If uno is not required to hardfork it's maybe a different story. It will likely be a softfork nontheless. I would still want to see some practical example tbh.
What is a softfork? Also, continuing from one of your follow up questions, does it really matter if new wallet version is required that is not backwards compatible with older versions? Consider that the act of performing software updates in modern computing these days is commonplace and even expected: people understand what needing to update their client means, it's just a matter of course, I'd have thought. Do you disagree? (It felt like nitpicking in the other thread with Bryce, which is why I remembered it.)
Uno needs always be able to be mined independently in any case.
Why? Getting more hash from merge mining with the hugely larger network seems to make perfect sense. UNO doesn't get somehow diluted or associated with BTC, it simply means more profit for miners. The only downer is the fork that's required (which I agree shouldn't be taken lightly).It's possible people flock in masses to this coin and we gain massive marketcap in a short timeframe and really all this fork-stuff is obsolete just because a freakin' chainreaction and mass madness and total run on Uno happens over night for the simple reason that people start to understand why it is better than bitcoin.
I don't share your view that BTC will just vanish into the ether in the next 12 months. Honestly, I agree it's possible but it just doesn't seem remotely likely. UNO is certainly superior, but in the history of mankind, it takes more than a realisation of something's superior design for a sudden exodus. I agree that UNO will continue to get stronger but it's still a heavily BTC-centric cryptoverse out there, warts and all.
(well on a second thought maybe we would still need some MM solutions to get to the real good, rock solid security even in that event)
Well maybe i just start to be more agnostic about all that stuff. MM is definately a good thing. SC? Still tests to do.
...hash calculations...
Maybe MM actually would trigger large investement for it being much more secure all of a sudden?
What's the advantages of waiting with the MM? Do they outweigh?
If Uno can topple bitcoin or come close to it within the next 12 months MM would be obsolete. If that would not be happening MM would be necessary. Is that correct thoughts?
I do applaud your open mindedness regarding considering MM solutions. Again, I don't see BTC just dying a rapid death and everyone flocking to UNO, but even if this was the case, I feel that implementing MM sooner than later seems to be the smart thing.Well maybe i just start to be more agnostic about all that stuff. MM is definately a good thing. SC? Still tests to do.
...hash calculations...
Maybe MM actually would trigger large investement for it being much more secure all of a sudden?
What's the advantages of waiting with the MM? Do they outweigh?
If Uno can topple bitcoin or come close to it within the next 12 months MM would be obsolete. If that would not be happening MM would be necessary. Is that correct thoughts?
-
One thing to pick on:
MM is definately a good thing. SC? Still tests to do.
- Implementing MM with BTC means forking UNO. - Implementing SC with BTC does not mean forking UNO.
- You are against forking UNO.
- You see the value of MM ("it is definitely a good thing").
Thoughts?
Cheers for the ongoing conversation
1. I don't see the rush to move. I think we can give a nod that it is okay to move towards MM ... really why not? But let's plan on a fork in ERA 8-9 (again we have time on our side). BTC insiders are just this week hinting that it might be a bit of a bummer investment for the next 2 years. So that is the window 24-30 months.
In the meantime, I do think Bryce has plenty of other coins to test-run things. If we do this it is the FINAL fork ... so any and all other 'fork-able' things need to be addressed at the same time. From there on out all updates must be compatible with this last fork ... cause this is a even more conservative group than Mpcoin.
I'm generally agreeable on this, BN. Well put.In the meantime, I do think Bryce has plenty of other coins to test-run things. If we do this it is the FINAL fork ... so any and all other 'fork-able' things need to be addressed at the same time. From there on out all updates must be compatible with this last fork ... cause this is a even more conservative group than Mpcoin.
I'll be damn'd DVC is a kind of "Pegged Side Chain"
"3. If the asset fails to be adopted, I can get some or all my bitcoins back."
In DVCs you can get all the frozen UNOs back.
"3. If the asset fails to be adopted, I can get some or all my bitcoins back."
In DVCs you can get all the frozen UNOs back.
Mind = Blown. Astute observation!
All we need is an "UnoShare" coin and Un-Ex and the uno-Whales can maintain stable prices just like Nubits. By leveraging "UnoShare" coin.
This would make Uno more like ripple/Stellar and nearly exactly like Nubits ... except better network security ... and the base $value shifts up ... Nubits are stuck @$1
Insufficient information/knowledge to make meaningful comment on this, but I seriously appreciate your input and have learned a lot from reading your posts. Thank you This would make Uno more like ripple/Stellar and nearly exactly like Nubits ... except better network security ... and the base $value shifts up ... Nubits are stuck @$1
t - 18hr before UNO takes off 
Is this your USD$200k buy-in? I seriously don't understand how you plan on doing this. Is the volume just not there? That's one long, long-term hold you're planning!(Thanks for the heads up!)
