Topic: BU an actual threat? - page 2. (Read 1607 times)

It looks like BU is going to happen no matter what. Exchanges already allow traders to buy BU for more than $200, is pretty cheap than BTC itself. There's considerable amount of volume particularly on bitfinex, its going to be more than what its price later as I can see.

I don't think its a threat to BTC though, its going to be like ETH and ETC.

You should try to keep it just even slightly consistent, you were saying Segwit was a technically superior solution this morning, and now you're advocating that everyone should have just shut their mouths and swallowed the poisoned kool-aid?

Which part of "miners are trying to bully the network and it's users" do you not understand?

I disagree.  Bitcoin can handle it because it does have real usage.  It has real usage and the real usage is in Bitcoin, not BU's new coin.  Platforms like Steam which accept Bitcoin will most likely continue accepting Bitcoin rather than the new coin and exchanges have already agreed that the BU coin will be listed as an alt.  The miners' hash power won't matter if most of Bitcoin's usage is in the coin that people care about and are used to, especially those who like holding.

And that is really the problem. They are new that is offering better services which can divide bitcoin holders.
There might be a big dump that could happen if they comfort in a new altcoin which is mimicking bitcoin.
The dump would be trying to exchange bitcoin to BU to use what they offer and that will be a new chaos to all the investor.
We are already divided with altcoins that are surrounding it and here comes a better competitor which we dont know if was planted by some government.

Codswallop. It would possibly trigger a complete loss of trust in all cryptocurrencies. Nobody would ever be quite sure again whether what they were putting money into would split and crater given the right levels of agitation.

If it had been an orderly and mutually supported move towards Unlimited then that would be dandy but that's not how it's playing out.

BU need to fix all the bugs that have been found recently and they have to secure their network from possible replay attacks before hard fork.

BU may remain as altcoin after the fork, core seems to win this political battle.

Help BU
download the BU client and run a node on your computer

But we keep forgetting that Ethereum was forked 4 times in total and only that one emergency fork after the DAO disaster caused community to split.
It was more of a rollover fix that real fork anyway. Another example - Monero: this altcoin had few forks and none of them caused any panic or problems.
We have problem only with forks in the Bitcoin and Ethereum communities, forks of altcoins are implemented seamlessly.

Actually the chain with less support are subjected to risk of 51% attack by supporters of major chain. ETC is minor chain during ETH hard fork and they experience this for very long time from the supporters of ETH. Same can go with minor chain of bitcoin and i think BTU will be that minor chain.  

let's hope this is true and this is also wrong. if BU has better technology and user cryptoccurency accept there is nothing wrong, maybe BTC remains a legend, even thousands or millions altcoin created by dev, it will not matter, because the exchange was built from scratch using bitcoin, so it is very difficult to BTC to the price of $ 100,

Again, you are wrong.  ETH/ETC was/is a hard fork.  There is no more perfect example of a hard fork.  One group of people wanted to "change the rules" the other group did not.  So they went their separate ways on separate block chains.  That is the definition of a hard fork.

I believe that all sides can agree. After all, the split will lead to greater comfort for many bitcoin holders. Why do this, who benefits?

How can you consider BU as an actual threat to bitcoin where in fact that BU will be separated to bitcoin and will continue to mine BTU. It is clear and and was defined by the major exchanges that soon BU and their codes will be serving BTU and Segwit code will be serving BTC. A split in bitcoin is approaching and we cannot stop it at this point of time.

The BIGGEST threat to BTC - EVER.

Anyone who thinks Bitcoin can shrug off a contentious HF, with messy double chain split, is kidding themselves.

ETH managed it because it is basically B to B. No actual 'users' are on Ethereum 'using' it. It's all big business. Playing with the new toy on the block.

Bitcoin is completely different. It is a customer facing $20Billion asset.

Please note : Either way is good for me, but it can't be 'contentious'. It needs to be ALL of us - TOGETHER.

If not.. all bets are off. Bitcoin will just become another ALT / Crypto currency..

IMHO - Core have managed this very 'badly'.. If they had just given even a tiny 2MB upgrade to the blocksize, to show that they were listening, we wouldn't be in this position now.

NOW - it's no longer a technical issue, it's become more 'political'. And that's the problem..

(+ lets not get started on BU programmers vs CORE.. sheesh..)

as a far as i know that is wrong, network didn't split in ETH and ETC, ETC was made before the split from other users that were not in agreement with ETH decision to do a hard fork

ETC 100% a new altcoin nothing to do with ETH if not for the same algorithm user and same parameters, there wasn't any split, they just created another chain because of the split, see the difference...

   Sure, I see what you mean.


Upon preliminary examination, I don'the really see major utility gains in BU, just seems like an unstable alt coin to me that is trying to seize the Bitcoin brand.

   I mean , every alt coin has some gimmicks to claim to be better than bitcoin, but in the end most of the demand is just from people hoping to get rich quick, and because of their lack of commitment to the core concepts of "altcoinx" they end up dumping it as soon as the opportunity to make a few hundred grand arises, placing a natural limit on the value of any altcoin.

   It remains the community of bitcoin users who set the market value, and since the "bitcoin believers" of the first generation still have the biggest holdings, and are unlikely to dump, I can't really see BU destroying the market value.

    The whole BU feeling kind of reminds me of a fanatical doomsday cult promising the end of the world on a specific date... and when the date arrives and the world doesn't end, they'll set a new date...

   Markets are ultimately what establish price... not like the core developerst are going to let bitcoin die because of scalability issues, they are just not implementing wild and extreme and probably dangerous solutions unilaterally.

   If a large number of coins "leave" the bitcoin ecosystem it could actually push the price up as demand on exchanges for BTC remains high and supply decreases.

BU is a flash in the pan imo... but please correct me if I am missing something

You can look at ETH hard fork as an example, network splitted into ETH & ETC while ETH have gained value and ETC is dying. But as an ETH holder you will have both ETH and ETC, so all of them are in profit after hard fork.

Same can go with bitcoin and BTC (core) may remain as large network while BTU may stay as just another altcoin. As a bitcoin holder we will get some free BTU 

So if (when?) a hardfork spooks the hell out of a lot of possibly uninformed people... and they all start dumping BTC (and/or BTU) and the prices plummet to ~$100... and your coins are now worth only 10% of what they are today... then that isn't a loss of value?

Of course, that could not happen and people could just hum along and the value could stay or grow... but history would tend to indicate that is not likely to happen. People generally want stability... not uncertainty and chaos.

You are, however, certainly correct in your assertion that it is a power play... some very egocentric, greedy people who can't/won't admit defeat... and are only interested in their own wealth. Meanwhile, a lot of the "rank and file" users are going to end up getting hammered. 

  I have only just started reading a little about BU. It seems to me that this is being blown out of proportion. Whichever party wins seems to just indicate the majority of the market will shift that direction, and whether BU takes over or BTC remains dominant won't really matter much.

    For your rank and file bitcoin user, it won't actually represent any loss of value, it just seems to be a power play of the ultra rich. Even if hash power is concentrated in fewer hands, a 51% attack would still be prevented by simple self interest. Am I missing something?