#NO2X - JOIN THE WAR!

[rifiuti]

Kore Minions are in for a surprise:

http://www.trustnodes.com/2017/10/24/bitcoin-fork-may-go


It is miners alone that create blocks and process transactions, with other nodes verifying the process. As such, with 15% of the hashrate, blocks on the minority chain will be very rare, averaging around 1 every two hours, but with variance it may be even a whole day without blocks.

It’s unclear how the market would react to that situation considering that at least for Coinbase this would be bitcoin itself so operating on very rare blocks.

https://blog.bitmex.com/trading-shitcoin2x/#at-fork-time

He who sells first, sells best.

2X price will be worse than Cash, no one even going to pick it up. Just because of BTC/BCH price, Bitmain still has to mine Bitcoin. If BCH > BTC, they would be mining BCH.

Same thing goes for this scenario. Miners is not going to mine at loss.

Prediction of markets is most complex task - I'd say nobody can do this.

My analysis would be: Look where the buying power is after the fork and where the momentum + trend is negative / positive - measured from last local top / bottom.

You need to look at political trades (short term) and mass traders (long term).

If you look at the limited group still supporting SW1x (NO2x) - I'd say I cannot see much buy power LEFT - these are mostly all in per today.

How many (agnostic) millions will be 'directed' by NYA entities to flow in fresh capital ?

Looks like easy math and I'd bet that 1x coin will fall in txs/min  and price in a sudden .... but sure,  beware of any predictions!

Good argument points although Bitmex, Bitfinex, Coincheck, Bithumb, Bittrex, Quoinexchange these are the biggest exchanges(volume-wise) and they are not the signees of the agreement.

From the exchange company point switching to S2X is just doesn't make sense(unless mining power shifts and legacy chain gets distrupted)

So, basically I would say the most important argument point here are the blocks.

If the %85 of the mining power shifts to S2X, even Bitcoin gets support from all users and exchanges, we all will have hard time. We are talking about finding one block a day kind of a problem. Where avg. daily tx number is 300.000.


Possible scenarios;

1. %85-%90 of the mining power will shift, legacy chain will get distruped, every exchange will be forced to use S2X.
2. %85-%90 of the mining power will shift to S2X but %90 of that portion will be replaced quickly.
3. Miners will mine at loss just to distrup the legacy chain, no matter the cost.
4. Miners will play let's-wait-and-see card. S2X will fail and mining power will stay at legacy chain.

Considering Garzik, he already moved on to another coin to create an ICO, I would say it's a failure already. I would put my money to fourth option.

[1714008827]

1714008827

[1714008827]

1714008827

[1714008827]

1714008827

[1714008827]

1714008827

[exstasie]

Considering Garzik, he already moved on to another coin to create an ICO, I would say it's a failure already. I would put my money to fourth option.

I think people are reading way too much into Jeff Garzik's Metronome project. Jeff has been heading in this direction for a long time, and I also never thought for a moment that he was spending much time/effort on BTC1. That was one of the downfalls of the 2x approach. They simply don't appear competent or, frankly, concerned for user safety.

Jeff exhibits a nonchalance that suggests that he is perfectly fine with consensus-breaking bugs emerging on the Bitcoin network. The way he sees it: at best, they can turn Bitcoin's governance into something like what Ethereum has (proof-of-Vitalik) and at worst, he can just hop onto an altcoin train. In fact, that's Metronome's selling point.....

Given that Gemini and Coinbase just doubled down in support of the NYA, I wouldn't write it off just yet.

[rainbow169]

As a neutral, I just hate all these powergrabs, but it's understandable as so much are at stake. There will be for sure a brutal fight in November. The name fight might be over in a month but the damage to the crytomarket and trust will last for a long time.

[exstasie]

As a neutral, I just hate all these powergrabs, but it's understandable as so much are at stake. There will be for sure a brutal fight in November. The name fight might be over in a month but the damage to the crytomarket and trust will last for a long time.

