Pages:
Author

Topic: Thoughts on the Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash Dilemia - page 2. (Read 839 times)

legendary
Activity: 4270
Merit: 4534
Segwit is backwards compatible with the old consensus rules it did not break anything.

segwit is not backward compatible
segwit tx's is set to be (ELI-5) invisible/ (ELI-15) not validatable by old consensus.
if you looked into it you will see terms such as what gmax named "upstream" filter nodes and LukJR calls "bridges" which is where if a old client just connects to the network and received the current block data the same way a segwit node does. it wont be understood.
a segwit node has to act as a translater and convert the chain of 2017+ into a different format specifically for the requesting node.
https://bitcoincore.org/assets/images/filtering-by-upgraded-node.svg



in short. if segwit nodes had a bug. you cannot just manually copy and paste the blockchain data from a folder to another folder for an old client and carry on. its all completely different.
so with all currnt nodes being strict core2017+ policy/rule following nodes. if core nodes did bug out they cant just downgrade to an earlier version. because the data would not have a translater.. (the translator has the flu)
EG. the 2013 levelDB event would have crashed the network if people were not able to just downgrade without a translator required.
back then they didnt need a translater so downgrading was simple.. now thats not the case. and makes the network more fragile to bug attack of a client running exact same ruleset and codebase

even the guidelines on upgrading to segwit say. if you want to run an old node, due to the network not wanting to act as translators for old clients(ban-hammer) you would personally need to download a segwit client. and white list yor old node to get accepted and then let your segwit client translate data for the old client. where by your old client treats segwit transactions as not requiring validation (funky tx's)
(image above simplifys the waffle)


imagine a system of checking passports. where in a decentralised world every passport needs checking.
segwit is set to be a diplomatic immunity holder that pretends the block creator validated them and so the decentralised consensus network do not need to check it.

as for the 35% of the community vote.
actually you AGAIN are reading too much reddit propaganda. your nearly at the point of sounding like a scripted sheep. antpool had less power then propagandised. loads of people were screaming "china china china" when there were things like slush pool which was based in thailand. there were other pools in iceland, georgia, and multiple other countries.

even funnier thing.. BTCC was a big lover and advocate of segwit. they even leant one of their spokesmen over to blockstream (mow) to help promote the bilatreal split plan.. and yet ven now BTCC refuses to have confidence to put its block rewards on a segwit(BC1q) address
https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000000b02343a0bd93fda8be0298c1bf16d0b084c1c014d567e  oh look 13TET  .. not bc1q
and if 95% of the community really wanted segwit.. how come only 10% or less is actually using segwit

again you have ignored the whole jgarzig+blockstream stuff.. just to continue the VER WU scripted kardashian distraction drama.
also yea 65% opposed cores roadmap.  core should not have said "attack, lets deport the opposition". but instead compromised. so that it stayed as one network of full community support.

anyway. as for the asic boost drama
that was a whole big laughing comedy. asic boost actually helps. if veryone used it then the network becomes mor secure and hashes blocks faster and with a higher difficulty than a network that does not use it.
but by gmax screaming its a threat. now a pool can use it while the core loyalist rfuse out of loyalty to gmax drama.. and so the ones using it can build blocks faster..
imagine it this way.. GPU mining days. everyone knew ATI was fastr than geforce. but imagine if gmax said ATI is an attack by having a bettr way to hasha block. lets boycott ati.. gmax loyalists would buy geforce and hash at a slower rate. allowing an outsider to come in with an ATI farm and ovr power it..
howevr back then people wer less loyal and more decentralist and so people went for ATI which made the network stronger knowing that a GPU farmer using geforce would have no chance

as to you saying
"Does the direction of the network has to be what Satoshi wants? I thought it was supposed to be decentralized."
firstly its not about satoshi's wants.. he has gone. its about a feature that was built specifically to address issues of a community ivide that if used would not upgrade the network without majority support.. core AVOIDED that mechanism by first throwing out the competition. rathr than finding a majority community agreement (compromise)

as to the freedom to fork off
yea i got no problem with clams(unilateral split), litecoin(zero day fork) which pretty much just grabbed the code and done their own thing on a separate network
but when it comes to the community wanting certain things happening on a certain network. throwing them off the network via double team deception(via bilateral split) so that one team gains the stronghold. and then ringfenses the pools (via Fibre) so no one outside the team can use the same tactic against them. thus turning bitcoin core network into a tyranic monarchy.. is not decentralist practice, not moral, not ethical and goes against the whole point of the world thinking "bitcoin"(2009-2013) was decentralised and uncontrollable.

legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1001
Yeah, when bch was introduced there are a lot of opinions that occurred, some believe bch destroy BTC and some believe bch is the next BTC, for me bch is destroying BTC, it make people confused when they want to invest, because a forking coin doesn't got a good impression for the investors, but since anyone can create their own coin so I don't blame people to try to create bch to take advantage, so for me even it's destroying Bitcoin but it's a fair competition, but somehow I don't see any good future in bch
full member
Activity: 364
Merit: 101
Well bitcoin.com and roger ver has made it seem like bch is bitcoin and they termed the real bitcoin as bitcoin core. This was even suggested to be published in coinmarketcap but they refuse to do so. I don't know how its supposed to look like for already existing investors. But really, for the new investors, it would really seem like deceiving to coin bch as bitcoin.
newbie
Activity: 294
Merit: 0
With my point of view bitcoin cash is creating the problem by disseminating inaccurate information. Where they are trying to cheat the users as for example bitcoin.com through buying bitcoin cash as if it is bitcoin. I think this is not the right attitude towards this should be stopped because it harms people.
newbie
Activity: 322
Merit: 0
It is a nice topic i think. I prefer bitcoin more than any other cryptos. Just because it is still leading the market. However, people have to move to that which makes more profit.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1010
ITSMYNE 🚀 Talk NFTs, Trade NFTs 🚀
IMO, BitcoinCash is spreading like a wildfire and payment processors are adding it everywhere. The team supporting BCH is strong and created havoc in the market many times before. Still lots of support needed to even compete with Bitcoin but yes it may happen in the future.
newbie
Activity: 294
Merit: 0
Many people think that BTC and BCH are kind of similar when we see the name. Misinformation or not, I personally think no one should buy a coin without checking whereabouts. We should not be confused about what we are buying. It would be better if there was no split in Blockchain, but I don’t think it should affect the market much.
jr. member
Activity: 318
Merit: 1
Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?
I think that there is only one bitcoin - this is BTC. I do not recognize the fork of bitcoin. But at the same time I think that BTH or other forks can not harm bitcoin. I think that all of them will eventually disappear and will remain one BTC.
legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
I agree that no one owns the word "Bitcoin",
.......
....
.....
Bitcoin is Bitcoin Core.

here is your mindset problem.
you keep thinking the network maintained by core, which has to strictly follow cores BIP process and submit new features only via cores github.. is "bitcoin"

This is not about that. This is about Roger Ver saying "Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin" and hilarity ensues. It is not my problem that when people says Bitcoin they really mean the cryptocurrency you call "Bitcoin Core".

That topic is another topic and should be in its own thread. Do not worry, I will research and inquire about that.

Quote
both core and cash do not own bitcoin
both sides (bitcoin.org and bitcoin.com) need to clarify that they are
bitcoin core
bitcoin cash

You can clarify if you want, no one is stopping you. But if you say "Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin", do not blame me if they call you out and laugh at you. When people say Bitcoin it means the real Bitcoin, the cryptocurrency you call "Bitcoin Core".

Quote
dont you get it yet

I do get it. But that does not mean I agree with your "get it".

Quote
and bitcoin core DID break from the consensus rules.. segwit is a consensus rule break. hense why from november 2016-summer 2017 they only had 35% consensus vote and thus segwit would not have got activated as it would caused issues to the network at 35%

Segwit is backwards compatible with the old consensus rules it did not break anything.

Plus the reason why Segwit only had 35% consensus was because Jihan Wu, who produces 70% if Bitcoin miners was trying to block it because it was not compatible with AsicBoost.

Quote
thats why they got bloq to make cash. to get rid of the 65% opposers. so that segwit could fake a 95% vote to activate segwit

Really? Hahahaha.

Quote
dont you get it yet

bloq and core are partners in crime. the bilateral split was a bi-directional (2 altcoin) event that both are different codebases,, address types, network topology compared to bitcoin 2009-2013

Until I get some more research about this and know what really happened, I will put my tin foil hat on.

Quote
and if you still think cores network is decentralised and open. i dare you to make a node that wishes to use in-network consensus feature satoshi built to have a new feature that opposes CORES roadmap.

Does the direction of the network has to be what Satoshi wants? I thought it was supposed to be decentralized.

Plus it is decentralized. Look at it, it can hard fork away to as many Bitcoin versions you want. I do not have problems with Bitcoin Cash splitting off from the main chain to have bigger blocks. I was hoping that would be a success so we can live in harmony. But clearly there might be some problems. Hahahaha.

