Topic: Forks Are Bad, I Think Greed is Behind Them (Read 192 times)
watching the developer over the years, his ego had been so annoying but he had been so successful with most of his decisions. To him the fork had been success until recently. If not that bitcoin had no governance, there were several warnings that were ignored, which made the evidence that the space is still young
Fork is now mostly as a result of Greed from developers, but basically it is an unusual occurrence that take place when blockchain split into two potntial path, I hope when regulations takes place in the space, there can be a form of monitoring and control in other to build a strong community.
https://cryptoinfowatch.com/fresh-contention-about-which-network-inherits-bitcoin-cash-moniker/ There is the worst fork I have yet witnessed. Not just in terms of effect on the coin market, but the main players exhibited the sort of greed not yet seen in the industry. The DAO fork is nothing compared to this. It is obvious that people are now mainly in the decentralized network to become super rich, not that they care what they can offer the society. Satoshi will continue to be a model of good conscience. I'm glad a few persons like Charlie Lee and Buterin are towing that path of selflessness, but all the other...
Absolutely yes! I totally agree to your opinion. The reason for the forks are purely greed and nothing else. No one is going to share the same vision of Satoshi nor will try to maintain that. The worst example is the Bitcoin form which created a shitcoin like BCH. Since ver succeeded to earn few billions from bitcoin fork, he is now trying to repeat this successful business model.
This is the worst Fork I have ever seen, it's totally borne out of greed and egocentric-en, without a recourse to the general crypto community. The quest to be supper rich and control times and people is what Satoshi fought against by creating the bitcoin but these players we saw in this BCH hard-fork are totally opposite of Satoshi"s vision.
Well I don't necessarily agree you that fork are bad. Well fork has it advantages and disadvantages. fork give birth to new coin That has upgraded version compared to the previous ones but it also has it disadvantages some forks can be fake
Fork is just manipulating the market and i think there is a lot more disadvantages from advantages. You just think about BCH fork birth two different coin and those are big hit coin specially i am going to talking about BCHABC which price as 280$ not dumped and trade 220$ in Binance. BCH volume is huge down after launching fork coin and i think big impact in original coin (BCH).
Fork are suppose to be a split that is devoid of disagreement but a more solid collaboration even though differently but we notice that some fork tend to drag the mother coin down, exposing it flows.
in my opinion, everything happened randomly and unexpectedly with recent events, it could be because of the big people who want to take advantage of themselves and also because there are indications from outside that it is indeed related to crypto.
Well I don't necessarily agree you that fork are bad. Well fork has it advantages and disadvantages. fork give birth to new coin That has upgraded version compared to the previous ones but it also has it disadvantages some forks can be fake
your choice of title is very bad, specially since it is wrong and it has little to do with your post!
"forks" are not bad. in fact forks are a necessity for a system such as bitcoin. but unfortunately they have been used in a wrong way and that makes those forks bad not forks in general. in the context of bitcoin any fork requires reaching agreement with everyone or consensus. and when a fork lacks that (like bitcoin cash and any other subsequent forks) they become a bad idea and damaging.
"forks" are not bad. in fact forks are a necessity for a system such as bitcoin. but unfortunately they have been used in a wrong way and that makes those forks bad not forks in general. in the context of bitcoin any fork requires reaching agreement with everyone or consensus. and when a fork lacks that (like bitcoin cash and any other subsequent forks) they become a bad idea and damaging.
There are some forks that are better than the source. Horizen, for example, is a fork of Zcash with a better technology. So i wouldn't say, forks are based on greed, at least not every coin.
The BCH fork is just the result of a drama in the BCH community. This is what to expect when someone or a group of people have too much resources or power to take decision for the whole community.
The BCH fork is just the result of a drama in the BCH community. This is what to expect when someone or a group of people have too much resources or power to take decision for the whole community.
Forks are called to be caused by disagreements, but for sure most forks have big greed behind them. However, we don't see as many forks in 2018 as it was in 2017, as less people react to them. Accordingly, forks don't create as big increase in the coin price as it was before.
https://cryptoinfowatch.com/fresh-contention-about-which-network-inherits-bitcoin-cash-moniker/ There is the worst fork I have yet witnessed. Not just in terms of effect on the coin market, but the main players exhibited the sort of greed not yet seen in the industry. The DAO fork is nothing compared to this. It is obvious that people are now mainly in the decentralized network to become super rich, not that they care what they can offer the society. Satoshi will continue to be a model of good conscience. I'm glad a few persons like Charlie Lee and Buterin are towing that path of selflessness, but all the other...
Jump to: