Topic: Hardfork questions (Read 471 times)

How does hardfork affect price of bitcoin?

Bitcoin cash is different coin and developers decided to create new fork on mentioned block. New born gold bitcoin will be worthless and they are almost same if you ignore small details.

Both coin are independent and don't affect each other's price. This is the same as the BCC fork right?

And how long do you think we should wait after the fork like WTF, these asses are going to make BTC useless as ETH.

How will a person know how to split the chain between 1x and 2x.

Something in me is telling me this won't be as serious as we think.

Just how so I split the coin?

Bitcoin uses proof-of-work to secure the blockchain. As more and more mining power joins the race to mine bitcoins, these proofs become increasingly difficult to solve. Hence the cumulative "difficulty" increases.

What they are saying is this: Regardless of Bitcoin's consensus rules, they will follow whichever chain the majority of the hashrate builds. This means they might start following an altcoin chain and calling it "Bitcoin." Mass confusion and lost funds could easily ensue.


It means you shouldn't transact for a while after the fork, unless you have no intention of trying to access your Segwit2x altcoins. If you try to transact on either chain after the fork without taking care to split your coins first, you could lose funds on the other chain.

Are there any automatic tools around to split your coins. Or any guide?

I really don't know whether the fork is really neccesary or not seeing that we just had one this August and i really don't know how it helped at all, if they are going to increase the block size, they should do it already so that we can put the forks whether hard or soft behind us.

You can take precautions to that not happening.
If you split your 1X and 2X coins onto 2 different(!) wallets/addresses you are fine.
No replay protection can only be exploited if those 1X and 2X coins are lying on the "same" address (to be exactly: on the same private/public key pair; since it can't be the same address when its on another network).
And as long (after the fork) you didn't send any coins, there is no Transaction which could be replayed on the other chain.

For the same reason that the supporters of 1X want to risk their own Bitcoin with no replay protection.

Why do the supporters of 2X want to risk there on Bitcoin with no replay protection.

Somewhere I feel this is a hoax of some sort.

It can.  Yes.  It doesn't mean it always will, but if you don't take the appropriate precautions it is a risk.


That depends on what they do with it.


Imagine that you have 10 BTC before the fork (That's $56,000 worth at today's exchange rate)

Now imagine that on the day of the fork you therefore have 10 1X_BTC and 10 2X_BTC.

You decide that you don't want the 2X_BTC and you don't want to be on that chain.  You find someone that does want the 2X_BTC, and the 2X_BTC exchange rate is only $500 per 2X_BTC. They pay you $5000 for your 2X_BTC.  You create a 2X_BTC transaction and send them the 2X_BTC.  After you leave with your $5000, they copy the 2X_BTC transaction and re-broadcast it on the 1X_BTC network.  You get home and open your 1X_BTC wallet and discover that your 1X_BTC are all gone!  They got $61,000 worth of coins (1X_BTC + 2X_BTC) and you got $5000.


No.

Difficulty is determined by the amount of hash power, not by the size of the block.

The Bitcoin style of crypto-currency adjusts difficulty once every 2,016 blocks.

If it takes longer than 20,160 minutes to complete those 2,016 blocks, then it took too long and the difficulty is reduced proportionally so that the next 2,016 blocks will take closer to an average of 10 minutes per block.

If it takes shorter than 20,160 minutes to complete those 2,016 block, then it didn't take long enough and the difficulty is increased proportionally so that the next 2,016 blocks will take closer to an average of 10 minutes per block.

Therefore, the chain that has the most hash power working on the blocks will have the "most accumulated difficulty" regardless of the size of the blocks.

After difficulty being defined wouldn't it be more work for transaction to go through a 1MB block as opposed to a 2 MB?

If I'm wrong please let me know.

They usually mean they will continue to mine on the most successful fork, which is usually the one with more hashrate/blocks mined in a given time.

"Difficulty" is a measure of the average amount of work that must be expended in order to publish a valid block.

"Accumulated difficulty" roughly means the total amount of work expended to produce all the blocks in a chain. This is a basic mechanism of Bitcoin that is used to ensure the integrity of the block chain. One of the rules of consensus is choose the chain with the most work behind it as long as it is valid. Since the validity of competing chains in this fork is an issue, assuming that both are valid and choosing the one with the most work is a reasonable thing to do if you want to avoid the politics and taking a side, though it could cause confusion.

In a fork with no replay protection, a single transaction is valid in both branches, so if you spend the coins in one branch, then you also spend coins in the other branch. Replay protection prevents a lot of confusion, but more importantly (to some) it helps to keep the chain with the lower value coins alive.

Whether or not this (or any) fork is necessary is a matter of opinion.

"Manipulated" is an exaggeration. It implies that some person or group can control where hash power is directed. As we see with the recent BCH fork, miners tend to mine on the most profitable chain and that has resulted in huge movements of hash power between the two chains.

Hash power is an integral part of consensus because of the rule of choosing the "longest" (a.k.a most accumulated difficulty) valid chain.

Investing??? I'm not here to invest in bitcoin tben later sell for fiat.

I feel as if the "investor" approach is why this fork is taking place to begin with

It means that a transaction that is sent on one side of the fork can also happen on the other side of the fork even if the sender doesn't intend it to.

So does that mean for example if I send you BTC from the legacy chain, that the same transaction eill happen on the btc2 chain?

What does this mean for those who dint want the 2X coin or be on that chain?

What's the worse that can happen?

yes there is so many fork made by bitcoin. this fork is worthed for investment such as bitcoingold. i like to try to invest on it. may the luck be with me. go luck to you all  and happy investing

The mining difficulty.  Effectively, the average number of hashes that would have to be calculated to complete the blocks.


It means that a transaction that is sent on one side of the fork can also happen on the other side of the fork even if the sender doesn't intend it to.


Because people disagree on how bitcoin should work.  Therefore, some people are choosing to use software that enforces one set of rules, and other people are choosing to use software that enforces a different set of rules.  Since Bitcoin is decentralized, there is no entity in charge of how bitcoin should work or which software people should use.  Each group of people believes that their set of rules are the "REAL bitcoin, and that the other sides set of rules are forking from them.

How can it be manipulated and why do ppl think that the hash determined a consensus?