Bitcoin-XT is simply a different (better?) coin ! WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL ?
THE MARKET WILL SUPPORT BOTH!!!!
:-)
====> no worries!!!
Topic: So the destruction of Bitcoin is now official? - page 5. (Read 6089 times)
i don't see how exactly this fork 'destroys' bitcoin ...seems like a big overreaction
Prices are moving now, because of the FUD caused by the recent Galvin's statement:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/so-the-destruction-of-bitcoin-is-now-official-1075088
And downwards of course.
Still not enough to drive it into sub 230, though
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/so-the-destruction-of-bitcoin-is-now-official-1075088
And downwards of course.
Still not enough to drive it into sub 230, though
well price of btc will be afected a bit it divides into 2 coins and a bit for worst but i guess thas not to happen thers lots of speculation even in btc security blockchain and only 30% of it was potencialy hacked i belive in security of price even to go to 300$ by piece guess im an optimist 
Satoshi should come out and raise his opinion regarding this imo, only he can convince everyone whats the right thing to do.
No need, this will probably be sorted out sooner rather than later and then we can all go back to crying about price.
Satoshi should come out and raise his opinion regarding this imo, only he can convince everyone whats the right thing to do.
No, everyone is free to choose which client use - chain follow... it will not be 'fair' to follow satoshi's opinion.
This will only divide the community in half and it will be bad for the price aswell, people from both chains will fud each other lol, popcorn worthy for sure.
Satoshi should come out and raise his opinion regarding this imo, only he can convince everyone whats the right thing to do.
Staoshi may be dead?
Satoshi should come out and raise his opinion regarding this imo, only he can convince everyone whats the right thing to do.
No, everyone is free to choose which client use - chain follow... it will not be 'fair' to follow satoshi's opinion.
Satoshi should come out and raise his opinion regarding this imo, only he can convince everyone whats the right thing to do.
And if the people will not exchange those coin, what will the miner do?
There will be some exchange somewhere. A single exchange doing it is enough to rain hell on everyone.
I think the majority will convert to chain B, because it can handle more transactions. I'm wondering if chain A starts to fade how low its price will go in case there would be a trading pair between the 2 chains.
I think most people will stick to the core version because they don't need to update, have the version without Gavin who is not very popular anymore, the core is more decentral, uses less bandwidth, runs more stable, uses less system recources and so on.
I don't think Gavincoin will be able to compete with core in the market.
I think it's best when Gavin just leaves for his altcoin project and takes his following with him. The trouble starts when he tries to act as if it was Bitcoin.
But I personally don't see why bitcoin should go or be mainstream? I see bitcoin as valid and good alternative to send a large (or little) quantity of money without the use of a centralized payment system (like WU ,moneygram or also a bank).
Right, we are lightyears away from mainstream adoption. It's not going to happen fast anyways. People are slow learners.
And actually we have seen quite a few times people go intuitively for new coins like doge and others. Most newcomers don't bother a lot with bitcoin, they demand alts. So this whole scalability thing sorts itself out right there with popular demand anyways.
I do not know, but this obsession to see bitcoin mainstream is really no-sense.
Bitcoin/Gavincoin pair will be ground zero and epic cinema. Better order tons of popcorn.
Wouldn't chain A (Bitcoin) and chain B (Gavincoin) have the same price?
The name will be same bitcoin, and who knows... if the gavin's change will succeed than the price will be the same.
Chain A and Chain B wouldn't be the same price.
If Bitcoin is at 230 dollars when it split, there would then be double the bitcoin coins and theoretically with the supply increasing by 2 times, the price between the 2 should half at that moment.
Also people will price the one they have more faith in for more money than the chain they have less faith in. People would probably try to dump their old coins for cash asap.... or hold (since holding from before a fork will give you the same coins on both chains). I would suggest holding and not buying or selling. But obviously at some point someone will have to choose which chain they want to follow and buy, sell or trade accordingly.
Of course people not knowing which chain to choose, could cause confusion, and fear, and could crash the price of both to nothing.
I think the majority will convert to chain B, because it can handle more transactions. I'm wondering if chain A starts to fade how low its price will go in case there would be a trading pair between the 2 chains.
The person who controls Satoshi's alert key has a lot of pull. Let's just all agree that Gavin is the leader and be done with this nonsense.
Maybe I have used the wrong words, but I was partial correct with my logic... because if someone will buy bitcoin from the chain-A and after a couple of days nobody will continue to use that chain then he basically will lose 'money' (Fiat currency that he used to buy Chain-A~btc.).
You've definitely stated something else. The problem is there however only for people who buy in on a specific chain after the fork. Nope, i don't agree on that.
Decentralisation, consensus and defensibility is more important than bigger blocks. While 'Bitcoin' may not scale 'cryptocurrency' definately does. Need more txs? Just use merge mined altcoins for smaller txs. I personally don't see a need to raise blocksize at all ever simple because we will never run out of space for cryptocurrency txs. Even with 1MB blocks in btc.
Cryptocrrency could go mainstream today on Bitcoin Core, there wouldn't be any scalability issues imo.
This whole problem is imaginary in my humble opinion.
Your humble opinion is wrong and is in no way associated with any technical background. You should definitely read the thread that D&T made a few months back. The network should have a theoretical 7 tps (transactions per seconds), in reality it is closer to 2-3.Decentralisation, consensus and defensibility is more important than bigger blocks. While 'Bitcoin' may not scale 'cryptocurrency' definately does. Need more txs? Just use merge mined altcoins for smaller txs. I personally don't see a need to raise blocksize at all ever simple because we will never run out of space for cryptocurrency txs. Even with 1MB blocks in btc.
Cryptocrrency could go mainstream today on Bitcoin Core, there wouldn't be any scalability issues imo.
This whole problem is imaginary in my humble opinion.
https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size
The average block size hit 0.5MB recently. Even though this number has great variations, the chart shows that we're slowly progressing there.
Pierre Rochard isn't right. I'm almost certain of it. Bitcoin is supposed to be used for pseudo-anonymous, quick and cheap money transfer.
I do not want to include a 2$ fee for a 1$ transaction, once the blocks are filled.
I think the majority will convert to chain B, because it can handle more transactions. I'm wondering if chain A starts to fade how low its price will go in case there would be a trading pair between the 2 chains.
It appears to me the last word on it would have the open market. Miners will mine what has the better price. If that is Bitcoin 1 or 2 or neither is to be seen.
Bitcoin/Gavincoin pair will be ground zero and epic cinema. Better order tons of popcorn.
Wouldn't chain A (Bitcoin) and chain B (Gavincoin) have the same price?
the miners will decide, they can't secure both without compromising one, there can't be two legitimate bitcoin, and surely the hash won't double over night
And if the people will not exchange those coin, what will the miner do? Nothing because they will not be able to dump those coins.
It appears to me the last word on it would have the open market. Miners will mine what has the better price. If that is Bitcoin 1 or 2 or neither is to be seen.
I am not secure of this thing, if the new 'coin' will not have the same consensus of now it will be an high risk mine it.
Bitcoin/Gavincoin pair will be ground zero and epic cinema. Better order tons of popcorn.
Wouldn't chain A (Bitcoin) and chain B (Gavincoin) have the same price?
the miners will decide, they can't secure both without compromising one, there can't be two legitimate bitcoin, and surely the hash won't double over night
Bitcoin/Gavincoin pair will be ground zero and epic cinema. Better order tons of popcorn.
Wouldn't chain A (Bitcoin) and chain B (Gavincoin) have the same price?
At first minute after fork yes, but as soon trading Gavincoin vs Bitcoin starts the price will start to differ.
AND there would suddenly be two Bitcoins for every one Bitcoin that exists now. I don't see how this couldn't hurt the cap of both coins.
I personally think they will both crash and burn pretty fast. There will only be casualties and no winner in that war imo.
Personally, I think that we shouldn't jump immediately to 20 Mb blocks, but work our way up there incrementally. I feel that that jump would invite people to spam, and some people's bandwidth is not enough to keep up with the large sizes.
But I personally don't see why bitcoin should go or be mainstream? I see bitcoin as valid and good alternative to send a large (or little) quantity of money without the use of a centralized payment system (like WU ,moneygram or also a bank).
Right, we are lightyears away from mainstream adoption. It's not going to happen fast anyways. People are slow learners.
And actually we have seen quite a few times people go intuitively for new coins like doge and others. Most newcomers don't bother a lot with bitcoin, they demand alts. So this whole scalability thing sorts itself out right there with popular demand anyways.
Actually it can happen very fast, once a catalyst happens things can go rapidly, especially with technology. That catalyst might be Nasdaq trading Bitcoin and from there Bitcoin might be fuelled and promoted by governments.
Why a not-controlled technology/coin should be promoted by the governments? They will try to regulate something, but this time I think they will not succeed.
Bitcoin/Gavincoin pair will be ground zero and epic cinema. Better order tons of popcorn.
Wouldn't chain A (Bitcoin) and chain B (Gavincoin) have the same price?
At first minute after fork yes, but as soon trading Gavincoin vs Bitcoin starts the price will start to differ.
AND there would suddenly be two Bitcoins for every one Bitcoin that exists now. I don't see how this couldn't hurt the cap of both coins.
I personally think they will both crash and burn pretty fast.
You might have a point, whats to stop an exchange to offer Gavincoin or Chain B coin or whatever against Bitcoin, this will be interesting. I want to know if the price will tank after the fork or not, i might sell some for fiat/alts.
Nobody knows if the price will be affected or not, but most probably no.
Bitcoin/Gavincoin pair will be ground zero and epic cinema. Better order tons of popcorn.
Wouldn't chain A (Bitcoin) and chain B (Gavincoin) have the same price?
At first minute after fork yes, but as soon trading Gavincoin vs Bitcoin starts the price will start to differ.
AND there would suddenly be two Bitcoins for every one Bitcoin that exists now. I don't see how this couldn't hurt the cap of both coins.
I personally think they will both crash and burn pretty fast.
You might have a point, whats to stop an exchange to offer Gavincoin or Chain B coin or whatever against Bitcoin, this will be interesting. I want to know if the price will tank after the fork or not, i might sell some for fiat/alts.
Jump to: