Are hard forks the poor developer's ICO?

[HabBear]

Are hard forks the poor developer's ICO?

Two attempts since August to hard fork bitcoin, two more ahead of us. These developers just want lay claim to the best cryptocurrency and instead of creating it from scratch they feel they need to hijack bitcoin - why?

Developers who pursue hard forks really are trying to get something for nothing. And they give us something for nothing (in the airdrop) to try to get us to subscribe to their sheisty intentions.

Hard forks are great for Bitcoin, because the prove that Bitcoin is right and strong. But I don't see how anyone can have pride in supporting or developing a hard fork.

Can you?

[1713559105]

1713559105

[1713559105]

1713559105

[1713559105]

1713559105

[Wind_FURY]

I certainly do not believe so. There will be some hard forks that will be for the purpose of "money grabbing", but some will be fighting for their ideals. Bitcoin Cash, although I disagree with them, is a good example of a fork that has kept the belief in their values. I wish the same could be said of Bitcoin Gold.

[HabBear]

I certainly do not believe so. There will be some hard forks that will be for the purpose of "money grabbing", but some will be fighting for their ideals. Bitcoin Cash, although I disagree with them, is a good example of a fork that has kept the belief in their values. I wish the same could be said of Bitcoin Gold.

Interesting point - what's an example of "belief in their values"? What are the values of Bitcoin Cash? What are the values of Bitcoin Gold? Or are you just equating "values" to "does the market it want it"?

[Wind_FURY]

Roger Ver, who is Bitcoin Cash's unofficial spokesman, believes that Bitcoin's transactions should remain onchain to uphold "Satoshi's vision". I did not take it seriously at first but if you take into account Blockstream's primary motive as a company, which is profit, then their interest in limiting blocks to 1MB is corrupted. To its followers, Bitcoin Cash is a "protest".

No comment on Bitcoin Gold. What values do they uphold?

[dreamhouse]

Depends on how the fork is done. If you just do a hardfor, it's not an ICO, but if it is hardfork and then you hold it for some premine, then it is a shitcoin like ICO.

[13abyknight]

Block size upgrades, emergency difficulty adjustment and all the other so called 'improvements' from the core protocol are just pretexts to create a new token out of thin air, premine the shit out of it (like Bitcoin gold). Bitcoin has been around for almost a decade now and all the problems that it has encountered have been successfully solved by various means. These hard forks are just big time excuses and will be going nowhere in the future.

[ahmad21]

Are hard forks the poor developer's ICO?

Two attempts since August to hard fork bitcoin, two more ahead of us. These developers just want lay claim to the best cryptocurrency and instead of creating it from scratch they feel they need to hijack bitcoin - why?

Developers who pursue hard forks really are trying to get something for nothing. And they give us something for nothing (in the airdrop) to try to get us to subscribe to their sheisty intentions.

Hard forks are great for Bitcoin, because the prove that Bitcoin is right and strong. But I don't see how anyone can have pride in supporting or developing a hard fork.

Can you?

I don't really think so because these days even an ICO developer  does not needs much funds to start his own ICO. Infact people are selling services to create erc 20 tokens in just 0.1 btc. I think anyone in this crypyo world can surely invest such an amount in his own ICO. So wont say that forks are for poor developers.

[SUDARMONO]

yes it is true they try to compete with bitcoin but in fact bitcoin always remain the best and the first in the interest of the community, and we know BCC itself can not reduce the fame bitcoin, but in other part many people who gain by getting bitcoin for free , it's a lot of waiting waiting for many people.

[squatter]

Are hard forks the poor developer's ICO?

Two attempts since August to hard fork bitcoin, two more ahead of us. These developers just want lay claim to the best cryptocurrency and instead of creating it from scratch they feel they need to hijack bitcoin - why?

Developers who pursue hard forks really are trying to get something for nothing. And they give us something for nothing (in the airdrop) to try to get us to subscribe to their sheisty intentions.

It's obvious that they are trying to leverage the biggest cryptocurrency network to bootstrap their own. Bitcoin Cash definitely started a trend and I don't see it stopping anytime soon.

Old timers should appreciate the fact that noobs will be fleeced into buying "the next Bitcoin." Most people I've talked to, when they first entered this space, bought into altcoins because "Bitcoin was too expensive." This time around, we as BTC holders get to profit because people are buying into hard forks w/ airdrops instead of newly launched coins. It feels a little dirty taking peoples' money like that, but what are we supposed to do?

[phr0stbyt3]

Well yeah you can call that especially btg which caused major panic among investors and huge exchange like bittrex also didn't list it but as they say you learn from your mistake looks like it has been solved finally and i hope in the future forks they atleast develop the basic functions to list it on a exchange

[HonestSurfer]

Are hard forks the poor developer's ICO?

Two attempts since August to hard fork bitcoin, two more ahead of us. These developers just want lay claim to the best cryptocurrency and instead of creating it from scratch they feel they need to hijack bitcoin - why?

Developers who pursue hard forks really are trying to get something for nothing. And they give us something for nothing (in the airdrop) to try to get us to subscribe to their sheisty intentions.

It's obvious that they are trying to leverage the biggest cryptocurrency network to bootstrap their own. Bitcoin Cash definitely started a trend and I don't see it stopping anytime soon.

Old timers should appreciate the fact that noobs will be fleeced into buying "the next Bitcoin." Most people I've talked to, when they first entered this space, bought into altcoins because "Bitcoin was too expensive." This time around, we as BTC holders get to profit because people are buying into hard forks w/ airdrops instead of newly launched coins. It feels a little dirty taking peoples' money like that, but what are we supposed to do?

Thats an interesting point. Piggy-backing on an a "notable" cryptocurrency network gives hard-forkers an advantage in terms of existing users and brand awareness. But these are marketing reasons.

My question is, from a technology perspective, why do these projects need to fork the bitcoin blockchain and why dont they just start a new one, with their own consensus and other rules? What is the technological benefit in staying on / forking the bitcoin blockchain?

[DooMAD]

Are hard forks the poor developer's ICO?

Two attempts since August to hard fork bitcoin, two more ahead of us. These developers just want lay claim to the best cryptocurrency and instead of creating it from scratch they feel they need to hijack bitcoin - why?

Developers who pursue hard forks really are trying to get something for nothing. And they give us something for nothing (in the airdrop) to try to get us to subscribe to their sheisty intentions.

Hard forks are great for Bitcoin, because the prove that Bitcoin is right and strong. But I don't see how anyone can have pride in supporting or developing a hard fork.

Can you?

The way I see it is that everyone will naturally have different visions for how to move forwards, which means there will always be varying demand for different clients that only some participants on the network agree with.  Bitcoin isn't a democracy and there's no voting.  The only way to achieve a vision for Bitcoin that some don't agree with is to just go ahead and code it and see how much support it gets in the wild.  People seem to have this perverse idea that consensus means everyone has to agree all of the time, but that's not correct.  Consensus means the people who do agree will be naturally matched up and will build a blockchain together.  The alignment of incentives and network effects mean that the largest group of people who agree should naturally have the most successful chain (most economic activity, most proof of work, most widely accepted by payment processors, etc).

[Reid]

A poor developer's iCO. 
What a cool way to say it or should I say it is too deep for other users here to understand.
I dont think that is the purpose for that.
This people who made it happen are bitcoin holders too so they have a good amount of money.
They aint poor, they just want more.
They milked the crypto world and created something just so they could get more money for what? What do we know, maybe they have bought it with bitcoin afterwards.

[hatshepsut93]

Are hard forks the poor developer's ICO?

Two attempts since August to hard fork bitcoin, two more ahead of us. These developers just want lay claim to the best cryptocurrency and instead of creating it from scratch they feel they need to hijack bitcoin - why?

Developers who pursue hard forks really are trying to get something for nothing. And they give us something for nothing (in the airdrop) to try to get us to subscribe to their sheisty intentions.

Hard forks are great for Bitcoin, because the prove that Bitcoin is right and strong. But I don't see how anyone can have pride in supporting or developing a hard fork.

Can you?

With ICO's developers create new coins and sell them for BTC or ETH, but with Bitcoin forks you have to own BTC to get forked coins, so it's not as profitable as running an ICO unless you are a whale.
However, forks are attempting to hijack Bitcoin's name and all their value is based around it, since they don't have any improvements besides a few changed lines of code that raise the limit of blocksize. So, it's quite easy to fork Bitcoin, but the hard part is promoting it - you have to spend much more than on promoting some ICO's, while ICO's are not much harder to launch - usually they don't have any prototypes, only whitepaper, ANN and site. Both forks and ICO's can be viewed as potential scams, so newbies should be very careful before deciding to send their BTC to someone promising them high returns or "the real Bitcoin".

[jekjekman]

Are hard forks the poor developer's ICO?

Two attempts since August to hard fork bitcoin, two more ahead of us. These developers just want lay claim to the best cryptocurrency and instead of creating it from scratch they feel they need to hijack bitcoin - why?

Developers who pursue hard forks really are trying to get something for nothing. And they give us something for nothing (in the airdrop) to try to get us to subscribe to their sheisty intentions.

Hard forks are great for Bitcoin, because the prove that Bitcoin is right and strong. But I don't see how anyone can have pride in supporting or developing a hard fork.

Can you?

I don't really think so because these days even an ICO developer  does not needs much funds to start his own ICO. Infact people are selling services to create erc 20 tokens in just 0.1 btc. I think anyone in this crypyo world can surely invest such an amount in his own ICO. So wont say that forks are for poor developers.

Yes ICO creation might cost less nowadays but the chance of people buying from your ICO is not that high. but for hard forks what only need to do is hold as many bitcoin as you can and once the altcoin is created you can sell that coin right away with a higher value. Every advantage is on the part of the supporters of the fork since they are the one who owns most of bitcoins.

[Iranus]

Are hard forks the poor developer's ICO?

No, because people aren't obliged to pay in order to own the token.  The developers typically fund their own projects.

hijack bitcoin

Note that the upcoming hard fork was agreed to occur before Bitcoin Cash or "Bitcoin Gold" were devised (or certainly before they had agreed for it to happen).  It's not their responsibility that other developers have attempted hard forks before them.

I also wouldn't consider it "hijacking" - just developing a different version of software that people can choose to run or not to run based on their own thoughts.

Developers who pursue hard forks really are trying to get something for nothing.

In this case, that was not their intention.  Notably there is not going to be a premine in this fork, so the developers are not at an advantage to an ordinary Bitcoin holder.

[Nameless27]

Nope they’re not even poor. Most of them are really hate bitcoin and to replace it is they’re biggest goal. Forking is an attention hungry way of dismantling bitcoin core and to have profit in the end for any result it maybe. Why does it is mostly supported by miners? Maybe in the old standards bitcoin can’t be mine now or harder not like before, if they do make a new mining coin with few miners in support what will happen. More coins means more profit less competitors. Now Forking means failure for me, the support of the community always be in bitcoin at least for now.

[Rinsend]

Hard forks are great for Bitcoin, because the prove that Bitcoin is right and strong. But I don't see how anyone can have pride in supporting or developing a hard fork.

Can you?

when a hard fork occurs,
this raises a very powerful force against bitcoin prices,
this is because the volume of bitcoin that grows very quickly,
because the fact is for anyone who holds some bitcoin when a hardfork happens this will make us have the same amount of coins for free

[pawanjain]

It's quite obvious that the Segwit2x wants to hijack the properties of Bitcoin by saying that they are upgrading it to a better version.
Instead of developing the coin together with the Segwit they decided to fork it by themselves. They also wanted the miners to support it.
Why would they do it if it was not for their benefit ? I am sure that they would not be successful in achieving their goals since Bitcoin will win the race and B2X will be just another Altcoin like the BCH and BTG.

[BitcoinIsAlgebraic]

Not all of them will be but bitcoin gold was definitely an attempt at an ICO launch using the fame of Bitcoin.