At this point, I'm just having fun and enjoying the show. I've always been adamantly against contentious forks, but I have no fight left in me after the July drama. Whatever happens will happen. The November fork is definitely creating uncertainty and setting up a situation where the balance should tip in favor of the bears. I'm fortunate enough to have made a living trading BTC during the 2014 bear market, so I'll be alright no matter what happens. I'm confident that I can hedge my long term positions better than most.

As for #NO2X, I really think the 2X fork is in some way karmic retribution for the August 1st fork split threat. The BIP148/NO2X side implemented an incompatible fork (BIP148) on a 2-month timeline with no replay protection and no widespread agreement. Now, the 2X side is implementing an incompatible fork on a 3-month timeline with no replay protection and no widespread agreement.

Hearing complaints from the same people that backed BIP148 sure sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. Anyone who supported BIP148 despite its rushed timeline and lack of support from Core -- yet disparages 2X for the same reasons -- is a hypocrite. That's the plain truth. Did Segwit have widespread support -- much more than 2X? Yes! But that's 100% irrelevant here and completely ignores the risks of UASFs that lack user support. Given all the hypocrisy, I'm actually enjoying watching the #NO2X crowd bitch and moan. They been looking real salty lately.

[classicsucks]

As a neutral, I just hate all these powergrabs, but it's understandable as so much are at stake. There will be for sure a brutal fight in November. The name fight might be over in a month but the damage to the crytomarket and trust will last for a long time.

At this point, I'm just having fun and enjoying the show. I've always been adamantly against contentious forks, but I have no fight left in me after the July drama. Whatever happens will happen. The November fork is definitely creating uncertainty and setting up a situation where the balance should tip in favor of the bears. I'm fortunate enough to have made a living trading BTC during the 2014 bear market, so I'll be alright no matter what happens. I'm confident that I can hedge my long term positions better than most.

As for #NO2X, I really think the 2X fork is in some way karmic retribution for the August 1st fork split threat. The BIP148/NO2X side implemented an incompatible fork (BIP148) on a 2-month timeline with no replay protection and no widespread agreement. Now, the 2X side is implementing an incompatible fork on a 3-month timeline with no replay protection and no widespread agreement.

Hearing complaints from the same people that backed BIP148 sure sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. Anyone who supported BIP148 despite its rushed timeline and lack of support from Core -- yet disparages 2X for the same reasons -- is a hypocrite. That's the plain truth. Did Segwit have widespread support -- much more than 2X? Yes! But that's 100% irrelevant here and completely ignores the risks of UASFs that lack user support. Given all the hypocrisy, I'm actually enjoying watching the #NO2X crowd bitch and moan. They been looking real salty lately.

[classicsucks]

Kore Minions are in for a surprise:

http://www.trustnodes.com/2017/10/24/bitcoin-fork-may-go


It is miners alone that create blocks and process transactions, with other nodes verifying the process. As such, with 15% of the hashrate, blocks on the minority chain will be very rare, averaging around 1 every two hours, but with variance it may be even a whole day without blocks.

It’s unclear how the market would react to that situation considering that at least for Coinbase this would be bitcoin itself so operating on very rare blocks.

https://blog.bitmex.com/trading-shitcoin2x/#at-fork-time

He who sells first, sells best.

2X price will be worse than Cash, no one even going to pick it up. Just because of BTC/BCH price, Bitmain still has to mine Bitcoin. If BCH > BTC, they would be mining BCH.

Same thing goes for this scenario. Miners is not going to mine at loss.

Prediction of markets is most complex task - I'd say nobody can do this.

My analysis would be: Look where the buying power is after the fork and where the momentum + trend is negative / positive - measured from last local top / bottom.

You need to look at political trades (short term) and mass traders (long term).

If you look at the limited group still supporting SW1x (NO2x) - I'd say I cannot see much buy power LEFT - these are mostly all in per today.

How many (agnostic) millions will be 'directed' by NYA entities to flow in fresh capital ?

Looks like easy math and I'd bet that 1x coin will fall in txs/min  and price in a sudden .... but sure,  beware of any predictions!

Good argument points although Bitmex, Bitfinex, Coincheck, Bithumb, Bittrex, Quoinexchange these are the biggest exchanges(volume-wise) and they are not the signees of the agreement.

From the exchange company point switching to S2X is just doesn't make sense(unless mining power shifts and legacy chain gets distrupted)

So, basically I would say the most important argument point here are the blocks.

If the %85 of the mining power shifts to S2X, even Bitcoin gets support from all users and exchanges, we all will have hard time. We are talking about finding one block a day kind of a problem. Where avg. daily tx number is 300.000.


Possible scenarios;

1. %85-%90 of the mining power will shift, legacy chain will get distruped, every exchange will be forced to use S2X.
2. %85-%90 of the mining power will shift to S2X but %90 of that portion will be replaced quickly.
3. Miners will mine at loss just to distrup the legacy chain, no matter the cost.
4. Miners will play let's-wait-and-see card. S2X will fail and mining power will stay at legacy chain.

Considering Garzik, he already moved on to another coin to create an ICO, I would say it's a failure already. I would put my money to fourth option.

People are getting confused about what will happen on exchanges. Exchanges don't settle onchain until customers withdraw their coin. So they can price 2x and 1x at whatever their stupid customers believe to be pricing reality over the SHORT TERM, but when people go to withdraw 1x coins and there is a 1 week delay due to the chain death spiral, what do you suppose will happen to the exchange price?

Any fool trading these BTC1x futures and "dumping BTC2x" will get what he deserves...

Bitcoin Cash unaffected.

[exstasie]

People are getting confused about what will happen on exchanges. Exchanges don't settle onchain until customers withdraw their coin. So they can price 2x and 1x at whatever their stupid customers believe to be pricing reality over the SHORT TERM, but when people go to withdraw 1x coins and there is a 1 week delay due to the chain death spiral, what do you suppose will happen to the exchange price?

Any fool trading these BTC1x futures and "dumping BTC2x" will get what he deserves...

Bitcoin Cash unaffected.

I think you're right that Bitcoin Cash benefits from all this turmoil, and I'm guessing it'll see a bump in price as a result. But fundamentally, it's still a terrible cryptocurrency, especially considering the emergency difficulty algorithm basically bakes hyperinflation into the protocol -- until one day, the supply is mined out and fees are still low. What happens then?

As for 1x vs. 2x, I think the sensible thing for people to do is hold both. Selling either one for ideological reasons may end up hurting your portfolio a lot. Be careful regarding replay attacks and sell one or the other only when the market has made fairly clear what will happen in the mid to long term.

[bitcoinfuck]

banks and corporate sector using bitcoin itself to there advantages!


rules are simple, if you can't beat it just clone it .



bitcoin core should not be allowed to fork, but everyone has free will, but its us community who should not fall for these forks.



most of the users who hold less then 1 BTC fall for these kinds of forks, thinking that they do not miss investing in bitcoin

[hv_]

banks and corporate sector using bitcoin itself to there advantages!


rules are simple, if you can't beat it just clone it .



bitcoin core should not be allowed to fork, but everyone has free will, but its us community who should not fall for these forks.



most of the users who hold less then 1 BTC fall for these kinds of forks, thinking that they do not miss investing in bitcoin

No - bitcoin core just needs to listen more to the needs of ALL and there is no need to fork.

[landersson]

Thanks for the info!
Very interesting.

Louise

[figmentofmyass]

No - bitcoin core just needs to listen more to the needs of ALL and there is no need to fork.

i can sympathize with that sentiment, but it's important to recognize that the bitcoin ecosystem is extremely diverse now. there is a massive global user base. people depend on bitcoin for their livelihoods, and businesses depend on bitcoin running reliably with 100% uptime. that's who core has to think about.

they are trying to minimize network disruptions and keep bitcoin scaling and functioning while continuing to see massive growth. that's no small task. they can't be expected to integrate changes to consensus rules (on short timelines, no less) when there is no widespread support from the community for any one proposal.

[hv_]

No - bitcoin core just needs to listen more to the needs of ALL and there is no need to fork.

i can sympathize with that sentiment, but it's important to recognize that the bitcoin ecosystem is extremely diverse now. there is a massive global user base. people depend on bitcoin for their livelihoods, and businesses depend on bitcoin running reliably with 100% uptime. that's who core has to think about.

they are trying to minimize network disruptions and keep bitcoin scaling and functioning while continuing to see massive growth. that's no small task. they can't be expected to integrate changes to consensus rules (on short timelines, no less) when there is no widespread support from the community for any one proposal.

You nailed it - the task is too big for 'a core'.

For me it would be fine if we had a core for exclusively  'running reliably with 100% uptime.' I've thanked core for doin this at different places already. And I'm pretty sure that this is a full-time job for 10 FE - just doin this.

But for all other tasks like Requirement Engineering, Risk Management, Prototyping, Project Management, Testing - QA, Feedback Looping, Deployment, Change Management, .... you name it - This all gets too much - no wonder that we are already deeply split!

To get started all this important things needed for the size and importance of bitcoin -  even free discussion was not allowed, despite BCT is still best unifying form I know from. - Tell me how could all this constructively be done not with these resulting forks in competition?  It's seems that we can only watch the logical consequences now, but the 2X might be the last chance to try - otherwise try to think what the big economic companies (NYA is just a small part seen here) will choose to do next ?  


Our existing core team is just not industrial style, not experienced not skilled not diversified, not constructive and not prepared enough to get this high rate growing baby under their control they wished to have.

It's not their failure they cannot do but it's their failure to try it (despite they might see it's breaking up more and more).

[BitcoinBallerina]

I really wish people would stop painting this situation so black and white because that makes outsiders, that are potential new users, believe that there are only two sides that can influence the Bitcoin network, when really it's a massively coordinated effort.

[jman0war]

I support Core ideologically, for the most part.
However the increase in block size does make sense to me.

I don't know if Bitcoin should only be used as a 'settlement' coin.
I'd like to see it used more for daily transactions for even a cup of coffee.
I am reading that fewer retail places are accepting Bitcoin, this is not good; so i'm willing to listen and support proposals that that aim to increase it's use.

[classicsucks]

People are getting confused about what will happen on exchanges. Exchanges don't settle onchain until customers withdraw their coin. So they can price 2x and 1x at whatever their stupid customers believe to be pricing reality over the SHORT TERM, but when people go to withdraw 1x coins and there is a 1 week delay due to the chain death spiral, what do you suppose will happen to the exchange price?

Any fool trading these BTC1x futures and "dumping BTC2x" will get what he deserves...

Bitcoin Cash unaffected.

I think you're right that Bitcoin Cash benefits from all this turmoil, and I'm guessing it'll see a bump in price as a result. But fundamentally, it's still a terrible cryptocurrency, especially considering the emergency difficulty algorithm basically bakes hyperinflation into the protocol -- until one day, the supply is mined out and fees are still low. What happens then?

As for 1x vs. 2x, I think the sensible thing for people to do is hold both. Selling either one for ideological reasons may end up hurting your portfolio a lot. Be careful regarding replay attacks and sell one or the other only when the market has made fairly clear what will happen in the mid to long term.

The EDA is being removed on Nov 6 via hardfork. The rate of coin issuance caused 15k BCH coins to be mined more than BTC. Hardly a big problem. Hyperinflation is a massive exaggeration. The BCH price is nice and low now, which should drive in a ton of volume from people feeling the 1x chain death and 2x price drop. Personally I am long all major alts.

[MAbtc]

The EDA is being removed on Nov 6 via hardfork. The rate of coin issuance caused 15k BCH coins to be mined more than BTC. Hardly a big problem. Hyperinflation is a massive exaggeration. The BCH price is nice and low now, which should drive in a ton of volume from people feeling the 1x chain death and 2x price drop. Personally I am long all major alts.

