Topic: Exchanges are rebelling against constant hard forks (Read 419 times)
It's normal for the Exchange to think so. A new altcoin is emerging. The new project claims to be very secure. However, in the first hacking case, the possibility of creating a new chain is discussed. This ridiculous situation needs to end.
Developers do this primarily for traders and investors. A fork on an exchange raises the value of a coin. The investor who bought has the right to sell more.
Exchange must respond to new developments. Those who are older than 3 years on the market knows. How Poloniex lost its popularity. How popular Bittrex became. Then Bittrex was thrown into the back of how to market. Binance follows every current development. They have to.
But the question is when? For the exchange to be able to have compatibility to the coin, specifically the changes from the coin, the developers must submit the requirements and how to adapt it. It is not just a single party job , it is a job of both to meet in the middle for compatibility. Binance did a great effort on having this one, indeed one of the greatest exchange we have. Well Poloniex became a lesser choice for some who didn't want show their identity to anyone, too bad for poloniex, their users sees it as a threat instead of added security. 
How Poloniex lost its popularity. How popular Bittrex became. Then Bittrex was thrown into the back of how to market.
Poloniex wanted to become a KYC compliant exchange too aggressively and paid the price for it, then they also made a lot of accounts unusable without notice. If KYC wasn't a thing Poloniex would still be a top exchange.Bittrex is indeed similar, but it seems less affected since it generates more volume than Poloniex and has more Bitcoin in their reserves, which basically means that they made fewer mistakes than Poloniex, which people appreciate.
Exchange must respond to new developments. Those who are older than 3 years on the market knows. How Poloniex lost its popularity. How popular Bittrex became. Then Bittrex was thrown into the back of how to market. Binance follows every current development. They have to.
Any how many exchanges have you both run? If it's zero, then let's assume you aren't qualified to make such sweeping assertions and that Coinfloor are probably in a better position to judge the demands on their business than you are. Almost every other post in this topic highlights the fact that this is a small exchange, which means they may employ only a small number of people. They may not be equipped to handle frequent changes in multiple coins. Whatever the case may be, it's ultimately up to them how they choose to run their company.
Yup. And soon will employ even less since the way they are doing business is leading to lose even customers and revenue they have. This is big problem of crypto startups. Owners since early adopters become way to rich because of simply holding bitcoin, to have will to still doing business seriously.
Its a statement and action that is expected to happen eventually because the developers have turned hardfork to a joke. They just prefer to create a coin from thin hair and ready to start expecting the owners of exchange sites to use their liquidity to support such coin. This is even a welcome development because the statement did not go after the small coins but the big ones which shows that they meant business. However, I think they should focus on the forked versions of coins and not the coin itself.
You are 100% correct and the point is that the administration of the cryptocurrency exchange themselves makes their choice regarding trading pairs and all cryptocurrencies that are listed on their exchange. Based on this, I can not understand how exchanges can be indignant about a hard fork. Of course, the benefits and benefits of hard fork should be discussed in a separate Topic, but I don’t see any problems for exchangers, since it is the trading exchange that dictates the rules. That's why I think coins that don't change much (bitcoin, doge) will end up being the winners.
Well, sometimes changes are needed (and of course, this is debatable). I think a more careful approach for this fork is needed overall. Instead of planning one or two changes every quarter, they should do 10 upgrades at once while maintaining the compatibility with the previous version.
Pretty sure this is annoying af for small exchanges, so hopefully, this fork thing goes in a better way.
Hardfork and whatever events, I think things like this have no effect anymore, even on the coin itself. So it seems there is no hope of changing hardfork if in essence it only provides additional features. Did they even learn about "log activities" ?
Crypto should be flexible, right ?
As someone who can't be bothered with technical aspects (I don't even run a node), I mostly see these forks as just a money grab. Oh, your crypto forked, now you have the same amount of two different coins...
Investors probably don't mind suddenly getting a bit more money but I can see why exchanges are getting tired of possible upcoming forks, it costs money to prepare to accept new coins. Our local exchange didn't even started supporting BCH until late last year.
Investors probably don't mind suddenly getting a bit more money but I can see why exchanges are getting tired of possible upcoming forks, it costs money to prepare to accept new coins. Our local exchange didn't even started supporting BCH until late last year.
You nailed it - that's what they are, a money grab for both the investors and developers (who have a lot of coins).
But they are destroying the eco-system being built around cryptocurrency by introducing a lot of expensive maintenance for all the support companies.
Well if exchanges get to the point as removing support for some of these forked cryptos then that makes it somewhat easier for the remaining crypto. Less competition for funds. I definitely would like any money being put into BCH into BTC instead to drive up the prices.
That's just coinfloor and not "exchangeS" because that is just one place and not all of them.
The heading was misleading, i was looking at the thread to see what all exchanges are planning to rebel against constant fork and it was just one exchange who cannot handle all these forks because they doubt that it might cause some issues with their smooth running and it is not even a huge exchange with huge volumes and i am expecting some exchanges to disable ETH when the upgrade takes place and whether they will be implemented all these changes at one go is still doubtful as i have read somewhere that they are planning to upgrade in stages. Not that its going to be my problem though, I don't think one exchange will really be making the rest of the exchanges delist the altcoins. If it was binance who announced they are delist all altcoins, many exchange will likely to follow the action.
They could just pause the deposit and withdrawal of the coins if they are that lazy to update but delisting is going to be such a drastic. But then anyway I don't have an account in coinfloor. The title of the thread should be revised.
Well they are here because of the crypto. And whether be it a scheduled update or a forked coins, it's the duty of Exchages to provide the best service to the users.
One of the reasons why binance dominated every other exchange at that time was due to the treatment of the user from those exchanges. Binance put the users first.
And it's users and user satisfaction that brings profit to the exchange.
One of the reasons why binance dominated every other exchange at that time was due to the treatment of the user from those exchanges. Binance put the users first.
And it's users and user satisfaction that brings profit to the exchange.
that could be the reason of thier de listing . on other platforms , coins that currently undergo on fork like eth were still unavailable for use . it sucks because its been a long time since i can use my eth .
not just eth but other coins including on the op are the one's that need to do fork the most . good thing that we still have our own btc which is free from these hassels . why cant just people see this matter and only support btc and other less hassel coins ?
not just eth but other coins including on the op are the one's that need to do fork the most . good thing that we still have our own btc which is free from these hassels . why cant just people see this matter and only support btc and other less hassel coins ?
That's why I think coins that don't change much (bitcoin, doge) will end up being the winners. People just want something that works smoothly and that you don't need to do a lot of work to maintain, so that they can focus on the eco-system around the coin.
You're definitely right, these forks comes from people who pretended to fix Bitcoin issues, when there are none and they comes from Nakamoto wannabees, as long as there are new Nakamoto coming expect new forks and new projects associated with Bitcoin, in the end Bitcoin will rule.
What ruined the altcoin space was the exchanges listing shitcoins because they were paid to. Once that happened, all sorts of dross got onto the exchanges, most of it designed for one pump and dump. The amount of money investors have lost on these is huge.
To be fair, though, the "investors" aren't entirely blameless in this regard either. So many amateur speculators would basically demand a particular shitcoin was listed on whatever exchange they used because they wanted to be the ones doing the pumping and dumping. If it bit them in the arse, then they mostly only have themselves to hold to account for that.
That's just coinfloor and not "exchangeS" because that is just one place and not all of them. Yes, this could lead to some sort of movement where exchanges could be doing these kinds of delist thing and it could lead to developers not doing hard forks anymore. Some of them are really useless, it doesn't really make sense to make some of these changes if you ask me.
Definitely, ethereum one looks a bit useful and it does make a good change but there are bitcoin hard forks that are useless for example which means you can't just delist bitcoin. All in all I support delisting hard forks but not the main coins itself.
