Topic: Why Bitcoin won’t hardfork like Ethereum (Read 12733 times)

What was kind of missed here is the fact that the ethereum hard fork happened fairly abruptly after a huge hack, whereas bitcoins may or may not hard fork for fundamental reasons. It's centralization vs. Decentralization.

Because all people like BTC! Not like hardfork

There are fundamental differences between the bitcoin and ethereum. These differences are certainly related to the protocol of each cryptocurrency like as the reason of their existence. It's sure that all of these will influence the way of a hardfork so it is wrong to compare each other. But the most important between bitcoin and not only the eth but all the altcoins is the network effect of the leader. So if the big base of users which supports the bitcoin and maintains this effect ceases to exist due to hardfork and the price crashes then people who caused it will understand that maybe there was not any reason for the scaling debate because the remaining bitcoin users will be very few to full the blocks with their transactions.

I believe Bitcoin will hard fork into Bitcoin China and Bitcoin ex-China.


They talk about the market, but who/what represent the market? Us? Me? Well, I have no idea how to determine the fate of minority chain.

According to http://xtnodes.com/#all_nodes charts where one can see a clear majority for core nodes being run, I got the impression that all other node types are not distributed at all but merely in the hands of some single entities.
That's where the people are with their hearts.

Now watching the craze on Bitfinex or Hitbtc regarding split token exchanges ... you are right, that's where their money is. Less emotional habits developing.
I have no doubt the masses of people will rush into straigt direction to biggest revenue promises, in a bee line. Whoever telling them the biggest riches will win.

Dear all
I do not like hardfork in any way!

While I do agree that a fork would be a terrible idea for maintaining both chains, I think BU might fork just out of spite/ they really believe that they will get the majority.

I clearly hope that we will not hardfork. Some will argue that Ethereum recovered, but this coin always had strange price movements and its reputation is now badly tainted.

I think this is the reality that this miners don't understand, Bitcoin derived its value through demand, if users decided to opt for another token, the demand will reduce and the value will move towards zero. Miners don't want to see the big picture here and there are ways to accommodated. Non of these miners can claim to have funded any developmental project on Bitcoin

in the end what really decide the fate of bitcoin, is not either the dev the miners or exchange, but the investors, if investors keep dumpiing in fear of what will happen

it can possibility scare the miners and force them to do the less disastrous choise, and attaccking the minority chain is one of those things

Exactly, value really relies on market response.

Even the mere fact that it is possible, would scare away investors. These miners has had enough power and leverage over the rest of the people using Bitcoin and I for one would welcome any change in the code to eliminate that power. These SonsAbitches are killing Bitcoin for their own profit and they want the rest of us to sit back and take it up the a$$.

They seem to forget that Bitcoin has no value, if nobody wants to buy or use it, so the power is not in their hands.

Article is in detail but looks like one sided but love this part;

Talking about 51% attack, miners can't keep attacking minority chain forever like what happened to ETC. Attack stopped after few hours/days.

As if the market will have any other choice. That was a convenient lie.

Now that Bitcoin is at least 51% mined from China, prepare for future regulations to be enforced on all transactions. The reference to Taiwan a subliminal warning to Westerners of their future ass kicking humiliation.

The BU mining cartel admitted it can and will 51% attack when required to.

I warned you all last year. And you all said I was spreading FUD.

When you guys are serious about decapitating the centralized power of the miners, come talk to me.

I think PPC survive with pow+pos algo.

The majority's goal wouldn't be to 51% attack the smaller chain forever, just shut them down temporarily so
there's not a confusing network split.  Minority would be forced to change Pow.

I imagine the PoW could be changed in some small way but still remain SHA256, so their ASICS would still be used. 

Weird, and onedimensional rant from 8btc IMHO

As if the mining industry would be able to 51% attack the smaller chain forever.....LOL

They would have to permanently keep tabs on the smaller chain, putting their larger chain at risk. Also who would stop the smaller chain from changing the algorithm to something else? POS? Or anything besides SHA256?

Then the miners are fucked and would be stuck with their inferior BUcoin and expensive hardware forever.

I guess all this bullshit will just make ETH, PPC, DSH, XMR and LTC prices explode if the shit really hits the fan  

dynamic nodes and pools wont trigger unless there is safe majority of three things
1. node acceptance
2. merchant acceptance
3. pools keeping the data secure by high chainwork (laymens combination of hashrate and height)

however
core could release their rage (BIP9 at lower than 95%, UASF or change of algo) and make a contentious attack against dynamic implementations

this is why all the brands which have the ability to accept blocks over 1mb have refused gmaxwells invitation to split away. because the dynamic block implementations will only trigger when there is consensus.
this is why all the brands that have the ability to accept blocks over 1mb have not set any deadlines. not bribed the community with txdata twisting code using new keypairs and blockdata structures to offer discounts, not included nuclear banhammer code to make threats.

they have instead for the last couple years just plodded along allowing the community to freely choose or not choose the many diverse implementations that allow over 1mb base block.

and thats what scares core the most to feel so threatened by the community that they needed to avoid community consensus by going soft and avoid a node vote.. but also shooting themselves in the foot by giving just pools the vote. but pools are smart enough to wait to see (unofficially) what the nodes want to do.(pools wont vote unless clear high node/merchant flags are being waved)

good article, i liked it.

my opinion which i think is worth mentioning here is that the mining industry is not stupid enough to fork without consensus, meaning without the majority of hashrate supporting a single thing. it is simply way too risky move to do.

imagine a split happens and one of the chains' coins be worth a lot less. this simply means they are losing 12.5BTC to 14.5BTC (depending on fees) worth of revenue. and depending on how low that price would be, they can potentially lose a lot of money on each block. now considering they mine multiple blocks each day this loss is also multiplied each day and sums up to a big enough $$$ number that will definitely make any person with smallest of brains think twice.

And what do you think the market will decide? People will be harassing the exchanges to credit them their fork coins and allow trading of them.

People stand to make a percentage of additional money when they get credited both forks coins as the sum of their value will likely be higher than the preforked bitcoin.