Analysis and list of top big blocks shills (XT #REKT ignorers) - page 49.

VeritasSapere

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: johnyj on January 11, 2016, 06:53:53 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 03:15:16 PM

If the blocks become larger it implies that there is increased adoption and use of Bitcoin. A high volume of low fee transactions over the long run would actually pay out more for the miners compared to a high volume of low fee transactions. The idea that if we increase the blocksize over time as the technology allows as it improves would lead to the network collapsing is not supported by the facts.

If we had a sixty four megabyte blocksize limit for instance with the same fees per transaction payed out today it would already exceed the present block reward. It is not impossible to have blocks this large, in a decade from now it might even seem trivial. It would even take BIP101 eight years to reach this point, and the newly proposed Bitcoin Classic more then twelve years. Most of the other blocksize limit increase proposals are even more conservative then this, which is fine. My point being is that a high volume of low value transactions can pay for the networks security and this would not lead to the network collapsing as you claim, especially as the limit is slowly increased as our technology improves.

As I explained HERE, as long as the blocks are not full, the fee income will always be a small percentage of the block reward, and it shrinks every 4 years. A reduced block reward + fee will make future miners only be able to mine a fraction of a bitcoin per each block (even fiat wise that means lots of money), greatly reduce the mining incentive, especially when most of the coins were mined

25-50 BTC per block fee is a much better incentive, and maybe the best incentive for the miners to continuously expand their operation, since it keeps every miner feels like an early adopter. But that is impossible to reach if we don't have block size limit

I think that you are wrong in this conception, It has been shown that we can have a fee market without a blocksize limit.

https://scalingbitcoin.org/papers/feemarket.pdf
http://www.bitcoinunlimited.info/1txn

bargainbin

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:45:31 PM

...
That depends on the price, most likely scenario is that I will have to down clock or turn off my older equipment while I should be able to keep all of the newer equipment running, especially if I buy into the next generation of equipment closer to the next halving.

"That depends on the price"? You don't know that, no more than any other miners (well, at least those not swapping spit with big exchange owners).
I mean what YOU yourself are doing, right now. Are you expanding? Or 'retracting'? Is downclocking what you mean by 'retracting'?

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 03:15:16 PM

If the blocks become larger it implies that there is increased adoption and use of Bitcoin. A high volume of low fee transactions over the long run would actually pay out more for the miners compared to a high volume of low fee transactions. The idea that if we increase the blocksize over time as the technology allows as it improves would lead to the network collapsing is not supported by the facts.

If we had a sixty four megabyte blocksize limit for instance with the same fees per transaction payed out today it would already exceed the present block reward. It is not impossible to have blocks this large, in a decade from now it might even seem trivial. It would even take BIP101 eight years to reach this point, and the newly proposed Bitcoin Classic more then twelve years. Most of the other blocksize limit increase proposals are even more conservative then this, which is fine. My point being is that a high volume of low value transactions can pay for the networks security and this would not lead to the network collapsing as you claim, especially as the limit is slowly increased as our technology improves.

As I explained HERE, as long as the blocks are not full, the fee income will always be a small percentage of the block reward, and it shrinks every 4 years. A reduced block reward + fee will make future miners only be able to mine a fraction of a bitcoin per each block (even fiat wise that means lots of money), greatly reduce the mining incentive, especially when most of the coins were mined

25-50 BTC per block fee is a much better incentive, and maybe the best incentive for the miners to continuously expand their operation, since it keeps every miner feels like an early adopter. But that is impossible to reach if we don't have block size limit

VeritasSapere

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:44:06 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:40:44 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:35:51 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:28:23 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:22:30 PM

...
P.S. To avoid complicated maths, model this at the limit, i.e. "the cost of mining 1 BTC is slightly less than market price of 1 BTC, as per satoshi's prognostication.

P.P.S: Which would you do:
1. spend 10 dollars to make five dollars
2. spend "five hundred and twenty million dollars" to make a billion dollars
(chose one)

The cost of mining one BTC is not slightly less than the market price of one BTC. When Satoshi mentioned this he was pointing out something that I am alluding to as well however. Which is that miners will chase profit until it is not as profitable anymore. For example, if Bitcoin doubles in price my mining operation will all of a sudden make twice as much money, at such a point it does make sense for me to expand my operation so that more profit can be made. A good mining operation should expand and retract depending on the network conditions, an increased price is a very clear sign for most miners to expand, unless the difficulty is skyrocketing as well, which does however imply that other miners beat them to the expansion, which is pretty much what is happening now with the mining industry.

Assume: you are a perfect miner, mining at the ragged edge of profitability today.
Wat do nao?

@BlindMayorBitcorn: we'll figure it out as we go along, don't worry

I do not understand your question. I am actually a real world miner though, so I do have insights in how mining works today.

So, as an IRL miner, what are you doing? Expanding? With the difficulty pretty much doubling over the past 3 month, how is that working out for you?
Or are you 'retracting'? If so, how does one go about doing that? (assuming scale here, or do you mean you got a couple of S7s in the garage?)

@BlindMayorBitcorn: he thinks the price of BTC will magically grow overnight, to make up for losses caused by halvening. Because reasons.

I do not think it would grow over night, I think that the price will increase over time though, but that is the bet that I am making for myself of course. To answer your question, I am planning to expand, however this very much depends both on the price and what equipment will be available to me as a small independent miner in the near future. Deciding when to expand or contract as a miner can depend on many variables which are hard to predict, mining is a risky business I will not deny that, fortunately I have done well with my operation so far.

The halving will be a great shock to many miners I am sure however mining is a self balancing economy, I do not think it is something we should be overly concerned about in terms of the design chooses we make, unless we plan to change these incentive mechanism specifically. We should not care to much about the profitability of mining, miners will sort that out themselves, it is more important to make Bitcoin appealing to the masses, this is what would bring about more profit for the miners ultimately.

BlindMayorBitcorn

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1116

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 11, 2016, 06:47:06 PM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 11, 2016, 06:34:20 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 11, 2016, 06:23:20 PM

@~~bargainbin~~lambie Any attack will be clear for all to see. The value of what's stolen will be destroyed.

So what's the plan here exactly? Was the block reward intended to just bootstrap the network? Fees are supposed to suddently up and kick everybody in the face? That seems odd. Undecided

Bootstrap the network and distribute coins. For there to be fees there has to be users. For there to be users Bitcoin needs to be useful. Right now it's useful for speculation. Sort of hard for the network to make money from fees when this is the case. So basically, the people who's supposed to pay the fees haven't arrived yet.

Oh dear.

Fatman3001

legendary

Activity: 1554

Merit: 1014

Make Bitcoin glow with ENIAC

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 11, 2016, 06:34:20 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 11, 2016, 06:23:20 PM

@~~bargainbin~~lambie Any attack will be clear for all to see. The value of what's stolen will be destroyed.

So what's the plan here exactly? Was the block reward intended to just bootstrap the network? Fees are supposed to suddently up and kick everybody in the face? That seems odd. Undecided

Bootstrap the network and distribute coins. For there to be fees there has to be users. For there to be users Bitcoin needs to be useful. Right now it's useful for speculation. Sort of hard for the network to make money from fees when this is the case. So basically, the people who's supposed to pay the fees haven't arrived yet.

VeritasSapere

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 11, 2016, 06:42:52 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:40:44 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:35:51 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:28:23 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:22:30 PM

...
P.S. To avoid complicated maths, model this at the limit, i.e. "the cost of mining 1 BTC is slightly less than market price of 1 BTC, as per satoshi's prognostication.

P.P.S: Which would you do:
1. spend 10 dollars to make five dollars
2. spend "five hundred and twenty million dollars" to make a billion dollars
(chose one)

The cost of mining one BTC is not slightly less than the market price of one BTC. When Satoshi mentioned this he was pointing out something that I am alluding to as well however. Which is that miners will chase profit until it is not as profitable anymore. For example, if Bitcoin doubles in price my mining operation will all of a sudden make twice as much money, at such a point it does make sense for me to expand my operation so that more profit can be made. A good mining operation should expand and retract depending on the network conditions, an increased price is a very clear sign for most miners to expand, unless the difficulty is skyrocketing as well, which does however imply that other miners beat them to the expansion, which is pretty much what is happening now with the mining industry.

Assume: you are a perfect miner, mining at the ragged edge of profitability today.
Wat do nao?

@BlindMayorBitcorn: we'll figure it out as we go along, don't worry

I do not understand your question. I am actually a real world miner though, so I do have insights in how mining works today.

What will you do when you're getting half what you're getting now??

That depends on the price, most likely scenario is that I will have to down clock or turn off my older equipment while I should be able to keep all of the newer equipment running, especially if I buy into the next generation of equipment closer to the next halving.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:35:51 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:28:23 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:22:30 PM

...
P.S. To avoid complicated maths, model this at the limit, i.e. "the cost of mining 1 BTC is slightly less than market price of 1 BTC, as per satoshi's prognostication.

P.P.S: Which would you do:
1. spend 10 dollars to make five dollars
2. spend "five hundred and twenty million dollars" to make a billion dollars
(chose one)

The cost of mining one BTC is not slightly less than the market price of one BTC. When Satoshi mentioned this he was pointing out something that I am alluding to as well however. Which is that miners will chase profit until it is not as profitable anymore. For example, if Bitcoin doubles in price my mining operation will all of a sudden make twice as much money, at such a point it does make sense for me to expand my operation so that more profit can be made. A good mining operation should expand and retract depending on the network conditions, an increased price is a very clear sign for most miners to expand, unless the difficulty is skyrocketing as well, which does however imply that other miners beat them to the expansion, which is pretty much what is happening now with the mining industry.

Assume: you are a perfect miner, mining at the ragged edge of profitability today.
Wat do nao?

P.S. also, what do you mean by "expand and retract"? How does a mining operation go about retractng, exactly?

@BlindMayorBitcorn: we'll figure it out as we go along, don't worry

Cost of mining IS slightly less than market price at least in theory. If price rises then miners will expand operations en masse , driving up hashrate and difficulty, in turn driving profits back to market prices. Such is the case for any commodity.

brg444

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:40:44 PM

I do not understand your question. I am actually a real world miner though, so I do have insights in how mining works today.

Meh you know how to turn on mining gear, big deal. That's all the insight you can provide really. There are so many holes in your arguments all you're left doing is constantly moving the goal post.

bargainbin

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:40:44 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:35:51 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:28:23 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:22:30 PM

...
P.S. To avoid complicated maths, model this at the limit, i.e. "the cost of mining 1 BTC is slightly less than market price of 1 BTC, as per satoshi's prognostication.

P.P.S: Which would you do:
1. spend 10 dollars to make five dollars
2. spend "five hundred and twenty million dollars" to make a billion dollars
(chose one)

The cost of mining one BTC is not slightly less than the market price of one BTC. When Satoshi mentioned this he was pointing out something that I am alluding to as well however. Which is that miners will chase profit until it is not as profitable anymore. For example, if Bitcoin doubles in price my mining operation will all of a sudden make twice as much money, at such a point it does make sense for me to expand my operation so that more profit can be made. A good mining operation should expand and retract depending on the network conditions, an increased price is a very clear sign for most miners to expand, unless the difficulty is skyrocketing as well, which does however imply that other miners beat them to the expansion, which is pretty much what is happening now with the mining industry.

Assume: you are a perfect miner, mining at the ragged edge of profitability today.
Wat do nao?

@BlindMayorBitcorn: we'll figure it out as we go along, don't worry

I do not understand your question. I am actually a real world miner though, so I do have insights in how mining works today.

So, as an IRL miner, what are you doing? Expanding? With the difficulty pretty much doubling over the past 3 month, how is that working out for you?
Or are you 'retracting'? If so, how does one go about doing that? (assuming scale here, or do you mean you got a couple of S7s in the garage?)

@BlindMayorBitcorn: he thinks the price of BTC will magically grow overnight, to make up for losses caused by halvening. Because reasons.

BlindMayorBitcorn

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1116

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:40:44 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:35:51 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:28:23 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:22:30 PM

...
P.S. To avoid complicated maths, model this at the limit, i.e. "the cost of mining 1 BTC is slightly less than market price of 1 BTC, as per satoshi's prognostication.

P.P.S: Which would you do:
1. spend 10 dollars to make five dollars
2. spend "five hundred and twenty million dollars" to make a billion dollars
(chose one)

The cost of mining one BTC is not slightly less than the market price of one BTC. When Satoshi mentioned this he was pointing out something that I am alluding to as well however. Which is that miners will chase profit until it is not as profitable anymore. For example, if Bitcoin doubles in price my mining operation will all of a sudden make twice as much money, at such a point it does make sense for me to expand my operation so that more profit can be made. A good mining operation should expand and retract depending on the network conditions, an increased price is a very clear sign for most miners to expand, unless the difficulty is skyrocketing as well, which does however imply that other miners beat them to the expansion, which is pretty much what is happening now with the mining industry.

Assume: you are a perfect miner, mining at the ragged edge of profitability today.
Wat do nao?

@BlindMayorBitcorn: we'll figure it out as we go along, don't worry

I do not understand your question. I am actually a real world miner though, so I do have insights in how mining works today.

What will you do when you're getting half what you're getting now??

VeritasSapere

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:35:51 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:28:23 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:22:30 PM

...
P.S. To avoid complicated maths, model this at the limit, i.e. "the cost of mining 1 BTC is slightly less than market price of 1 BTC, as per satoshi's prognostication.

P.P.S: Which would you do:
1. spend 10 dollars to make five dollars
2. spend "five hundred and twenty million dollars" to make a billion dollars
(chose one)

The cost of mining one BTC is not slightly less than the market price of one BTC. When Satoshi mentioned this he was pointing out something that I am alluding to as well however. Which is that miners will chase profit until it is not as profitable anymore. For example, if Bitcoin doubles in price my mining operation will all of a sudden make twice as much money, at such a point it does make sense for me to expand my operation so that more profit can be made. A good mining operation should expand and retract depending on the network conditions, an increased price is a very clear sign for most miners to expand, unless the difficulty is skyrocketing as well, which does however imply that other miners beat them to the expansion, which is pretty much what is happening now with the mining industry.

Assume: you are a perfect miner, mining at the ragged edge of profitability today.
Wat do nao?

@BlindMayorBitcorn: we'll figure it out as we go along, don't worry

I do not understand your question. I am actually a real world miner though, so I do have insights in how mining works today. The equipment I set up a year ago is still running profitably today, and I have already past my ROI. Hopefully I will be able to buy into the next generation of miners. If the Bitcoin price did increase more I would actually buy more of the present generation now, for me this does depend on the price however, most likely I will end up waiting for the next generation of chips before I expand my operation more.

bargainbin

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:28:23 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:22:30 PM

...
P.S. To avoid complicated maths, model this at the limit, i.e. "the cost of mining 1 BTC is slightly less than market price of 1 BTC, as per satoshi's prognostication.

P.P.S: Which would you do:
1. spend 10 dollars to make five dollars
2. spend "five hundred and twenty million dollars" to make a billion dollars
(chose one)

The cost of mining one BTC is not slightly less than the market price of one BTC. When Satoshi mentioned this he was pointing out something that I am alluding to as well however. Which is that miners will chase profit until it is not as profitable anymore. For example, if Bitcoin doubles in price my mining operation will all of a sudden make twice as much money, at such a point it does make sense for me to expand my operation so that more profit can be made. A good mining operation should expand and retract depending on the network conditions, an increased price is a very clear sign for most miners to expand, unless the difficulty is skyrocketing as well, which does however imply that other miners beat them to the expansion, which is pretty much what is happening now with the mining industry.

Assume: you are a perfect miner, mining at the ragged edge of profitability today.
Wat do nao?

P.S. also, what do you mean by "expand and retract"? How does a mining operation go about retractng, exactly?

@BlindMayorBitcorn: we'll figure it out as we go along, don't worry

BlindMayorBitcorn

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1116

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 11, 2016, 06:23:20 PM

@~~bargainbin~~lambie Any attack will be clear for all to see. The value of what's stolen will be destroyed.

So what's the plan here exactly? Was the block reward intended to just bootstrap the network? Fees are supposed to suddently up and kick everybody in the face? That seems odd. Undecided

VeritasSapere

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:22:30 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:14:27 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:09:22 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:02:42 PM

[...] It does matter if the "dollar" value of BTC has doubled since then. Since if hypothetically the value of Bitcoin doubles after the halving, then there is still the same amount being paid for security

But since the value of BTC has doubled, the thing that you're securing has doubled in value, so you need twice the security. If a $5 lock is just-good-enough to protect a $100 bike, is it also good enough to protect a $200 bike?

Yes and because it has doubled in value, miners will be incentivized to increase their operations. So that $5 lock becomes a $10 lock in your analogy.

How would the miners be "incentivized" to increase their operations, after the block reward halves & price doubles?

Also, earlier postscript you might have missed:

P.S. To avoid complicated maths, model this at the limit, i.e. "the cost of mining 1 BTC is slightly less than market price of 1 BTC, as per satoshi's prognostication.

P.P.S: Which would you do:
1. spend 10 dollars to make five dollars
2. spend "five hundred and twenty million dollars" to make a billion dollars
(chose one)

The cost of mining one BTC is not slightly less than the market price of one BTC. When Satoshi mentioned this he was pointing out something that I am alluding to as well however. Which is that miners will chase profit until it is not as profitable anymore. For example, if Bitcoin doubles in price my mining operation will all of a sudden make twice as much money, at such a point it does make sense for me to expand my operation so that more profit can be made. A good mining operation should expand and retract depending on the network conditions, an increased price is a very clear sign for most miners to expand, unless the difficulty is skyrocketing as well, which does however imply that other miners beat them to the expansion, which is pretty much what is happening now with the mining industry.

Bergmann_Christoph

sr. member

Activity: 409

Merit: 286

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 05:49:22 PM

Quote from: fisheater22 on January 11, 2016, 05:43:56 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on January 11, 2016, 05:20:26 PM

[...]
Transaction space means MORE transactions and thus more fees
even though the fee per transaction might decrease, but not necessarily the total.
[...]

If it costs ~nothing for miners to process transactions (vs. mining empty blocks) & plenty of block space, why would I pay > satoshi tx fee?

Since it does cost something for the miners to process transactions, increased orphan rate is one factor. Therefore if you want your transaction to be confirmed faster or even confirmed at all, you should include a fee. It is up to the miners to decide whether it is worth including your transactions or not. If it is worth including your transaction they will include it, if it is not they will not, just increase the fee until miners accept your transaction. This is the essence of the free market behind fees. There already is a free fee market and we do not need to introduce an arbitrary limit in order to impose this.

Yes, miner's have many business opportunities beside the reward.

They don't need to include transactions. They do it cause they get something for it. It's not important how much space they have. If you have six farmers with unlimited fields, they would still get money for their fruits, cause they are the only ones with access to farmlands.

Miners can do so much. They have the power to include transactions. I just don't get how people claim that you'll help the miners by restricting their space.

Miner's don't need to include transactions. They can sell priority transactions, they can sell abonements (get through without min fee). They can develop new business modells. Look at btcchina, their pool supports the exchange by including every tx. And so on.

bargainbin

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

^^

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 11, 2016, 06:23:20 PM

@~~bargainbin~~lambie Any attack will be clear for all to see. The value of what's stolen will be destroyed.

...The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

Fatman3001

legendary

Activity: 1554

Merit: 1014

Make Bitcoin glow with ENIAC

@~~bargainbin~~lambie Any attack will be clear for all to see. The value of what's stolen will be destroyed.

bargainbin

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:14:27 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 11, 2016, 06:09:22 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 11, 2016, 06:02:42 PM

[...] It does matter if the "dollar" value of BTC has doubled since then. Since if hypothetically the value of Bitcoin doubles after the halving, then there is still the same amount being paid for security

But since the value of BTC has doubled, the thing that you're securing has doubled in value, so you need twice the security. If a $5 lock is just-good-enough to protect a $100 bike, is it also good enough to protect a $200 bike?

Yes and because it has doubled in value, miners will be incentivized to increase their operations. So that $5 lock becomes a $10 lock in your analogy.

How would the miners be "incentivized" to increase their operations, after the block reward halves & price doubles?

Also, earlier postscript you might have missed:

P.S. To avoid complicated maths, model this at the limit, i.e. "the cost of mining 1 BTC is slightly less than market price of 1 BTC, as per satoshi's prognostication.

P.P.S: Which would you do:
1. spend 10 dollars to make five dollars
2. spend "five hundred and twenty million dollars" to make a billion dollars
(chose one)

VeritasSapere

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: Bergmann_Christoph on January 11, 2016, 06:17:52 PM

Quote from: Indianacoin on January 11, 2016, 05:16:40 PM

Why don't people understand that;

Increased Blocksize would lead to a bigger Blockchain that overwhelms the storage capacity of smaller nodes.
More space for transactions will decrease the market for transaction fees.
Bitcoin should be a currency for the Elite and not for your daily cup of coffee.
Sidechains will solve the problem of smaller block size limit anyway.
Consensus might not be achievable and there will suddenly be two types of Bitcoin.

You don't like Socrates, do you?

Short answer: I think you missed the part of this thread when people slightly accepted that there's no absolute truth in this issue.

Nearly everyone here knows a dozen of arguments to counter your claims (and most of them have been discussed / strived at some point earlier)

Quote

Consensus might not be achievable and there will suddenly be two types of Bitcoin.

This is some worst-case scenario. Maybe it will be good, maybe it will be desastrous. I depends upon if the split stays or closes. I think most exchanges should agree on one version, may it be small or big, and since miners are here for the money, they would follow he exchanges, and the other change would die quickly.

If the exchanges serve both chains - which is the economically rationale decision - then we'll find the markets in chaos. Best decision will be to sell instantly both coins and look like they crash. Maybe there will terrible double spend opportunities.

If miners decide for a chain, the other will die quickly.

it would be exciting, but could be really terrible. I hope the important people will be wise enough to accept and respect different oppinions. Bitcoin is designed to find a consensus or to break. Holding it together is not a technical challenge, but a political.

Bitcoin is designed to find consensus or split. Splitting solves the problem of tyranny of the majority, in some cases I would consider this to be a good and desired feature, it might be the perfect way to resolve disagreements, since both sides can still have the Bitcoin they want, it can be considered a win-win scenario in many ways.

Topic: Analysis and list of top big blocks shills (XT #REKT ignorers) - page 49. (Read 46564 times)