Definitely, ethereum one looks a bit useful and it does make a good change but there are bitcoin hard forks that are useless for example which means you can't just delist bitcoin. All in all I support delisting hard forks but not the main coins itself.
What ruined the altcoin space was the exchanges listing shitcoins because they were paid to. Once that happened, all sorts of dross got onto the exchanges, most of it designed for one pump and dump. The amount of money investors have lost on these is huge.
Markets are very flexible. They adapt to the need of the people and we have seen that happen within crypto as well. I don't like it either, but it's something we have to accept and move on. It's pointless to blame exchanges for everything because they do what they are supposed to do, offer what people want and make money in the process.
People might not want to admit it, but altcoins are a huge demand factor for Bitcoin. Another thing is that most altcoiners eventually turn into Bitcoiners. Most of the people that I know (including myself) started out as an altcoiner, then got fucked over many times and realized that Bitcoin is the only coin of value. It all helps Bitcoin, not harm Bitcoin.
Ask what the end goal is of people trading altcoins, most of them will say that they want to grow their satoshi stack.
It would be bad if all altcoins were delisted, but it would be better if only a few altcoins which according to them have no power to develop. As far as we know, there have been many new altcoins that have appeared in recent years, and on average altcoins become shitcoins, this should be delisted and let potential coins continue to be updated.
I too wish the exchanges just concentrated on a few altcoins.
What ruined the altcoin space was the exchanges listing shitcoins because they were paid to. Once that happened, all sorts of dross got onto the exchanges, most of it designed for one pump and dump. The amount of money investors have lost on these is huge.
Its a statement and action that is expected to happen eventually because the developers have turned hardfork to a joke. They just prefer to create a coin from thin hair and ready to start expecting the owners of exchange sites to use their liquidity to support such coin. This is even a welcome development because the statement did not go after the small coins but the big ones which shows that they meant business. However, I think they should focus on the forked versions of coins and not the coin itself.
Nobody know what the ❤️❤️❤️❤️ Is coinflood, prolly some foolish exchange that self proclaim themselves the biggest in the universe, btw thank for the laugh so we can avoid this dodgy exchange knowing they can simply bend the rules to fulfil their own agenda.
One exchange is not going to be enough. I understand if it's a meaningless fork, but to delist Ethereum?
They are just lazy.
coinfloor decision is just overly exaggerate the problem involving hardfork.
Any how many exchanges have you both run? If it's zero, then let's assume you aren't qualified to make such sweeping assertions and that Coinfloor are probably in a better position to judge the demands on their business than you are. Almost every other post in this topic highlights the fact that this is a small exchange, which means they may employ only a small number of people. They may not be equipped to handle frequent changes in multiple coins. Whatever the case may be, it's ultimately up to them how they choose to run their company.
exchange could just ignore hardfork if they feel burdened by always listing every hardfork existed anyways. for example, ethereum is not dead after hardfork happening and most of the exchange that didn't list the hardfork of ethereum are fine with it and to be honest coinfloor decision is just overly exaggerate the problem involving hardfork.
Coinfloor is the first to have done delisting all altcoins. If all other exchanges follows, its bad for the altcoins prices, the altcoins are already down for years so i hope it won't happen. There is a lot to lose for them if they delist all. Maybe the exchange just too tired to keep updating the blockchain after ethereum fork taking too long, the technical team got frustrated.
It would be bad if all altcoins were delisted, but it would be better if only a few altcoins which according to them have no power to develop. As far as we know, there have been many new altcoins that have appeared in recent years, and on average altcoins become shitcoins, this should be delisted and let potential coins continue to be updated.
Exchanges are rebelling against constant hard forks
LOL. Rebelling? They are just lazy. All they need to do is just close their exchange down. Or sell it like Poloniex owners sold their exchange after they lost interest. Other exchanges will pick up their customers. Cryptocurrenies are developing s fast that all infrastructure that serve them has to be constantly updated. It is simple as that.
Coinfloor is the first to have done delisting all altcoins. If all other exchanges follows, its bad for the altcoins prices, the altcoins are already down for years so i hope it won't happen. There is a lot to lose for them if they delist all. Maybe the exchange just too tired to keep updating the blockchain after ethereum fork taking too long, the technical team got frustrated.
which do generate out volume and thats really a big benefit for them.
Delisting all altcoins by Coinfloor? Quite rare to be done by an exchange.For sure theyre already done with those forks.Its actually kinda hassle due to another set or batch of alterations
and adjustments made due to such changes.
Coinfloor is the first to have done delisting all altcoins. If all other exchanges follows, its bad for the altcoins prices, the altcoins are already down for years so i hope it won't happen. There is a lot to lose for them if they delist all. Maybe the exchange just too tired to keep updating the blockchain after ethereum fork taking too long, the technical team got frustrated.
As someone who can't be bothered with technical aspects (I don't even run a node), I mostly see these forks as just a money grab. Oh, your crypto forked, now you have the same amount of two different coins...
Investors probably don't mind suddenly getting a bit more money but I can see why exchanges are getting tired of possible upcoming forks, it costs money to prepare to accept new coins. Our local exchange didn't even started supporting BCH until late last year.
Investors probably don't mind suddenly getting a bit more money but I can see why exchanges are getting tired of possible upcoming forks, it costs money to prepare to accept new coins. Our local exchange didn't even started supporting BCH until late last year.
The word (hard) fork has two meanings in crypto - a software upgrade without backwards compatibility or a chain split and creation of new coin as the result. You are talking about the latter, while the article is focused on the former - the cost of frequent software upgrades, the risks associated with them, etc, all these things annoy both the users and especially the service providers.
Well, they should understand this as this is part of their contract, so they must also be patient in this kind of situation and not just being greedy and after how much money they can earn for a day, it's part of the contract. Anyway, not only exchange but also holders/traders, but let's be patient as this is for everyone's safety too.
I understand their sentiment knowing how hard it is to change wallet versions and such every time a coin forks. Basically it's just money-grab for the devs and their constituents and does not really bring in a lot of necessary changes to the crypto table and their respective communities. These devs, for the most part don't care about improvements. They just want to get more money from their brainchild and that's it.
Developers really love doing all these forks - but they are a massive nuisance for everyone else. The exchanges, the online wallet providers, the payment processors, all of them have to do a shedload of work to accomodate these changes.
That's why I think coins that don't change much (bitcoin, doge) will end up being the winners. People just want something that works smoothly and that you don't need to do a lot of work to maintain, so that they can focus on the eco-system around the coin.
That's why I think coins that don't change much (bitcoin, doge) will end up being the winners. People just want something that works smoothly and that you don't need to do a lot of work to maintain, so that they can focus on the eco-system around the coin.
Apart from the problems faced by Coinfloor, the show must go on because it is clearly not possible for the ETH developer team to cancel the hard fork process, which preparation itself takes a long time.
And in my opinion, there will be many other major exchanges that will support the hard fork process. Moreover, the hard fork process carried out by ETH is an effort to overcome the problem of the Difficulty bomb (ETH Ice Age).
Coinfloor has been one of the shittiest cryptocurrency exchanges out there, and no one really cares whether they are going to delist Bitcoin Cash or not. This is an exchange which has a trade volume of only around $2 million per day. I will be more worried if the bigger exchanges decide to delist coins such as Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold and Bitcoin SV.
Only small exchanges will suffer on what the ETH is going to change
We need to wait and see whether other places do this as well as it's just as likely to be an excuse for them to drop a market they haven't made the best of. If others follow suit that reflects very badly on ETH.
You can't expect to be the 'world's computer' if you need the permission of a mega corporation running a node to use it.
It would have been much easier to understand whether or not the delisting is a political move had the exchange released some percentages as to the amount of business trading eth and bch brings them.
