Topic: Hardfork = Mitosis - page 8. (Read 5736 times)

LOL you make me laugh with you weird assumptions..
so lets clarify things. learning is fun. nd i hope you learn something from this.

you do realise that blocks over 1mb will only be made if there is 95% consensus, because miners wont risk it otherwise.(orphan risk.. learn it)
secondly. if exchanges are using a chain that is rejecting blocks and only has 5% hashpower( leaving them behind) then not only are they not seeing the blocks that contain their own customers deposit transactions, but they are ignoring 95% of all transactions..
no one would use that exchange if their deposits never show up in the exchange.

please think beyond the spoonfed rhetoric.. it does not require "exchanges" to make a chain the master chain. it requires the most accepted distribution of block data and the highest hash power..
those without it (5%) will fizzle out..

There is no need to worry about that. If the longest chain is 75% of the total hashing, miners will will converge.

If a hard fork like that would come, everybody would pull the money out of bitcoin.
I do not like that idea.

Why is that? The blockchain would be the same length.

Ok so you would admit that it would cause conflict short term but not long term?

So after the chains are divided, and the divide is established, the alternate coin only needs support from the exchanges and wallets and it gets established.

Yes until the altchain is not on exchanges, it is an orphan, but after its on exchanges, it officially becomes an altcoin. Classic already has a wallet.

So the exchanges are the only thing standing between a hardfork and a united bitcoin.

If 1 rogue exchange were to support the hardforked chain, then we are fucked.

---

However all major exchanges use Core, because Classic cant be trusted with all those "new improvements"

No one stopping no one  from HF. But they will not do it, because they will fail straight away. All they are doing is trying to put pressure on Bitcoin Core devs.
So, why all this cheap talk? Just fork it. Nobody will even notice. 

its not 50-50 equilibrium... thats what orphaning is about. please stop the usual false rhetoric of altcoins.. and do some more research on the matter.

ill say it again. learn about orphans and how it will sort everything out, making people choose one path.

what you have to realise is that BU, XT, bitcoinJ, bitcoin ruby, classic and every implementation you can think of apart from core.. actually has implementations with the 2mb buffer... they are running today, validating blocks. being checked and used..
there is no future promise or ETA.. the code is publicly available now and people are running the compiled programs that are validating and relaying real bitcoin data..

it is only CORE that are causing a conflict, causing controversy and are going to cause your altcoin analogy(short term). but guess what.. if miners get consensus to activate a hard fork (95%).. it will be core users that see their data rejected and unvalidated making the users of core implementations left many blocks behind the other 95%.. so those 5% wanting to remain full nodes will ofcourse update to the 2mb or be left with an insecure chain(5% hashrate) diluted data(5% distribution) and blocks far behind the main chain.. yes 95%=main chain..

meaning that the "altcoin" doomsday you cry out about will fade out quick..

just wondering.. are you going to throw Luke Jr under the bus in some propaganda scheme, if he releases a core implementation with the 2mb buffer included.
are you that devoted to blockstream that you will throw any coder under the bus if they solve the controversy issue that you are using as your last ditch attempt to avoid real growth??

and please dont ejaculate the rhetoric that segwit is the ultimate capacity solution.. even the guys coding it have publicly said its not designed as the capacity solution

A competition between chains will cause your wealth to evaporate. Therefore bitcoin must be a united entity.

Just like you dont want your leg  or hands to fall off, and you want your own body to stay united.


Not in bitcoin.


And they would, miners would jump back and forth in panic, and eventually settle at 50-50% equilibrium half of them mining 1 chain and the other half another chain.



Yea, but it still divides your money in half.

So you call yourself a "Free Market Capitalist" but you are afraid of a free market?  Wow, I'm impressed.

FYI, hard forks have occurred in the past.

FYI, the only way both forks would continue on is if a subset of miners kept mining each fork.

FYI, if that happened (it wouldn't), you would still control the same amount of "money" with the same private keys, it would just be divided across two chains.