Quote
.. and just se how fast your node gets ban-hammered, REKT, propagandised as an attack. as oppose to a fair decentralised challenge to a network upgrade.

Because it can be. But do not worry. I will ask achow about this and see if you are not bullshitting again as someone said to me in private.

I told him I would still be giving you the benefit of the doubt though.

I like people who are passionate in their beliefs and have respect for them.
newbie
Activity: 252
Merit: 0
i think whatever is happening it is engaging people into crypto world some may support bitcoin, some may BCH. best part to me is people are coming towards cryptos. and only this will help to sprade the market all over the world.
jr. member
Activity: 602
Merit: 8
It is a heated topic definitely, but I am going with the old faithful BTC!
jr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 1
This is a very bad practice ... after such a deception, people with an adherence will work with cryptocurrency or negatively speaks for potential investors. I hope to make up my mind and few have suffered.
full member
Activity: 406
Merit: 100
At the time of launching bitcoin cash where bitcoin prices dropped dramatically because of the stronghold of both sides. Digital currency as a transaction medium will depend on the high security level always guaranteed by bitcoin and increase the speed in the transaction. Bitcoin will be safe and how fast the transaction speed will increase is not clear. But bitcoin cash difficulties in the transaction process for 2 minutes 30 seconds. Cool
full member
Activity: 812
Merit: 101
in my opinion, both have no big problems, the difference between them will not affect the market.

both have different qualities and quantities. bitcoin more dominates the market and the crypto world, BCH is just a fraction of bitcoin. so BCH is helpless.

BCH will not be a bitcoin in the future, because BCH does not have good selling power in the market, even BCH spreading is very slow.
newbie
Activity: 224
Merit: 0
I don't think Bitcoin Cash will be able to bigger profitable then Bitcoin. I always prefer bitcoin, because Bitcoin Cash is a part of Bitcoin. So I can say Bit coin is father of all cryptocurrency not only Bitcoin Cash.
jr. member
Activity: 182
Merit: 1
There are so many misconceptions and views about Bitcoin. Bitcoin is definitely not a currency that will replace a country's currency. Bitcoin is also definitely not a business that promises a daily profit of a few percent
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 544
Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?
Bitcoin cash is actually a good cryptocurrency and it has good features. Bitcoin cash was made without the basic flaws and problems in bitcoin algorithms. But even though this is a well made coin but the problem comes from the management of BCH especially Roger Ver. Due to their scamming methods of getting more buyers they camouflaged as the real bitcoin site using bitcoin.com as the name of their website. Due to this bad moves of Roger Ver bitcoin cash was being affected.
jr. member
Activity: 60
Merit: 4
Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

I agree. I don't think there is any issue with forking the network. This is common practice. But theft of the brand and defamation is another story!
legendary
Activity: 4270
Merit: 4534
I agree that no one owns the word "Bitcoin",
.......
....
.....
Bitcoin is Bitcoin Core.

here is your mindset problem.
you keep thinking the network maintained by core, which has to strictly follow cores BIP process and submit new features only via cores github.. is "bitcoin"

both core and cash do not own bitcoin
both sides (bitcoin.org and bitcoin.com) need to clarify that they are
bitcoin core
bitcoin cash

dont you get it yet

and bitcoin core DID break from the consensus rules.. segwit is a consensus rule break. hense why from november 2016-summer 2017 they only had 35% consensus vote and thus segwit would not have got activated as it would caused issues to the network at 35%

thats why they got bloq to make cash. to get rid of the 65% opposers. so that segwit could fake a 95% vote to activate segwit

dont you get it yet

bloq and core are partners in crime. the bilateral split was a bi-directional (2 altcoin) event that both are different codebases,, address types, network topology compared to bitcoin 2009-2013

and if you still think cores network is decentralised and open. i dare you to make a node that wishes to use in-network consensus feature satoshi built to have a new feature that opposes CORES roadmap. .. and just se how fast your node gets ban-hammered, REKT, propagandised as an attack. as oppose to a fair decentralised challenge to a network upgrade.
legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
I prefer bitcoin over bitcoin cash, BCH is just a fork coin of bitcoin so it has no chance to dethrone the original, only the chinese and the koreans supports bitcoin cash meanwhile bitcoin is supported wholewide so bitcoin is still the best.

But what is "dethrone" for you? Is it the market cap? Will your preference for Bitcoin change if another altcoin replaced Bitcoin as the most valued coin in all of the "blockchain world".

I believe Bitcoin will still be king because it has the most work expended on it, it has the most community support, the best developers and the most secure cryptocurrency.
Pages:
Jump to: