Topic: Achain’s Fork Theory —— what do you think? - page 7. (Read 6950 times)

I think it as a good thing when you try to help more people understand Blockchain

From my poor understanding, their fork theory try to resolve 3 issues.

1. Scalability:
I saw different solutions on this issue. If all business run on one chain, it has huge pressure on performance. And the nodes dont need all ledger but the ledger they cared about. From this perspective, it is good to have different block chain to support different business, and communicate with each other with careful authorization and trust (consensus).  
I am NOT technical expert, while I heard different solutions. For instance, EOS and previous graphene from BTS could support really high transaction rate. And Vitalik also emphasized the performance issue is going to be resolved in next 2 years by "sharding" at DEVCON summit.
Also Lisk has side chain which try to make Dapp development as easy as possible at the same time. The side chain technology can partially resolve scalability issue ,if I understand the tech correctly, and kind of isolate security issue.
Ok. I missed the lighting network on bitcoin network and ethereum, the off-chain technology is suitable for low fee, quick, small payment, and also cross chain atomic exchange.
What's the advantage, difference, and the current progress of the each technology?

2. User base:
The recent Bitcoin fork show lots of debates. Some radical users support one of them, and look down upon others. While lots of BTC holders don't care the debates and only care the "free" coins. Should I say you can get free users from fork? I don't know, probably people just care free coins. The technology behind represent the core value. You need people support the core value, which need "real" innovation based on current chain.  At this point, it related my next topic: do you think people who know very little about blockchain should fork any chain?

3. The barriers building one's own blockchain.
We have to admit it is still the early stage of blockchain technology. I dont judge on various blockchain solutions, and they are valuable innovations.  The market may finally determine the winner, maybe it is the one what you think it is impossible. So I support more and more people enter this industry, learn, contribute, and evolve continuously.  
I do think as a Dapp developer, he need understand the basic knowledge of blockchain, but no need to know the tech details of blockchain. For instance, he should never change the consensus, encryption, which should be done very carefully. However he could build the Dapp using his current skills on normal internet Apps.  The blockchain cornerstone guarantee App transform into Dapp. So I think they are good attempts, like ethereum using solidity, even it is still vulnerable, and like NEO using multiple programming languages, and like Lisk which helps to build Dapp. We need avoid the issues on parity's multi signature, but don't stop try, what makes the technology improve.
Building one's own blockchain is similar with building Dapp? I am doubting. I am not saying we only need one blockchain in the world which could resolve all issues, but is it really good that every one build a blockchain easily? It's hard to differentiate scammer and real builder. And Achain has the rule to approve the fork. It doesn't describe the detailed rules, at this time I keep my neutral opinion.

I do not agree with you. I think such a view is foolish. After all, Achain's community has not yet been built yet. Do you want to fly before you learn to walk? ?

I don't know the details, but in theory it could be, right?
For instance, they can change the block size, the bonus of generating block, etc?

Probably Tony will tell more in Singapore Blockshow summit.

I think it is possible, but there are lots of work to do. Thinking about current ethereum and etheruem after fully casper being implemented, two chains with some common users.

Approximately when will the VEP 1.0 mentioned by Point 7 be available and take effect?

 Emmmmmm........Regarding Point #6, who have the rights to vote on whether or not to split (and the type of splitting)? Is it just the token-holders, delegates, or all the community members?

If a sub-chain chooses not to subscribe to the main chain’s consensus mechanism (e.g. DPOS), can they adopt a different one?I'm sorry, my question may be a little more, because I am very interested in forking, so I hope everyone can help me to answer.......thanks

 Do sub-chains have to inherit all properties of the main chain? Is there an option of (even partially) not to?

Hi brother....What does soft fork and hard fork mean in No. 6? How are they different?

I guess some people above don't understand English? What 's the relationship between this "fork theory" and money? Cui said it's about innovation and it's just an idea.

I'm not sure if I'm correct but to me, this basically means Achain is open to splitting of chains in future for specific uses to make it simpler for developers who are not blockchain experts. This would in turn mean for every split ACT holders will get free money. Just like BTC, BCC and BTG

I like this idea althrough I think it's still pretty new and it will take a long time for the team to accomplish this idea.

As we all know, Achain reputation in China is not good, and community construction is also quite poor, and now another way to want money, this is not a good idea Yeah, the founder, should change

so evil

I do not know where you came from to put forward this theory. Achain's community groups are like feces. They do not look at the problem of community building. They always think about money.

Team manipulate prices to deceive investors, so bad！

i can prove that he says is true

Your statement is ambiguous, not to say that all projects from China are liar, such as NEO and QTUM are very good projects.
However, ACHAIN does not belong to this list, ACHAIN team I think it is not reliable, because they put the team responsible for the technical developers were dismissed before the ICO, ACHAIN only focus on publicity, but did not pay attention Development.

chinese scam，be  careful

It is said that ACHAIN reputation in China is very bad, before the jubi exchange, is the achain author team co-exchange malicious price manipulation, resulting in a lot of investors lose the same investment.
This is just a goodwill reminder.