This is not a political move, it is a small exchange with a 24 hour trading volume of $450,000 according the reported volume by coinmarketcap which pale in comparison to the big exchanges in the market and their decision to delist ETH and the other fork coins is because of the technical issues they will have to encounter when a fork happens and if they are not careful they will be paying a huge prize and hence i understand why they are delisting ETH because of the massive change they are planning to implement but i still do not understand why they want to remove Bitcoin cash now as i am not aware about any upgrade from them.As someone who can't be bothered with technical aspects (I don't even run a node), I mostly see these forks as just a money grab. Oh, your crypto forked, now you have the same amount of two different coins...
The ETH forks aren't money grabs, they're technical kludges and can kicking.
I can see why exchanges in particular can't be bothered with that shit any more. Running a proper ETH node sounds like a seriously demanding task. It would no doubt be worth it if they were making money from it but Coinfloor have never really taken off.
For other chains that fork or splinter or just get weaker over time exchanges are the ones who'll be targeted with double spends. To combat that they have to introduce tons of confirmations which is turn pisses off their customers.
I remember someone who pledged their willy to BSV, money button whatever that is, saying soon they couldn't afford to run a node any more and that was one of BSV's thimbleful of real services. When sizeable crypto businesses themselves can't run nodes then you know you've fucked it.
As someone who can't be bothered with technical aspects (I don't even run a node), I mostly see these forks as just a money grab. Oh, your crypto forked, now you have the same amount of two different coins...
Investors probably don't mind suddenly getting a bit more money but I can see why exchanges are getting tired of possible upcoming forks, it costs money to prepare to accept new coins. Our local exchange didn't even started supporting BCH until late last year.
Investors probably don't mind suddenly getting a bit more money but I can see why exchanges are getting tired of possible upcoming forks, it costs money to prepare to accept new coins. Our local exchange didn't even started supporting BCH until late last year.
You nailed it - that's what they are, a money grab for both the investors and developers (who have a lot of coins).
But they are destroying the eco-system being built around cryptocurrency by introducing a lot of expensive maintenance for all the support companies.
I don't think its hard forks they oppose. Ethereum may be owned and operated by developers who lack the competence and technical sophistication to successfully manage an altcoin. Everything ETH releases appears to be borderline dysfunctional, whether its their crypto cat app that crashed the ETH network. Or their proposals for the future, some of which have been criticized by legit software engineers as being unworkable.
Bitcoin cash has always been shady under Roger Ver who misled people into buying btc cash, claiming it was the "same thing" as bitcoin.
Bitcoin cash has always been shady under Roger Ver who misled people into buying btc cash, claiming it was the "same thing" as bitcoin.
It would have been much easier to understand whether or not the delisting is a political move had the exchange released some percentages as to the amount of business trading eth and bch brings them.
This is not a political move, it is a small exchange with a 24 hour trading volume of $450,000 according the reported volume by coinmarketcap which pale in comparison to the big exchanges in the market and their decision to delist ETH and the other fork coins is because of the technical issues they will have to encounter when a fork happens and if they are not careful they will be paying a huge prize and hence i understand why they are delisting ETH because of the massive change they are planning to implement but i still do not understand why they want to remove Bitcoin cash now as i am not aware about any upgrade from them.
As someone who can't be bothered with technical aspects (I don't even run a node), I mostly see these forks as just a money grab. Oh, your crypto forked, now you have the same amount of two different coins...
Investors probably don't mind suddenly getting a bit more money but I can see why exchanges are getting tired of possible upcoming forks, it costs money to prepare to accept new coins. Our local exchange didn't even started supporting BCH until late last year.
Investors probably don't mind suddenly getting a bit more money but I can see why exchanges are getting tired of possible upcoming forks, it costs money to prepare to accept new coins. Our local exchange didn't even started supporting BCH until late last year.
Here is the news from Coinfloor (UK exchange):
https://www.coindesk.com/uks-oldest-crypto-exchange-to-delist-ethereum-and-focus-solely-on-bitcoin
Developers really love doing all these forks - but they are a massive nuisance for everyone else. The exchanges, the online wallet providers, the payment processors, all of them have to do a shedload of work to accomodate these changes.
That's why I think coins that don't change much (bitcoin, doge) will end up being the winners. People just want something that works smoothly and that you don't need to do a lot of work to maintain, so that they can focus on the eco-system around the coin.
https://www.coindesk.com/uks-oldest-crypto-exchange-to-delist-ethereum-and-focus-solely-on-bitcoin
Quote
Coinfloor, the U.K.’s longest-running cryptocurrency exchange, plans to delist ethereum next month, citing an unclear future of hard forks and the need for onerous technical support for the second-biggest coin by market capitalization.
The company will also delist bitcoin cash, the splinter currency founded two years ago in the aftermath of bitcoin’s heated scaling debate. Starting Jan. 3, Coinfloor will support only bitcoin, whose eleventh anniversary happens to fall on that day.
The plan comes ahead of the launch of ethereum 2.0, tentatively planned for early 2020, which will begin the process of shifting the network away from the energy-consuming proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism to proof-of-stake (PoS).
Coinfloor’s decision suggests that nurturing a team with the specific expertise to follow the technical trials and tribulations of coins like ethereum may be too expensive for smaller crypto players, particularly if this constitutes only a small part of their trading volume.
From the point at which it starts next year, ethereum’s platform upgrade “could take years to complete,” said Obi Nwosu, founder and CEO of Coinfloor. The complexity of the operation “means for a period of time there could be two versions of ethereum running.”
According to some ethereum developers, it’s likely to be years before the old ethereum PoW chain is fully merged into the new PoS network, leading to current discussions around ways to create a secure bridge between the two chains.
The company will also delist bitcoin cash, the splinter currency founded two years ago in the aftermath of bitcoin’s heated scaling debate. Starting Jan. 3, Coinfloor will support only bitcoin, whose eleventh anniversary happens to fall on that day.
The plan comes ahead of the launch of ethereum 2.0, tentatively planned for early 2020, which will begin the process of shifting the network away from the energy-consuming proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism to proof-of-stake (PoS).
Coinfloor’s decision suggests that nurturing a team with the specific expertise to follow the technical trials and tribulations of coins like ethereum may be too expensive for smaller crypto players, particularly if this constitutes only a small part of their trading volume.
From the point at which it starts next year, ethereum’s platform upgrade “could take years to complete,” said Obi Nwosu, founder and CEO of Coinfloor. The complexity of the operation “means for a period of time there could be two versions of ethereum running.”
According to some ethereum developers, it’s likely to be years before the old ethereum PoW chain is fully merged into the new PoS network, leading to current discussions around ways to create a secure bridge between the two chains.
Developers really love doing all these forks - but they are a massive nuisance for everyone else. The exchanges, the online wallet providers, the payment processors, all of them have to do a shedload of work to accomodate these changes.
That's why I think coins that don't change much (bitcoin, doge) will end up being the winners. People just want something that works smoothly and that you don't need to do a lot of work to maintain, so that they can focus on the eco-system around the coin.
It would have been much easier to understand whether or not the delisting is a political move had the exchange released some percentages as to the amount of business trading eth and bch brings them.
That's why I think coins that don't change much (bitcoin, doge) will end up being the winners.
Well, sometimes changes are needed (and of course, this is debatable). I think a more careful approach for this fork is needed overall. Instead of planning one or two changes every quarter, they should do 10 upgrades at once while maintaining the compatibility with the previous version.
Pretty sure this is annoying af for small exchanges, so hopefully, this fork thing goes in a better way.
Developers really love doing all these forks - but they are a massive nuisance for everyone else. The exchanges, the online wallet providers, the payment processors, all of them have to do a shedload of work to accomodate these changes.
