Topic: What will you do with your &#039;Bitcoin Cash&#039;? (Read 2172 times)

Quote from: cellard on July 20, 2017, 09:54:30 AM

Why do you care for things which are utterly inconsequential?

As to me, we should care about what they can and are actually going to do to the original blockchain. Why doesn't anyone ask this question? If they are attack Bitcoin under whatever name, the outcome will be essentially the same, and it won't be good for Bitcoin given their hashrates. This is what I've been telling all this time, and this is the most dangerous thing that might come out of the current showdown. Or do you really think they are going to coexist with Bitcoin peacefully? That seems next to impossible to me. The whole shebang is designed to kill or, at least, heavily hurt Bitcoin. Am I paranoid, or am I not enough paranoid?

Just look at ETH/ETC, both coins can co-exist. Jihan isn't going to attack anything because nobody is going to follow his altcoin, he will not have enough hashrate to attack without lossing a lot of money.

There will be no hardfork anyway, I was just asking a theoretical question about who get to keep the BTC token in the case of a theoretical hardfork ETH/ETC style.

I don't think that we should look at the ETH and ETC coins

Today it is a completely different situation. The Ethereum fork was kind of spontaneous, a totally unexpected event even by those behind it. This is not the case with Bitcoin now. Further, what is this Bitcoin Cash if not a fork by any metric? If they take the existing blockchain and clone it, this is pretty much it. And in that very case the attack is inevitable, otherwise the whole idea is stillborn. Apart from that, how do you know that Jihan doesn't have enough hash rate? He might have been silently assembling a ruthless army of the top-notch asics all these months to crush Bitcoin with just one sweeping blow

Doesn't matter. Whales have more BTC than Jihan. In a hardfork, you vote with your BTC, not with hashrate. If they are stupid enough to hardfork the approval of the whales, then the whales will jump on BitmainCoin's chain, creating a massive crash, potentially selling the entire orderbook all the way down to 0, so they would need to move their hashrate back to the legacy chain. You can't hardfork Bitcoin just because you got miners.

Not to mention, who would be stupid enough to be on a blockchain that is basically centralized with Jihan's hashrate?

The current blockchain is only slightly less centralized

Apart from that, most people basically don't care whether Bitcoin is centralized or not. All they care for are profits and nothing else but profits. If Jihan in some ingenious way makes them choose between losing the value of the coins on the "regular" blockchain and acquiring that value on his blockchain, they won't think twice (you can be dead sure of that). Further, what makes you think, first, that Jihan and his goons (who are collectively known as the mining cartel) have less coins than some obscure "whales", and, second, that some of these whales (say, Roger Ver) won't in fact prefer JihanCoin?

cellard

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1252

Quote from: cellard on July 20, 2017, 09:54:30 AM

Quote from: Iranus on July 21, 2017, 09:16:07 AM

Why do you care for things which are utterly inconsequential?

As to me, we should care about what they can and are actually going to do to the original blockchain. Why doesn't anyone ask this question? If they are attack Bitcoin under whatever name, the outcome will be essentially the same, and it won't be good for Bitcoin given their hashrates. This is what I've been telling all this time, and this is the most dangerous thing that might come out of the current showdown. Or do you really think they are going to coexist with Bitcoin peacefully? That seems next to impossible to me. The whole shebang is designed to kill or, at least, heavily hurt Bitcoin. Am I paranoid, or am I not enough paranoid?

Just look at ETH/ETC, both coins can co-exist. Jihan isn't going to attack anything because nobody is going to follow his altcoin, he will not have enough hashrate to attack without lossing a lot of money.

There will be no hardfork anyway, I was just asking a theoretical question about who get to keep the BTC token in the case of a theoretical hardfork ETH/ETC style.

I don't think that we should look at the ETH and ETC coins

Today it is a completely different situation. The Ethereum fork was kind of spontaneous, a totally unexpected event even by those behind it. This is not the case with Bitcoin now. Further, what is this Bitcoin Cash if not a fork by any metric? If they take the existing blockchain and clone it, this is pretty much it. And in that very case the attack is inevitable, otherwise the whole idea is stillborn. Apart from that, how do you know that Jihan doesn't have enough hash rate? He might have been silently assembling a ruthless army of the top-notch asics all these months to crush Bitcoin with just one sweeping blow

Doesn't matter. Whales have more BTC than Jihan. In a hardfork, you vote with your BTC, not with hashrate. If they are stupid enough to hardfork the approval of the whales, then the whales will jump on BitmainCoin's chain, creating a massive crash, potentially selling the entire orderbook all the way down to 0, so they would need to move their hashrate back to the legacy chain. You can't hardfork Bitcoin just because you got miners.

Not to mention, who would be stupid enough to be on a blockchain that is basically centralized with Jihan's hashrate?

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: deisik on July 21, 2017, 02:29:29 AM

Quote from: Iranus on July 20, 2017, 04:00:44 PM

Quote from: Roccker on July 20, 2017, 07:09:36 PM

Why would they want to fork off if they weren't going to succeed?

Because they'd like to see a chain with larger blocks

This is not an explanation

Pretty sure it is

You may want to learn what the word explanation means

As well as some other words, for that matter. It is not about what you think it is, it is what the party which you explain something to thinks about your words and whether they consider it as an explanation. So far I don't see how you can coherently explain why the mining cartel is going for Bitcoin Cash (or whatever) unless they want to outcompete Bitcoin. And this addressees your next question regarding other altcoins. They are there to earn profits for their developers (let's assume that for a moment). But in case of Bitcoin Cash this is only possible if it manages to bring down the "regular" Bitcoin. Otherwise, it will fail itself. As simple as that. And that specifically poses the question before you why they (the mining cartel) would deliberately want to create a coin which is set to fail. In other words, if you want to explain something, you should make the ends meet in your "explanation" (which you don't)

Iranus

hero member

Activity: 1792

Merit: 534

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

I see myself fucking up something and sending it to a wrong adress or something and lose my whole life-savings. 20bc

Considering what's already happened on Cryptsy and Mt. Gox, I'd say that keeping it on the exchange is about a million times riskier than just sending out to a safer wallet at any time at all, not just near forks. Sending it to the wrong address has happened but it's a negligible risk if you triple check.

Quote from: Roccker on July 20, 2017, 07:09:36 PM

It's not clear if you get your money if you are on exchange?

It's not clear because it's essentially the exchange's decision. Coinbase, for example, has already said that they will not be giving their customers the Bitcoin Cash/UAHF coins and that their users should withdraw if they want those.

It's important to understand that when storing coins in an exchange the exchange is holding them for you, and all you have is a promise that you'll get them back. That promise didn't include "in the case of any chain splits, we'll give you all of the different coins through a lovely interface and you can do what you like with them". So to avoid shady or confusing activity from exchanges, you should withdraw.

Quote from: deisik on July 21, 2017, 02:29:29 AM

Quote from: Iranus on July 20, 2017, 04:00:44 PM

Quote from: deisik on July 21, 2017, 02:29:29 AM

Why would they want to fork off if they weren't going to succeed?

Because they'd like to see a chain with larger blocks

This is not an explanation

Pretty sure it is.

What is the purpose of seeing Bitcoin with larger blocks if no one is going to use it anyway?

Anyone could create a fork of BTC. Anyone can also create an altcoin. Does that mean that the 995 coins listed on coinmarketcap are all going to become the biggest cryptocurrency?

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Iranus on July 20, 2017, 04:00:44 PM

Why would they want to fork off if they weren't going to succeed?

Because they'd like to see a chain with larger blocks

This is not an explanation

What is the purpose of seeing Bitcoin with larger blocks if no one is going to use it anyway? As to me, it makes sense to start this coin only if they really intend to come out as winners. Regarding the Bitcoins you mentioned, I guess that they hadn't enough support by the mining cartel. Anyway, the failure or success would greatly depend on the hash power but indirectly. Hash rate itself is meaningless if you don't have users, but it may make all the difference if you are going to take down the competing chain in a really ingenious and sophisticated way

Roccker

full member

Activity: 266

Merit: 111

Argh.
I wanna keep my bitcoin just on the exchange.

I see myself fucking up something and sending it to a wrong adress or something and lose my whole life-savings. 20bc

It's not clear if you get your money if you are on exchange?
A few months ago when BU was a danger, they said they will give all costumers also the BU funds

Iranus

hero member

Activity: 1792

Merit: 534

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: gentlemand on July 20, 2017, 12:17:50 PM

Why would they want to fork off if they weren't going to succeed?

Because they'd like to see a chain with larger blocks. Bitcoin XT, Bitcoin Classic, Bitcoin Unlimited and Bitcoin ABC have all basically failed, despite all the hype they each had for doing the same thing as last time, so the only solution is to fork off without a majority of hash rate.

Major groups backing BU/EC have decided that a compromise is necessary, but they've decided that they want their own chain to play with.
You could equally argue "why did they start Clamcoin if they weren't going to take over BTC?"

The big block advocates, or rather this strain of them as I don't really have a problem with larger blocks, seem to operate in something of an echo chamber of their own construction.

I'm not sure I subscribe to this rhetoric of just bashing the people.

This is absolutely a self-fulfilling prophecy, because Roger Ver is not a coder. He's just an opinionated public figure. So by bashing Roger Ver rather than big blocks, you're keeping yourself from joining the "big block" side. And by doing that, you're stopping any "good" people from moving over to that side, and keeping the majority of people annoying. It's like when people avoid going vegan because they don't like vegans, or avoid using BTC because it's used on the dark net.

So more than anything it's an echo chamber of everyone else's construction.

gentlemand

legendary

Activity: 2604

Merit: 3056

Welt Am Draht

Quote from: gentlemand on July 20, 2017, 11:38:21 AM

You seem to heavily underestimate these dudes

If you don't think of them as complete idiots (which they ain't), you should expect that they have calculated everything well enough to be certain of success. Why would they want to fork off if they weren't going to succeed? Further, they are not going to attack Bitcoin directly, they have artfully managed to make users pay insane fees, so what makes you think that they won't be able to beat Bitcoin into oblivion, which is what they will do? Many if not most people here are exclusively for profits, and if they see the original Bitcoin crashing, they will be eager to sell their coins for this new Bitcoin (whatever name it might have)

Maybe I am, but China is basically a Bitcoin desert outside mining. The actual usage is taking place in areas where the economic players have nothing to do with mining and Coinbase at least is having nothing to do with this fork. I assume most others will follow.

They've consistently proven their code isn't good enough. No one other than themselves wants to follow them.

The big block advocates, or rather this strain of them as I don't really have a problem with larger blocks, seem to operate in something of an echo chamber of their own construction.

I think they rather radically underestimate the utter contempt most others have for them or there's some weird blindness to it. Check the average Roger Ver tweet. There's a list of abuse about four metres long beneath it.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

I don't think that we should look at the ETH and ETC coins

Today is a completely different situation. The Ethereum fork was kind of spontaneous, a totally unexpected event event by those behind it. This is not the case with Bitcoin now. Further, what is this Bitcoin Cash if not a fork by any metric? If they take the existing blockchain and clone, this is pretty much it. And in that very case the attack is inevitable, otherwise the whole idea is stillborn. Apart from that, how do you know that Jihan doesn't have enough hash rate? He might have been silently assembling an army of asics all these months

Before anything else let's see how much of their own mining power they devote to it. The money will remain on the main chain. If they attack that I really don't think people will be inclined to switch to a chain under the control of a handful of pricks who destroyed the original one

You seem to heavily underestimate these dudes

If you don't think of them as complete idiots (which they ain't), you should expect that they have calculated everything well enough to be certain of success. Why would they want to fork off if they weren't going to succeed? Further, they are not going to attack Bitcoin directly, they have artfully managed to make users pay insane fees before, so what makes you think that they won't be able to tacitly beat Bitcoin into oblivion, which is what they will certainly do? Many if not most people here are exclusively for profits, and if they see the original Bitcoin crashing, they will be eager to sell their coins for this new Bitcoin (whatever name it might have)

gentlemand

legendary

Activity: 2604

Merit: 3056

Welt Am Draht

Quote from: cellard on July 20, 2017, 09:54:30 AM

I don't think that we should look at the ETH and ETC coins

Today is a completely different situation. The Ethereum fork was kind of spontaneous, a totally unexpected event event by those behind it. This is not the case with Bitcoin now. Further, what is this Bitcoin Cash if not a fork by any metric? If they take the existing blockchain and clone, this is pretty much it. And in that very case the attack is inevitable, otherwise the whole idea is stillborn. Apart from that, how do you know that Jihan doesn't have enough hash rate? He might have been silently assembling an army of asics all these months

Before anything else let's see how much of their own mining power they devote to it. The money will remain on the main chain. If they attack that I really don't think people will be inclined to switch to a chain under the control of a handful of pricks who destroyed the original one.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Why do you care for things which are utterly inconsequential?

As to me, we should care about what they can and are actually going to do to the original blockchain. Why doesn't anyone ask this question? If they are attack Bitcoin under whatever name, the outcome will be essentially the same, and it won't be good for Bitcoin given their hashrates. This is what I've been telling all this time, and this is the most dangerous thing that might come out of the current showdown. Or do you really think they are going to coexist with Bitcoin peacefully? That seems next to impossible to me. The whole shebang is designed to kill or, at least, heavily hurt Bitcoin. Am I paranoid, or am I not enough paranoid?

Just look at ETH/ETC, both coins can co-exist. Jihan isn't going to attack anything because nobody is going to follow his altcoin, he will not have enough hashrate to attack without lossing a lot of money.

There will be no hardfork anyway, I was just asking a theoretical question about who get to keep the BTC token in the case of a theoretical hardfork ETH/ETC style.

I don't think that we should look at the ETH and ETC coins

Today it is a completely different situation. The Ethereum fork was kind of spontaneous, a totally unexpected event even by those behind it. This is not the case with Bitcoin now. Further, what is this Bitcoin Cash if not a fork by any metric? If they take the existing blockchain and clone it, this is pretty much it. And in that very case the attack is inevitable, otherwise the whole idea is stillborn. Apart from that, how do you know that Jihan doesn't have enough hash rate? He might have been silently assembling a ruthless army of the top-notch asics all these months to crush Bitcoin with just one sweeping blow

cellard

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1252

Quote from: deisik on July 19, 2017, 12:04:36 PM

Quote from: gentlemand on July 18, 2017, 07:41:24 AM

Everyone in this thread is spreading FUD, BIP91 is compatible with UASF so there won't be any chain split. Besides segwitx2 has over 90% support now.

It's not a chain split. It's a fork into a new coin. They're making no attempt to claim it's Bitcoin

And this seems to be the most dangerous part

At first I thought it was kind of joke, but then I read the twitter post by your link and the whole announcement, and it doesn't look they are kidding. So as I got it, they are going to fork off finally. ViaBTC seems to be closely affiliated with Bitmain and Jihan, and in layman terms this basically means war. I hope that I'm missing something or misinterpreted something else, but if they are really going to fork Bitcoin (making a new coin off it), they will be dumping their old bitcoins and likely trying to attack the genuine blockchain since this is the only way the chain is going to survive. Why do I not see and hear the alarms raised?

Quote from: gentlemand on July 18, 2017, 07:41:24 AM

They are still gonna signal BIP91, so that is a good thing but I have no idea why they decided to start with their shenanigans now

Something is fishy here, very fishy, to say the least

Quote from: Krimster on July 19, 2017, 04:29:53 PM

Everyone in this thread is spreading FUD, BIP91 is compatible with UASF so there won't be any chain split. Besides segwitx2 has over 90% support now.

It's not a chain split. It's a fork into a new coin. They're making no attempt to claim it's Bitcoin.

If they are forking off the Bitcoin blockchain, that bodes bad for Bitcoin. The name is irrelevant (and they call it "Bitcoin Cash")

I don't care what they do with their hashrate and the client they run as long as if there is a hardfork we keep the BTC token tag.

So this leads to my question: Who gets to keep the original "BTC" token tag? exchanges should list the original chain as BTC, I hope they don't pull an "ETC" and pretend that the altcoin isn't the forked chain.

Why do you care for things which are utterly inconsequential?

As to me, we should care about what they can and are actually going to do to the original blockchain. Why doesn't anyone ask this question? If they are attack Bitcoin under whatever name, the outcome will be essentially the same, and it won't be good for Bitcoin given their hashrates. This is what I've been telling all this time, and this is the most dangerous thing that might come out of the current showdown. Or do you really think they are going to coexist with Bitcoin peacefully? That seems next to impossible to me. The whole shebang is designed to kill or, at least, heavily hurt Bitcoin. Am I paranoid, or am I not enough paranoid?

Just look at ETH/ETC, both coins can co-exist. Jihan isn't going to attack anything because nobody is going to follow his altcoin, he will not have enough hashrate to attack without lossing a lot of money.

There will be no hardfork anyway, I was just asking a theoretical question about who get to keep the BTC token in the case of a theoretical hardfork ETH/ETC style.

6Asmodeus6

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

I will hold it until something realy important changes my mind. Bitcoin was a realy good plus on my life and made me learn a lot of things about currencies.I didn't think that i will get rich over a night just by owning it like those news titles says.I mean it would be cool though Cheesy

.If I have many reasons to dump it i will do it but otherwise, I will hold it forever.

European Central Bank

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1087

None. If you ask me, the whole thing is an excuse to attack the real bitcoin blockchain with their hash rates. And, by the looks of it, they will nuke it into oblivion. There simply is no other logical explanation.

Time to shapeshift what little I have left, I guess.

uh, that's exactly what they want you to do. do you think anyone other than them is gonna have anything to do with this? do you think they're gonna give up mining the coin with real value? this is how they get real bitcoins for less from you.

Krimster

member

Activity: 84

Merit: 11

Quote from: cellard on July 17, 2017, 01:26:25 PM

Quote from: gentlemand on July 17, 2017, 12:30:35 PM

https://twitter.com/ViaBTC/status/886798784348532737

So Bitmain and friends will be forking a new chain on August 1st whatever happens by the looks of things, as well as Segwitting on the main one.

I assume we'll all get some of this to play with so what will you be doing with it? Would you dump instantly or hold fire and see what happens?

Some rather deep pockets will be desperately keen to make a success of it so I may hang on to it for a bit for a lark.

Just think about it. Who wants to be part of ChinaCoin, with inferior software, when you can just stay on the legacy chain, be teamed up with all the whales which I suspect aren't going too be too happy about Bitmain's hardfork, and also get to have segwit without no hardfork? Seems pretty obvious to me. All these hardforks are dead on arrival. Im probably going to dump them for more free real Bitcoin.

None. If you ask me, the whole thing is an excuse to attack the real bitcoin blockchain with their hash rates. And, by the looks of it, they will nuke it into oblivion. There simply is no other logical explanation.

Time to shapeshift what little I have left, I guess.

d5000

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 6249

Decentralization Maximalist

So this leads to my question: Who gets to keep the original "BTC" token tag? exchanges should list the original chain as BTC, I hope they don't pull an "ETC" and pretend that the altcoin isn't the forked chain.

