Topic: [Guide] Surviving the fork, or How to double your bitcoins (or save fiat) - page 3. (Read 9931 times)

I'm still absorbing all of this - but I do want to say that I am still not convinced that the doubling / dual fork parallel universes is fact or theory.  I really think this is a pretty big deal that is not being widely discussed - so that makes me wonder if it is a Real deal.  I think something like this would deserve a public comment from one of the Core Devs or Gavin/Mike.

But assuming it is possible....

1) This raises really big issues with future Hard Forks.   For example - what happens if the China Miners/Exchanges decide to go a different route from Western Miner/Exchanges.  Could the Bitcoin Supply split again?   Because once things get more globally accepted and Bitcoin a more global currency - I can see potential future politically motivated Hard Fork divergencies.  I mean - if Gavin & Mike can do it - surely China or the U.S. or Europe could do it??   As pointed out earlier - kind of blows the whole fixed supply concept.

2) OP posted a few posts up something about the Bitcoin Price could be driven down, even on both chains, as cross attacks/dumping occurs.   Eh - maybe.  But I think that is taking a limited perspective of looking at Bitcoin with the current currency marketshare it has NOW.  What happened to the whole 1 Bitcoin will equal $1 Million in a endstage game.   It could just as easily be that an event happens after the fork to make everyone run/be driven into Bitcoin, and price will go up so fast that Buyers will outnumber sellers 10's of thousand to 1.  Not that farfetched actually.

3) Interestingly, if the whole Doubling / Dual Universe Coin theory is viable, then it most likely will be known by everyone as Zero Hour approaches, and only an idiot won't be making plans to double coins into both universes.  And so I would imagine you actually would end up with 2 Bitcoin Currencies.  Core would most like be the favored "underground currency" and would be treated/seen sort of like physical Gold is today.  XT would become the Fiat Bitcoin obviously.  BOTH would probably skyrocket in value eventually - although because of the huge insider Miner/Exchange infrastructure probably following XT - XT-Fiat would indeed probably shoot the moon fastest.  BUT - like I said, if this is real, then EVERYOE will know about it soon enough,a nd plans being made - as a defense against the XT Fork if nothing else.

4) I'd still like to hear more on the technical issues involved in "tainting" coins.   Again, assuming that this is even possible.  Because it is really sounding a lot like an untested theory - but with potentially huge consequences.

traders also decide, they're basically left out of the voting but in the end if no one buys miners well.......

top pools won't run xt

Well, 2 blocks bitcoin mined with XT, or 0.08%

Long way to go to 75%.

This is right.  Don't think of a fork as dividing bitcoin into two pieces.  Think of it as creating a parallel universe.  (The fiat money invested would divide though.)

the whole XT freak show is very interesting and educational to watch,
how people are changing heavily as soon they fear to loose something and
how all participants in this game (user/service provider/exchanges/miner etc.)
moving around to find their optimal equilibrium, mostly driven by greed.

not sure if theymos is aware, on what kind of treasure he sits with this forum,
i am sure that academical in deep research on this data could feed several
generations of sociologists, psychologists and other disciplines.

machiavelli was yesterday, here comes bitcoin and the fork btw won't happen.

miners can't decide on their own, true. but a combo of a few major miners/exchanges will do.
a miner would never switch to XT, if he can't find an exchange (running XT) to cash out.

however, the two top pools don't running XT (yet) >> https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/blocks/1
discus and ant are key as seen by this pool block distribution >> http://mempool.info/pools

You have to have a copy of the blockchains to be able to send coins in the both versions. I'm not sure if Electrum provides such service after the fork.

I think someone will write such tool, those who will be selling exclusive coins, for example.

Instead of dloading the blockchain maybe we could use an electrum wallet?

And can we expect someone to write a tool to inspect the blockchain and confirm those 'fresh satoshis' exclusive to one chain that someone sent you were actually created after the fork?

It has just come to my mind. If most of us sell soon after the fork then the price of the both chains will plummet. If someone believes that the price will go down significantly and he is not sure that he will do the split of the coins in time then it's better to sell before the fork and still get more fiat than after selling doubled bitcoins... All this looks like a catch 22, the price will go down anyway...

The fork will happen if 75% of blocks are mined by miners who support it. This is a quite silly indicator because it's not the miners who decide what changes are good/bad. NotBitcoinXT makes it worse, we can't trust even the number of blocks. What an average Joe will do? A sane average Joe will try to sit on the both chairs until he clearly sees what happens. And the most rational behavior is to follow the guide to maximize profit (minimize loss).

Technically if I have found a winning hash for a chain, how will you prevent me from submitting it?

It is the mining equipment that just needs to be changed. as far as the coin protocol is concerned it cannot monitor if you are submitting to other chains. How will the corechain know that the node that submitted the winning hash is also submitting winning hashes to the XT chain.

Maybe there is something about the mining process that you know that I totally missed.

James

P.S. i shouldnt call this merged mining that means specific things, think of it as parallel mining. will require some mods to silicon to do, so depending on the relative values, maybe it is not so practical. then again if you can make custom silicon...

That still doesn't show an economical incentive to stay on the weaker chain.
Maybe you could describe it further? (That is not a rhetorical question. I am really curious.)

The larger the system the slower the change. Since every change in a large system would have a wide impact. You can't make a cruiser that holds 5000 people to turn like a water scooter

This may be interesting for you - https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Economic_majority. It's not the miners who decide.

Merge mining after the fork will be impossible as soon as atleast one different block is found. You need to include the merkle tree in the block you are mining. and the merkle trees will differ after the first block after the fork.

If the losing form decides to allow merge mining, yeah maybe it can be implemented. But I'd wager heavy money against two existing significant chains anyway. Will just not happen

http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/273/how-does-merged-mining-work

please explain what protocol change is needed to allow merge mining XTcoin and corecoin?

please estimate what percentage of the chinese mining pools will not merge mine to make extra money, if merge mining is possible

They can only merge mine if the protocol is specifically changed for that purpose

There are huge risk from existing coin holders: We often talk about Satoshi's 1 million coins, many are afraid that those coin will come out one day and crash the market, and several days ago we have witnessed that a 80K sell order will knock down the exchange rate by 10%

Imagine that you are a large bitcoin holder, when there is only one chain, the motivation to sell your coin is low, since they are all valuable. But once the coin forked, it is possible that core miners who controlls 25% of hash power are controlling 70% of the existing coins. They will dump the coins on the XT chain and destroy its value (Remember what Peter Todd have threatened with selling all his coins?). When XT coin worth nothing, miner will move their hash power back to core chain. Similarly, XT developers will dump their core coins, cause large damage there. A Mutual Assured Destruction fired up when XT went online 1.Jan. 2016, the end of bitcoin

So things will get really ugly if we allow a fork to happen

well the margins on mining was getting pretty low and this is a good way to boost revenues 50% by merge mining

I don't know your line of work, mine is Software Development and I never worked for a company that holds this old wisdom. If you are not innovative and see new trends before they happen, your company dies.
There might be exceptions, when you are big enough or have political influence, but not everybody is Microsoft or a Bank.

So basically it will become another piece of worthless technology that could have been awesome but never made it because a group of grown ass intelligent men AKA self proclaimed core developers spent more time throwing their toys out of the pram than working together to find a common way forward. Sounds legit