New fork, new potential troubles for bitcoiners.

[satscraper]

There have been a lot of forks lately. Bitcoiners never seem to get any peace of mind. ^{That’s how I see it.}

The most interesting thing is that anyone can copy one of your transactions sent after the fork and send it over the new network, namely eCash. ^{It’s reassuring that the destination address doesn’t change.}

That said, the relevant anti-replay mechanism:

In short, if you don’t figure it out, you can make the mess.

Has anyone here used this stuff so far?

[ABCbits]

In short, if you don’t figure it out, you can make the mess.

Yeah. For other recently forked coin, there are less risky option, such as OP_RETURN output with size above 83 bytes, send dust to uncompressed P2PK and few other approach. But honestly i would rather not mess with nLockTime when it's possible, since a mistake could make my Bitcoin cannot be spend/moved for really long time.

P.S. I think it's only problematic if you have any intention to claim and use/sell this eCash coin.

[LoyceV]

there are less risky option, such as OP_RETURN output with size above 83 bytes

I wouldn't dare use this to prevent replaying on my real Bitcoins. If Bitcoin would accept this in the future, your transactions can still be replayed.

this eCash coin

Wait.... There's eCash XEC and eCash ECX now?

[BlackHatCoiner]

There have been a lot of forks lately. Bitcoiners never seem to get any peace of mind. ^{That’s how I see it.}

Fortunately, most of these forkcoins are worthless from day 1. The recent eCash one is traded at less than $30 on neoxa.exchange. No need to get into trouble to claim them!

I wouldn't dare use this to prevent replaying on my real Bitcoins. If Bitcoin would accept this in the future, your transactions can still be replayed.

Bitcoin accepts this already. I think what he meant is to create a Bitcoin transaction with OP_RETURN (>83 bytes) so that it cannot be replayed on the Bitcoin Knots chain. (Then you move your Knots with a transaction you verify that is invalid on Bitcoin.)

Wait.... There's eCash XEC and eCash ECX now?

Yep. More useless garbage.

[NotATether]

I'm going to fade this. I'm not going to bother looking up the price on this one, and the risk of transaction replays is way too high to consider recovering what miniscule value coins I have. I don't even know if there is any exchange that supports this. Is there though?

[satscraper]

P.S. I think it's only problematic if you have any intention to claim and use/sell this eCash coin.

Agreed. This was exactly what I was thinking when I opened this thread, so I’m committed to not fiddling with this shit unless it reaches $3000-$5000. If that happens ^{which I seriously doub}t I’ll make the relevant transaction according to official receipt they published. This won’t affect my BTC, and I’ll sell my eCash.

[DaveF]

The other method is to get some dust from someone who has coins that are not on the fork chain and then combine them with a TX that has the bulk of your coins.
You do give up some privacy since if I or anyone sends you some then I or anyone can track your address, but beyond that it's not that big a deal.


And for those of you in signature campaigns. I bet at least some of the coins you will be getting over the next few weeks will not be on the ecash chain so you could probably do it yourself at this point.

-Dave

[pooya87]

Agreed. This was exactly what I was thinking when I opened this thread, so I’m committed to not fiddling with this shit unless it reaches $3000-$5000. If that happens ^{which I seriously doub}t I’ll make the relevant transaction according to official receipt they published. This won’t affect my BTC, and I’ll sell my eCash.

Only 2017 fork-mania was worth it since there were a lot of them and claiming was easier (they usually had replay protection IIRC) and prices were this terrible. Nowadays they create shady shitcoins without bothering to even add proper replay protection and claiming the "airdrop" is too much work considering how low their prices are. The last one, BLuke, was getting pumped but that excitement only lasted for like a day or two! They couldn't keep it up enough to incentivize claiming the airdrop

[Mia Chloe]

~snip

I actually agree that forks can create unnecessary confusion and risk for Bitcoin holders just like when Knox was very new. Replay protection is kinda important but the truth is users shouldn’t have to worry about accidentally sending funds across networks.

Personally I’d rather wait until the process is well tested before moving any coins. Some forks like this are kinda unnecessary if you ask me but sometimes devs just want something to play around with.

[ABCbits]

I wouldn't dare use this to prevent replaying on my real Bitcoins. If Bitcoin would accept this in the future, your transactions can still be replayed.

Bitcoin accepts this already. I think what he meant is to create a Bitcoin transaction with OP_RETURN (>83 bytes) so that it cannot be replayed on the Bitcoin Knots chain. (Then you move your Knots with a transaction you verify that is invalid on Bitcoin.)

Yeah, that's what i meant. It seems there's no way to move Bitcoin first, before moving eCash, unless you have UTXO that only exist on Bitcoin chain (as stated by @DaveF).

The last one, BLuke, was getting pumped but that excitement only lasted for like a day or two! They couldn't keep it up enough to incentivize claiming the airdrop

Which is probably intentionally. If they implement real replay protection that protect owner coin on both chain, more people would sell their BTCB2 coin and further crash its price.

[pooya87]

Which is probably intentionally. If they implement real replay protection that protect owner coin on both chain, more people would sell their BTCB2 coin and further crash its price.

That's the only logical explanation that I can think of too but this strategy has consequences though. For example it prevents this altcoin from being taken seriously or being listed on any decent exchange that would help it get pumped and dumped (which is the only way useless altcoins can continue existing).