Interesting... thanks for the info. I figured that Bitmain quite liked the EDA, since they could paint it as "low fees guaranteed" when it effectively just decreased block time on average in favor of mining rewards. I agree that the hyperinflation angle is exaggerated, but you can't blame bitcoiners for taking that position, can you? If you asked BCH supporters before the fork, I'm sure all of them would reject the idea that BCH should be mined faster than Bitcoin.

So are they just removing the EDA entirely and returning to the old difficulty algorithm? Probably smart and good timing for the market as we head into the November uncertainty. If the 2x chain is the "corporate takeover" and the 1x chain is unusable due to low hash rate and high fees, Bitcoin Cash can step right in and profit from all the confusion and uncertainty.

[rifiuti]

This is coming from Bitfinex.

Bitmex is also #NO2X.

And we all know that these two exchanges holds big portion of daily trades;

Possible scenarios;

1. %85-%90 of the mining power will shift, legacy chain will get distruped, every exchange will be forced to use S2X.
2. %85-%90 of the mining power will shift to S2X but %90 of that portion will be replaced quickly.
3. Miners will mine at loss just to distrup the legacy chain, no matter the cost.
4. Miners will play let's-wait-and-see card. S2X will fail and mining power will stay at legacy chain.

Considering Garzik, he already moved on to another coin to create an ICO, I would say it's a failure already. I would put my money to fourth option.

Considering my previous comment, miners might not play let's-wait-and-see card. After XT, Classic, Unlimited and Bcash failures, I think they might risk it all and halt the legacy network.

[classicsucks]

The EDA is being removed on Nov 6 via hardfork. The rate of coin issuance caused 15k BCH coins to be mined more than BTC. Hardly a big problem. Hyperinflation is a massive exaggeration. The BCH price is nice and low now, which should drive in a ton of volume from people feeling the 1x chain death and 2x price drop. Personally I am long all major alts.

Interesting... thanks for the info. I figured that Bitmain quite liked the EDA, since they could paint it as "low fees guaranteed" when it effectively just decreased block time on average in favor of mining rewards. I agree that the hyperinflation angle is exaggerated, but you can't blame bitcoiners for taking that position, can you? If you asked BCH supporters before the fork, I'm sure all of them would reject the idea that BCH should be mined faster than Bitcoin.

So are they just removing the EDA entirely and returning to the old difficulty algorithm? Probably smart and good timing for the market as we head into the November uncertainty. If the 2x chain is the "corporate takeover" and the 1x chain is unusable due to low hash rate and high fees, Bitcoin Cash can step right in and profit from all the confusion and uncertainty.

Nope, they have a new diff algo. The nitty gritty is here https://www.yours.org/content/deadalnix-s-difficulty-algorithm-explained-ac50eb2b1f16/

Many people don't realize that BTC difficulty calculation is only every 2016 blocks. That is a potentially fatal flaw in the coin that may very well cause the death of the Segwit1x chain, regardless of what Bitmex or any other exchange says "the real BTC" is. Basically the difficulty doesn't drop and the chain slows to a halt (AKA chain death spiral). If you look at the Segwit BTC chain right now, you'll see that exactly this starting to happen right now! Hashrate has dropped 6 exahash in the last 24 hours, while diff went up 21%, and the mempool is 30-50MB, That means that Segwit BTC blocks are only getting mined every 20 minutes on average, With full blocks, transactions get backed up quite quickly... this could even continue and get much worse in the next few weeks as Segwit BTC1x may never get to 2016 blocks for the diff adjustment!

Bitcoin Cash has the EDA precisely to avoid the death spiral phenomenon. Unfortunately, the EDA adjusts difficulty in an asymmetrical manner (down faster than up), causing the miners to game the algo a bit. As other have stated, this means a few extra coins are issued ahead of schedule, and block times are a bit sporadic. The fork will fix that. And then the 2x/1x war will be in full swing.

I'm long popcorn.

[nicosey]

Interesting read on the subject,
https://blog.commerceblock.com/upcoming-fork-352cd9f9951a

[enyamwari]

Interesting read on the subject,
https://blog.commerceblock.com/upcoming-fork-352cd9f9951a

Thanks for this....very helpfull