Topic: BU Hard Fork or Segwit Soft Fork newbie questions (Read 1283 times)

Ok so you are confirming that Rojer Ver & Jihan Wu of Bitcoin Unlimited are not continuing with the hard fork/51% attack in the future?

I was thinking of selling my bitcoin now and buying them cheap again when hard fork happens. You are confirming that I cannot do this because of the above?

They are dead. And that's exactly why the price is soaring. It's up now about $60 from when Gregory Maxwell broke the news last night:

https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg05055.html

https://medium.com/@WhalePanda/asicboost-the-reason-why-bitmain-blocked-segwit-901fd346ee9f

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/is-a-mining-manufacturer-blocking-segwit-to-benefit-from-asicboost-cm770504

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/63qaps/a_list_of_all_the_bu_supporter_concocted/

Whats the latest status now regarding this drama?

Is the BU hard fork or attack is inevitable in 2017/18 or just FUD not really going to happen? If not really going to happen then why is the latest bitcoin price rising?

Sounds like a good idea. But you forgot to mention that you will get a free copy of BU coins and if you add them up with the BTC coins it maybe more than half price in total.

So a BU hard fork or an attack will be inevitable after this summer season?

If a hard fork happens first does that mean soft forks are not required and hence are automatically cancelled? A hard fork after summer will automatically win over the segwit soft fork this november? Is it like first come first served?

Here's my plan. Please share your thoughts on it. I feel like it's a good idea (obv, its my idea), but i would like to hear some outside input.

I have already Shapeshifted all my Bitcoin into Ethereum. Ethereum price has been quite stable, going up some even. Why would I want to leave all my money in Bitcoin where it could tank hard? And stay that way for a long time. And, as we know, having coins in both chains doesn't really make up for the loss of value both coins will surely have. Furthermore everyone could lose all of their money.

A contentious hard fork will be extremely damaging to both chains, and all crypto-currencies for that matter. Potential bitcoin users, would be investors, etc will not view Bitcoin in the same light for quite some time, maybe never again.

Perhaps many others are thinking same as me, and together we'll all push up ETH price. Even if they dont, ETH may be at $65-$70 by the time all this crap blows over.

Lets say BTC is worth $1,000 right now, and that I have 5 coins worth $5,000. Then I shapeshift over to ETH for $5,000 in ETH, and lets say those are worth an even $50 right now, so I now have 100 of those. Then, in the meantime, bitcoin argues and argues on and on stagnating the price keeping right about where its at now, if not lower. It's certainly not going back up to $1300 with all this crap going on. So there I am with my 100 ethers I took away from bitcoin, feeling a good bit more safe. And lets also say ether keeps creeping up, maybe up to $65 by the time this blows over. So that would be 100 x $65 =$6,500 leaving me with an extra $1,500, and I didn't stress nearly as much.

No hardfork? Fine, I buy my BTC back at around the same price i sold it, probably less.

Hardfork happens and price gets cut in half, roughly. I watch all the mayhem from the sidelines not worrying about what might happen to my $5,000. No decisions to make yet. I'll make them when I'm good and ready. Then I buy back my $5,000 worth of BTC or BTU + another $1,500 worth. So lets see....how many coins can I buy with $6,500 at $500 each? 13 right? Fawk ya!!! Now when they go back up to $1,000 (assuming this happens of course) I have $13,000 instead of $5,000.

It's a no brainer right? At least it seems so to me. Of course some nutty shit could happen like ether could fork or get attacked, anything is possible. But does anyone have any more realistic objections?

I can hear you already. "Attacks and forks are a very real possibility! Especially with Ethereum!" Ok fine, I'll give you that one.

Any other objections?

I don't see this as weird. All users will have the choice, and that's good.
The bad side is that it would take probably months for things to settle, so you will have to freeze your assets for a long time.

lightning is just a separate node/service on separate network offering a service offchain.. no fork no hassle anyone can run these whenever they like.. think of it much like depositing funds into coinbase or bitgo.. nothing big deal you choose to use it or not

---

---

---

softfork segwit will kill off 5% of the hash and drop many of the diverse implementations down to a second downstream filterd tier network if it reaches the 95% by mid november

---

USAF forces segwit to be activated and will cause more than 5% distruption. by mid november.

---

---

---

as for BU. HF. the concept is node and pool consensus, hence no deadlines no threats no active banning.. but those on the segwit side see it as an attack/opposition. so segwit would pull a banning node/ rejecting hashpower trigger if BU got to a certain level of community consensus.

Ok coming back to this thread after 2 weeks I heard another forking term which is UASF which makes the matter more confusing.

So in the bitcoin world right now whats the latest status in regards to 4 different forks?:

- Soft Fork Segwit
- Lightning network (Soft Fork?)
- BU Hard Fork
- UASF

Which fork/s above affects bitcoin investors?

Or is Segwit and Lightning Network combined? Why they need combining, is it because one depends on the other to become stronger?

When is the approximate estimated month year when either of the above forks will be activated?

Despite all the public rhetoric, we don't know if a compromise solution is being worked on behind closed doors. Nothing is certain.
There maybe an agreement on a simultaneous segwit/BU style hard fork (a consensus single chain result). From the current rhetoric I would say Aug/Sep will be the decision deadline, but things can change.

That's possible, that at the very end they reach agreement under the pressure of the price falling... like the cold war strategy you mentioned: MAD (mutually assured destruction).  The thing is I think each is convinced they can win still in the long run.

In terms of price I think we will have Dumpwars.  Core and BU will dump to destroy the other.  It's interesting to think that if Satoshi had an extremely strong preference for, say, Core, he could dump BU into oblivion.

So the hard fork is estimated to happen at the end of this summer (Aug/Sep)?

I´m not an expert and maybe I´m wrong but this is how I see it.

There are two options fighting to win. An option that needs 90 percent support to win, another option that needs 75 percent. If the option that needs 90 percent gets to it, who will want to stay in the remaining 10 percent? If the other option gets to reach the 75 percent that needs, who is going to stay in the remaining 25 percent? I think it's possible that the rumors about a possible hard fork are part of a cold war strategy and that it finally ends up having consensus in some sense, that would be at least the most logical and interesting. Starting with the miners themselves who would not see falling the value of the coins that they mine.

Your understanding is basically correct. You'll have 2 coins and the price of it should fluctuate drastically once it hits the exchange. The people will just decide which coin will have better value than the other. And because of that, let's say the price of your original coins cost $1000, it is possible that its value will decrease in to lower region ($500-$600) after the fork. We don't know what will be the price and we can say that it is inevitable that the price will decrease drastically.

For sure there will be some exchanges that will open pair for BU - if not with fiat, for sure with alts or maybe even with BTC  
If not, for sure will be someone who will open trading thread, here on Bitcointalk, and will be buying coins for 10% of value.

The worst thing is that people will have to choose coin. It is really weird..

For BU to be activated, 75% of the mining power needs to support it.  If this were the case, the chances are that BU would have a majority of support and therefore that your previous coins would lower dramatically in value. 

The value of new Bitcoin/BUcoin will also drop dramatically temporarily due to those who do not support and the fear/sometimes FUD of a hard fork.

if exchange do not accept BU as a new chain you have nothing to worry about, only core will win, and i guess why the exchange would accept bitcoin unlimited? they have no reason, because would destroy the core chain and the value of bitcoin, the exchange are all with core at the moment, and miners can't sell their coins without an exchange

Only vision of that is scary! If something like that gonna happen, on all exchanges will be crazy panic. No one would known which Bitcoin is the real one! The price could fall even to few $$. It could even mean the end of Bitcoin !!! It really looks scary!

BU, xt, bitcoinj, classic are not demanding a split. not going to ban nodes to split.
meaning that things like BU, XT, classic and other nodes that are compatible to a change in the blocksize will not hurt each other and will grow together...

however it will cause cores over weight ban hammer to trigger and core nodes will start orphaning and banning what it doesnt like.
this was seen by the simple 3 second orphan event of BU making a block that was 1.000250.
xt, classic and other nodes just seen that because the dynamics were not activated to treat it as a rule breaker and reject it. nothing more. things went on just like all other orphans that happen a few times a week. no drama no fuss.. 3 seconds and forgotten

but core went ban hammer heavy and banned nodes that relayed such a block.

all core needs to do is add a few lines of code to allow the 1mb base limit to grow if a certain activity occurs. and core too can continue running on the same playing field as the rest of the community.

but no. core will ban it and be the cause of their own altcoin if an event happened.

the only people wanting an altcoin are the greedy ones. the ones that think they can "double their money".
the issue with this is "what then".... 10 minutes of having double coins.. you spend one half... and then.. all that excitement and greed is over..

then ...... yep stupidity.

to keep bitcoin strong the community need to be working on the same playing field. not looking to have kings and networks of just one code base. and a 10 minute double coin event that ends up in a cauldron of mixed services that are biased against one chain and adoring the other causing user confusion about which coin merchants accept and not accept

diversity, decentralisation is good on one network.
but centralising 2 networks is not good
distribution of a centralised codebase on a network does not mean decentralised

If you hold coins before any hard fork as a bilateral split, you own coins in both forks. You have automatically hedged your bets. You could choose to sell one side of your hedge for an increased stake in the other coin. You take your risk.


If miners feel threatened that an unwanted change is being forced upon them, and they have a sufficient majority of hash power, they might try to force a resolution before the end of the summer. Possible bilateral split occurring as a result.


Yes, if proposals to attempt to force it trough are not implemented. But blockstream are so desperate for it to make lightning networks more reliable and not a potential free for all theft hole, they will pressure core to try and try again. They have invested a lot of money in it.

You would have coins on both chains, so you'd have twice as many coins. The combined value still be a lot lower than before the fork, as nobody wants a coin that just splits into different mutually incompatible coins. So the scenario would be very bad for your investment, for sure.