Yeah, just look at the segwit forks to see how bad everyone is at wanting to use new forks. They were just two forks in august but it took many users more than 6 months to even bother to start using segwit.
Developers are going to have to do their best to make things backwards compaitble like is done with bitcoin to ensure everything remains fairly stable and usable for the exchanges. Btc, ltc and doge are pretty good at doing this, if eth starts adding a load of forks and a few other cryptos do the same, exchanges will find it hard to run anything less than a full/pruned node while keeping security but they may have to compromise on a few things (such as fully reviewing code) to ensure their version of the software is compatible with the current fork at the time.
Here is the news from Coinfloor (UK exchange):
https://www.coindesk.com/uks-oldest-crypto-exchange-to-delist-ethereum-and-focus-solely-on-bitcoin
Developers really love doing all these forks - but they are a massive nuisance for everyone else. The exchanges, the online wallet providers, the payment processors, all of them have to do a shedload of work to accomodate these changes.
That's why I think coins that don't change much (bitcoin, doge) will end up being the winners. People just want something that works smoothly and that you don't need to do a lot of work to maintain, so that they can focus on the eco-system around the coin.
https://www.coindesk.com/uks-oldest-crypto-exchange-to-delist-ethereum-and-focus-solely-on-bitcoin
Quote
Coinfloor, the U.K.’s longest-running cryptocurrency exchange, plans to delist ethereum next month, citing an unclear future of hard forks and the need for onerous technical support for the second-biggest coin by market capitalization.
The company will also delist bitcoin cash, the splinter currency founded two years ago in the aftermath of bitcoin’s heated scaling debate. Starting Jan. 3, Coinfloor will support only bitcoin, whose eleventh anniversary happens to fall on that day.
The plan comes ahead of the launch of ethereum 2.0, tentatively planned for early 2020, which will begin the process of shifting the network away from the energy-consuming proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism to proof-of-stake (PoS).
Coinfloor’s decision suggests that nurturing a team with the specific expertise to follow the technical trials and tribulations of coins like ethereum may be too expensive for smaller crypto players, particularly if this constitutes only a small part of their trading volume.
From the point at which it starts next year, ethereum’s platform upgrade “could take years to complete,” said Obi Nwosu, founder and CEO of Coinfloor. The complexity of the operation “means for a period of time there could be two versions of ethereum running.”
According to some ethereum developers, it’s likely to be years before the old ethereum PoW chain is fully merged into the new PoS network, leading to current discussions around ways to create a secure bridge between the two chains.
The company will also delist bitcoin cash, the splinter currency founded two years ago in the aftermath of bitcoin’s heated scaling debate. Starting Jan. 3, Coinfloor will support only bitcoin, whose eleventh anniversary happens to fall on that day.
The plan comes ahead of the launch of ethereum 2.0, tentatively planned for early 2020, which will begin the process of shifting the network away from the energy-consuming proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism to proof-of-stake (PoS).
Coinfloor’s decision suggests that nurturing a team with the specific expertise to follow the technical trials and tribulations of coins like ethereum may be too expensive for smaller crypto players, particularly if this constitutes only a small part of their trading volume.
From the point at which it starts next year, ethereum’s platform upgrade “could take years to complete,” said Obi Nwosu, founder and CEO of Coinfloor. The complexity of the operation “means for a period of time there could be two versions of ethereum running.”
According to some ethereum developers, it’s likely to be years before the old ethereum PoW chain is fully merged into the new PoS network, leading to current discussions around ways to create a secure bridge between the two chains.
Developers really love doing all these forks - but they are a massive nuisance for everyone else. The exchanges, the online wallet providers, the payment processors, all of them have to do a shedload of work to accomodate these changes.
That's why I think coins that don't change much (bitcoin, doge) will end up being the winners. People just want something that works smoothly and that you don't need to do a lot of work to maintain, so that they can focus on the eco-system around the coin.
Jump to: