn't answer my question

Namely, what's the purpose of mining a coin which no one is going to use? Look, you tell about 51% attack which is possible due to aggregating enough hash power in a few hands but you fail to see how this entirely nullifies your own claim that hash rate is giving users "the ability to trust the network". What trust are you talking about if all hash rate is accumulated in a pair of hands? It is not hash rate itself that matters, it is its proper distribution that secures the network (read decentralization). Further, if I had 90% of all coins, I could easily sell your fork into oblivion

You assume no one will follow but https://coin.dance/blocks shows there's plenty of miners who support big blocks and would gladly follow this fork. It's not a binary outcome either, there will be both users and hashrate moving over. And it uses the existing blockchain so all current users already have a stake in this UAHF.

Both distribution of hashrate and brute hashrate matter when it comes to trusting the network. A coin that's SHA256 based is easily attacked if it hasn't got sufficient hashrate to fend off established miners from other networks with significantly higher hashrates. And if you sell your 90% hypothetical stake of coins all you're doing is redistributing them and altering a price, this has zero effect on the direction of the protocol.

[LeGaulois]

It starts to be very boring with Bitcoin, I enjoy it less and less. I may not wait to see August or something else. I am going to not take the same interest from now and maybe move my main interest in cryptocurrencies with another coin

[soul-impact]

So this is the reason for the dump. I'm getting sick of this shit to be honest, Jihan needs to burn in the fires of hell. This guy is becoming a real pain in the ass.

No, he should be thanked and honored for having the courage and integrity to do the right thing and to lead the mining community with on chain scaling, to the benefit of everyone.

I think we should commend his actions, this is not something that is done for personal gain, it is for the benefit of all. We should feel grateful to him, but you are too exasperated to say that he should feel honored.

[michkima]

This is just them trying to implement a new altcoin that they would practically profit from by a huge margin if ever it will be launched. Typical business plans here in the cryptoworld. People just want to rule bitcoins, because if they do they will be rich. Greed is the primary consideration again here.

[deisik]

Majority hashrate + original blockchain = Bitcoin

Majority can only be economic

Economic majority doesn't mean shit unless they put their money where their mouths are and start mining. You could have 90% of all BTC and be completely unable to stop a hardfork because it's secured by proof of work, not proof of stake. And it's the hashrate that gives users the ability to trust the network. A minority fork is worthless because it's easily subject to a 51% attack giving users no reason to trust it

You didn't answer my question

Namely, what's the purpose of mining a coin which no one is going to use? Look, you tell about 51% attack which is possible due to aggregating enough hash power in a few hands but you fail to see how this entirely nullifies your own claim that hash rate is giving users "the ability to trust the network". What trust are you talking about if all hash rate is accumulated in a pair of hands? It is not hash rate itself that matters, it is its proper distribution that secures the network (read decentralization). Further, if I had 90% of all coins, I could easily sell your fork into oblivion

You assume no one will follow but https://coin.dance/blocks shows there's plenty of miners who support big blocks and would gladly follow this fork. It's not a binary outcome either, there will be both users and hashrate moving over. And it uses the existing blockchain so all current users already have a stake in this UAHF.

Both distribution of hashrate and brute hashrate matter when it comes to trusting the network. A coin that's SHA256 based is easily attacked if it hasn't got sufficient hashrate to fend off established miners from other networks with significantly higher hashrates. And if you sell your 90% hypothetical stake of coins all you're doing is redistributing them and altering a price, this has zero effect on the direction of the protocol.

Oh, I see that now raw hashing power is nowhere near enough to secure network?

Other networks cannot attack Bitcoin network unless they become part of this network, i.e. start mining Bitcoin, right? So it still inevitably comes down to hash power distribution, whether you like it or not. Anyway, you still have to explain how Wu is going to make his network "secure" given that he will be the one controlling it (if it does indeed come down to "distribution of hashrate"). Regarding big blocks and miners supporting them, first, we don't know how these miners are different from Jihan Wu and his accomplices (and whether they are not in fact the same bastards), and, second, as I guess, this is not the same as supporting Wu's ultimatum, to begin with

I think we should commend his actions, this is not something that is done for personal gain, it is for the benefit of all. We should feel grateful to him, but you are too exasperated to say that he should feel honored.

I'm curious if you are serious

[Nagadota]

Majority hashrate + original blockchain = Bitcoin

Majority can only be economic

Economic majority doesn't mean shit unless they put their money where their mouths are and start mining. You could have 90% of all BTC and be completely unable to stop a hardfork because it's secured by proof of work, not proof of stake. And it's the hashrate that gives users the ability to trust the network. A minority fork is worthless because it's easily subject to a 51% attack giving users no reason to trust it.

An economic majority can push hashrate over eventually.  Miners can only mine for so long while loosing money on a chain that's worth way less.  I don't think UASF will actually succeed, but an economic majority could definitely render the hashrate before the split irrelevant after a month or two.
Note - if BIP 148 succeeds and the minority chain still exists, a large amount of the hashrate on there would probably be supporting BU, so couldn't they just hard fork on the legacy chain?  Is that not possible for some reason?

[The One]

If i wanted to split a chain and mine it for myself... i wouldn't announced it in advance. I would simply announce it on the day the split happens and leave it to the other miners to catch up. Obviously i won't get 72 hours worth of blocks for myself. The idea that Bitmain will solo mine for 72 hours is laughable. Miners now can prepare in case a split does happen thus Bitmain has no advantage now.

[chopstick]

There is no such thing as an "economic majority". 95% of Bitcoin users don't care or are uneducated when it comes to the scaling debate. A handful of CEO's saying they support this or they support that, is nothing more than political gerrymandering that literally means nothing, unless they personally own large chunks of hashpower, That is.

No one is going  to use the UASF chain beyond a handful of crackpots, Blockstream shills and poor saps who got brainwashed over in the censored r/bitcoin forum. In other words, it is doomed to fail, especially when you consider that the chain with larger blocks is vastly superior in just about everyway, and it will have hashrate support... yeah, UASF is doomed.

Blathering on about an imaginary "economic majority" is laughable, it doesn't exist, your average Bitcoiner who doesn't give a shit will choose the chain with large blocks simply because it has more utility, lower fees, less congestion, etc. Meanwhile, the Segwit-UASF chain will have no hashpower, no immediate advantage over large blocks, and only a small handful of reddit users... thus exposing itself as nothing more than a half-witted astroturfing campaign which ultimately, ironically, only managed to accelerate the move towards Bigger Blocks, which is the exact opposite of what they wanted in the first place.

The small-blockers will continue to double down and double down and then double down again, even as 99% of the network upgrades to larger blocks. It's insane. But they brought this upon themselves.

They are certainly free to move to an altcoin, though. Maybe they should call it Segwit1MBforever coin. I'm sure it will do really well. They can market themselves to all the Alpaca farmers in Equador who's primary concern is whether or not they can run a full node with a Raspberry Pi in the middle of nowhere.

[25hashcoin]

That's funny Theymos.  It's not an altcoin if Luke Jr does a minority fork, but its an altcoin if Bitmain does it, right?  Anyway i'm fully expecting UAHF to have majority hash power.

The hypocrisy is strong with him. Pathetic and desperate.

[bustedsynx]

Did any of you Bitcoin whales started the dump on Finex?   

[Mr. Green]

Pls dump moar.

Jihan's cheap coins mmmh delicioussss

[d5000]

An economic majority can push hashrate over eventually.  Miners can only mine for so long while loosing money on a chain that's worth way less.  I don't think UASF will actually succeed, but an economic majority could definitely render the hashrate before the split irrelevant after a month or two.

Correct. I don't think an UAHF coin will be worth more than $500 if it's only supported by miners and a few small companies. But I got the impression that BitPay is willing to support everything that is better than the status quo - except UASF BIP 148. So Bitmain's UAHF may get support from BitPay if UASF "succeeds" - and then they have already one of the biggest economic actors on board.

BitPay must be one of the actors that are most suffering the high fees, so their stance is understandable without any conspiracy theories. They are among the most fervent supporters of Segwit2x.

Note - if BIP 148 succeeds and the minority chain still exists, a large amount of the hashrate on there would probably be supporting BU, so couldn't they just hard fork on the legacy chain?  Is that not possible for some reason?

As far as I know, BU blocks would be accepted by the Bitmain UAHF, so they probably would stay on the same (forked) chain. If there is (BIP148) UASF but no UAHF, then I think there would be nothing - at least nothing technical - to impede a BU fork.

There is no such thing as an "economic majority". 95% of Bitcoin users don't care or are uneducated when it comes to the scaling debate. A handful of CEO's saying they support this or they support that, is nothing more than political gerrymandering that literally means nothing, unless they personally own large chunks of hashpower, That is.

I agree with respect to the "apolitical majority". But we have two major players that could influence this majority:
- the Core client, which is the most used;
- BitPay, which is the only significant payment processor.

If Core decided to integrate BIP148 into the code (it's possible if things escalate further) then they will have some users that simply download "the latest Bitcoin version" (not knowing that it's not fully compatible to the legacy chain). That should not be ignored. However, because of BitPay's influence I think the "economically winning" chain will be the one BitPay chooses.

[gentlemand]

However, because of BitPay's influence I think the "economically winning" chain will be the one BitPay chooses.

I'd say of all companies it's Coinbase who wield the largest phallus. They have a history of being somewhat wishy washy too.

I've no idea about the various forks, but if Bitmaincoin wins out then I'm done. I didn't sign up for that. I didn't sign up for most of what's developed but that would be the final straw.

[25hashcoin]

I've no idea about the various forks, but if Bitmaincoin wins out then I'm done. I didn't sign up for that.

Actually, Bitmains fork is exactly what you signed up for, true to Satoshis vision. What no one signed up for was BlockstreamCores 1mb forever banker settlement token. If that wins out, then I and many others are done. Good thing it won't win because it has a tiny minority support.

[ebliever]

I've no idea about the various forks, but if Bitmaincoin wins out then I'm done. I didn't sign up for that.

Actually, Bitmains fork is exactly what you signed up for, true to Satoshis vision. What no one signed up for was BlockstreamCores 1mb forever banker settlement token. If that wins out, then I and many others are done. Good thing it won't win because it has a tiny minority support.

+1 for comedy, 25hashcoin. Your posts are hilarious.

[pokapeski]

After thinking about it for not too long (and after cuddling in foetal position for some good 10 minutes realizing how consensus-less fanatics have provocked this abrupt awaken of a beutiful dream) by now I am cashing my BTC immediately.

[gentlemand]

This user is currently ignored because I already know what it's going to write.

You're really persuading me with your stunningly intricate way of getting deep into my mind and influencing me. I feel like nothing more than a helpless marionette with the sheer elegance of your manoeuvring.

[ebliever]

After thinking about it for not too long (and after cuddling in foetal position for some good 10 minutes realizing how consensus-less fanatics have provocked this abrupt awaken of a beutiful dream) by now I am cashing my BTC immediately.

This is actually great news for Bitcoin holders (seriously). People are dumping for dumb reasons (is it news to anyone that there is a contentious scaling debate)? Meanwhile, the major obstacle to scaling is declaring that they are going off and creating their own altcoin, and in doing so signaling that BIP148 must have greater strength than generally realized, which means it is likely to succeed now.

In short: Bitcoin price is down at precisely the time when we can see some light at the end of the tunnel.

[Amph]

oh i knew this would happen, what is this new coin that they would mine a fork of the original chian or an enterely new one, or maybe a coin already on the market?

It'll be a new fork of Bitcoin sort of in the vein of how XT/BU/Classic would've worked, but apparently he plans a little extra premine of 5400 "BTC" for himself.

so this prove that miner are untrustworthy, i bet they just want to do this to have that premine, and hard fork are perfect for that i would not be surprised if they do it in the future for another reason

or they could do another one int he future, as a fork, and make that shitty "swap scam trend" with their BU fork, 1:1