For me there could be potentially different approaches, but at the end I think the BTC tag will continue to be used for the "traditional" chain.

At the exchanges related to big-blocker mining pools (e.g. ViaBTC's exchange) there is a minimal probability that they will classify the "Bitcoin Cash" chain as "BTC" and the other chain perhaps as "Classic Bitcoin" or something similar (I think I remember they have called the "old" chain "Bitcoin frozen" in their announcement).

But as the Bitcoin Cash branding, from the start, is a bit different from the Bitcoin branding (they compare themselves to "Bitcoin", so they're saying they're not Bitcoin, at least not the "pure Bitcoin") I think most big exchanges will stick with BTC for the traditional chain. As big blocker exchanges have only a small market share, I think to not confuse their users, they will rapidly switch again to use "BTC" for "old Bitcoin" - they may not even try to change it.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: deisik on July 19, 2017, 12:04:36 PM

Quote from: gentlemand on July 18, 2017, 07:41:24 AM

Everyone in this thread is spreading FUD, BIP91 is compatible with UASF so there won't be any chain split. Besides segwitx2 has over 90% support now.

It's not a chain split. It's a fork into a new coin. They're making no attempt to claim it's Bitcoin

And this seems to be the most dangerous part

At first I thought it was kind of joke, but then I read the twitter post by your link and the whole announcement, and it doesn't look they are kidding. So as I got it, they are going to fork off finally. ViaBTC seems to be closely affiliated with Bitmain and Jihan, and in layman terms this basically means war. I hope that I'm missing something or misinterpreted something else, but if they are really going to fork Bitcoin (making a new coin off it), they will be dumping their old bitcoins and likely trying to attack the genuine blockchain since this is the only way the chain is going to survive. Why do I not see and hear the alarms raised?

Quote from: gentlemand on July 18, 2017, 07:41:24 AM

They are still gonna signal BIP91, so that is a good thing but I have no idea why they decided to start with their shenanigans now

Something is fishy here, very fishy, to say the least

Everyone in this thread is spreading FUD, BIP91 is compatible with UASF so there won't be any chain split. Besides segwitx2 has over 90% support now.

It's not a chain split. It's a fork into a new coin. They're making no attempt to claim it's Bitcoin.

If they are forking off the Bitcoin blockchain, that bodes bad for Bitcoin. The name is irrelevant (and they call it "Bitcoin Cash")

I don't care what they do with their hashrate and the client they run as long as if there is a hardfork we keep the BTC token tag.

So this leads to my question: Who gets to keep the original "BTC" token tag? exchanges should list the original chain as BTC, I hope they don't pull an "ETC" and pretend that the altcoin isn't the forked chain.

Why do you care for things which are utterly inconsequential?

As to me, we should care about what they can and are actually going to do to the original blockchain. Why doesn't anyone ask this question? If they are attack Bitcoin under whatever name, the outcome will be essentially the same, and it won't be good for Bitcoin given their hashrates. This is what I've been telling all this time, and this is the most dangerous thing that might come out of the current showdown. Or do you really think they are going to coexist with Bitcoin peacefully? That seems next to impossible to me. The whole shebang is designed to kill or, at least, heavily hurt Bitcoin. Am I paranoid, or am I not enough paranoid?

European Central Bank

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1087

Quote from: deisik on July 19, 2017, 12:04:36 PM

I don't care what they do with their hashrate and the client they run as long as if there is a hardfork we keep the BTC token tag.

So this leads to my question: Who gets to keep the original "BTC" token tag? exchanges should list the original chain as BTC, I hope they don't pull an "ETC" and pretend that the altcoin isn't the forked chain.

https://twitter.com/coinbase/status/887703206435758080

coinbase doesn't even consider it worth taking a little trouble to collect for their customers. it looks doa already. i'll still be collecting mine and dumping instantly.

cellard

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1252

Quote from: gentlemand on July 18, 2017, 07:41:24 AM

Everyone in this thread is spreading FUD, BIP91 is compatible with UASF so there won't be any chain split. Besides segwitx2 has over 90% support now.

It's not a chain split. It's a fork into a new coin. They're making no attempt to claim it's Bitcoin

And this seems to be the most dangerous part

At first I thought it was kind of joke, but then I read the twitter post by your link and the whole announcement, and it doesn't look they are kidding. So as I got it, they are going to fork off finally. ViaBTC seems to be closely affiliated with Bitmain and Jihan, and in layman terms this basically means war. I hope that I'm missing something or misinterpreted something else, but if they are really going to fork Bitcoin (making a new coin off it), they will be dumping their old bitcoins and likely trying to attack the genuine blockchain since this is the only way the chain is going to survive. Why do I not see and hear the alarms raised?

Quote from: gentlemand on July 18, 2017, 07:41:24 AM

They are still gonna signal BIP91, so that is a good thing but I have no idea why they decided to start with their shenanigans now

Something is fishy here, very fishy, to say the least

Quote from: gentlemand on July 18, 2017, 07:41:24 AM

Everyone in this thread is spreading FUD, BIP91 is compatible with UASF so there won't be any chain split. Besides segwitx2 has over 90% support now.

It's not a chain split. It's a fork into a new coin. They're making no attempt to claim it's Bitcoin.

If they are forking off the Bitcoin blockchain, that bodes bad for Bitcoin. The name is irrelevant (and they call it "Bitcoin Cash")

I don't care what they do with their hashrate and the client they run as long as if there is a hardfork we keep the BTC token tag.

So this leads to my question: Who gets to keep the original "BTC" token tag? exchanges should list the original chain as BTC, I hope they don't pull an "ETC" and pretend that the altcoin isn't the forked chain.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Everyone in this thread is spreading FUD, BIP91 is compatible with UASF so there won't be any chain split. Besides segwitx2 has over 90% support now.

It's not a chain split. It's a fork into a new coin. They're making no attempt to claim it's Bitcoin

And this seems to be the most dangerous part

At first I thought it was kind of joke, but then I read the twitter post by your link and the whole announcement, and it doesn't look they are kidding. So as I got it, they are going to fork off finally. ViaBTC seems to be closely affiliated with Bitmain and Jihan, and in layman terms this basically means the war is coming. I hope that I'm missing something or misinterpreted something else, but if they are really going to fork Bitcoin (making a new coin off it), they will be dumping their old bitcoins and likely trying to attack the genuine blockchain since this is the only way their chain is going to survive. Why do I not see and hear the alarms raised?

Quote from: gentlemand on July 18, 2017, 07:41:24 AM

They are still gonna signal BIP91, so that is a good thing but I have no idea why they decided to start with their shenanigans now

Something is fishy here, very fishy, to say the least

Quote from: gentlemand on July 18, 2017, 12:17:37 PM

Everyone in this thread is spreading FUD, BIP91 is compatible with UASF so there won't be any chain split. Besides segwitx2 has over 90% support now.

It's not a chain split. It's a fork into a new coin. They're making no attempt to claim it's Bitcoin.

If they are forking off the Bitcoin blockchain, that bodes bad for Bitcoin. The name is irrelevant (and they call it "Bitcoin Cash")

cellard

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1252

Quote from: cellard on July 18, 2017, 11:22:12 AM

There's only one real bitcoin, and that is the one backed by the best devs, so that means bitcoin core + original chain. Every other bitcoin is an altcoin by definition, and these altcoins will get dumped into 0.

What are they going to do with the 2X chain then? Core doesn't have any mining power and it's being activated in a way beyond their control. The 2X chain is going to become Bitcoin for now whether they like it or not. Are they going to suck it up and try to improve 2X or toss their cookies?

No such thing as "x2 chain". This is just activation of segwit. We are yet to see who is really going to be stupid enough to push for an actual hardfork. We will see later this year, for now we are safe, but we will see another crash later this year when the big blockers are back to ruin the good uptrend as always.

d5000

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 6249

Decentralization Maximalist

If I, at the time of the fork, am one of the first happy Bitcoin users that gets the "Bitcoin Cash" transferred to an exchange and there is someone that wants to buy them for a decent price (more than 20% of the Bitcoin price), then I'll try to dump. But I will try to re-buy some well in the cellar (under 5% or the Bitcoin price), maybe it's an opportunity.

I wonder if Bitcoin Cash counts as "BTU fork" for Bitfinex, so BCU holders get "Bitcoin Cash" tokens? As it is "Emergent Consensus", it should be the case ... If yes, then the price of the BCU Bitfinex token could be an indication of the price we could expect after the fork.

maku

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1000

They are still gonna signal BIP91, so that is a good thing but I have no idea why they decided to start with their shenanigans now.
Their forked coins will be immediately boycotted by everyone else and I don't care about it at all.
In the worst case scenario, it will be similar to the situation after ETH forked, the prime chain of EHT is now 25x more expensive than before forking.

richardsNY

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1091

I will do the right thing, and that's converting them to Bitcoin directly if there will be a BTC/X trading pair, or I'll sell them for fiat and buy Bitcoin with these freshly obtained funds. One thing is sure, I'll sell them right away as I have no interest in holding any altcoins for a longer time. Especially because I do expect some sort of a pump to happen at the time these altcoins start being tradable. Less on exchange coins at initial stage allows entities to quite easily boost the price to their desired levels. In the end, if miners desire to fork out, then let them exit. It means that we have less toxic elements to deal with in the future.

gentlemand

legendary

Activity: 2604

Merit: 3056

Welt Am Draht

Quote from: cellard on July 18, 2017, 11:22:12 AM

There's only one real bitcoin, and that is the one backed by the best devs, so that means bitcoin core + original chain. Every other bitcoin is an altcoin by definition, and these altcoins will get dumped into 0.

What are they going to do with the 2X chain then? Core doesn't have any mining power and it's being activated in a way beyond their control. The 2X chain is going to become Bitcoin for now whether they like it or not. Are they going to suck it up and try to improve 2X or toss their cookies?

cellard

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1252

Quote from: Amph on July 18, 2017, 09:03:34 AM

for me all other chain that is not the new main one or the old main one, will be seen as an altcoin, and i'll threat that in the same way, if there will be enugh volume i'll hold for a better value

but in the end i'll transform it to "real bitcoin", for sure the bitmain coin can't be the new mainchain, it's clearly a take off because they got mad about the new forced segwit activation, bring me a bender mem for this please...

There's only one real bitcoin, and that is the one backed by the best devs, so that means bitcoin core + original chain. Every other bitcoin is an altcoin by definition, and these altcoins will get dumped into 0.

If you make the mistake of selling your original chain coins for the hard fork scams you will lose your money.

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1072

for me all other chain that is not the new main one or the old main one, will be seen as an altcoin, and i'll threat that in the same way, if there will be enugh volume i'll hold for a better value

but in the end i'll transform it to "real bitcoin", for sure the bitmain coin can't be the new mainchain, it's clearly a take off because they got mad about the new forced segwit activation, bring me a bender mem for this please...

gentlemand

legendary

Activity: 2604

Merit: 3056

Welt Am Draht

Quote from: Denker on July 18, 2017, 07:35:21 AM

I still believe this is a big bluff. I will believe it when it happens. And if it indeed should happen I will be probably very happy as we will finally got rid off of these clowns!
In terms of the Chinacoin I don't know.Maybe I will sell a part and hold the rest to dump it later if the chain should still have any serious monetary value, what I highly doubt to be honest.

The thing is as it's been given a new name and is a self declared separate coin there's not much to bluff really. It's off to do its own thing though I've no idea what the endgame is.