Why not treat BU as Alt? | Bitcointalksearch.org

exadex.org

full member

Activity: 122

Merit: 100

The Bitcoin company BitGo made a statement on how they would treat BTU when it comes to a hard fork:

Quote

BitGo considers any hard fork which is rolled out without industry-wide consensus, and therefore splits the network, to be an altcoin, not Bitcoin itself. This is irrespective of how much hash power the forked coin may have.

You can find the whole statement on https://blog.bitgo.com/bitgos-approach-to-handling-a-hard-fork-71e572506d7d#.1alajkzg7

I really recommend to read it.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3071

Quote from: d5000 on March 24, 2017, 05:30:22 AM

No, I'm not referring to bugs or so. I'm referring to the Emergent Consensus model. How would it behave in the wild, what incentives would it offer to miners to increase or decrease block size, etc.

That could only be tested in an environment where real money is involved. Likely there will be much manipulation, above all in the initial stage, but perhaps something usable could be the outcome if both parties don't play too unfair.

Indeed.

And has the BU testnet simulated it's (now confirmed) intention to re-org/orphan attack the Bitcoin blockchain? I wonder why not

d5000

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 6249

Decentralization Maximalist

Quote from: franky1 on March 22, 2017, 02:46:59 PM

Quote from: d5000 on March 22, 2017, 02:44:26 PM

But the reason why I would like to see a "BU altcoin" is that it would be a way to test it thoroughly "in the wild". As many Core supporters (including me) have doubts that its consensus will work as expected, it would be the opportunity to the BU team to show that it works well.

cough testnet cough

run it on testnet.. oh look now you have your own separate network to test it in the wild

No, I'm not referring to bugs or so. I'm referring to the Emergent Consensus model. How would it behave in the wild, what incentives would it offer to miners to increase or decrease block size, etc.

That could only be tested in an environment where real money is involved. Likely there will be much manipulation, above all in the initial stage, but perhaps something usable could be the outcome if both parties don't play too unfair.

RawDog

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1026

Quote from: aso118 on March 23, 2017, 08:22:43 AM

Quote from: Reid on March 23, 2017, 02:11:25 AM

I dont get it.
I have read so much yet I cant still understand.
They say it is an altcoin but alts should have a price right?
Some say it is part of bitcoin, if that is the case then there should not be a price for this or else they will be a competitor.
If they will get their profits through bitcoin only then I can't say they are an alt but more like an option to transact.
Which is it really? Can someone make it clear?

The problem is there will be 2 coins - and the market will decide which one it will attribute more value too.
If people find that BTU implementation suits them, its value might be more than BTC.

Bitcoin Unlimited is 'BTC' - the real bitcoin.

Bitcoin Core is 'BALT' - bullshit alt

Don't let SegWit have the label 'BTC'. They can change their fucking label too. People who don't follow the details will mistakenly think 'BTC' is the real or original bitcoin. BU is the original bitcoin and should take the BTC label. SegWit is a wild deviation from the original protocol and is the alt coin

aso118

legendary

Activity: 1918

Merit: 1012

★Nitrogensports.eu★

Quote from: Reid on March 23, 2017, 02:11:25 AM

I dont get it.
I have read so much yet I cant still understand.
They say it is an altcoin but alts should have a price right?
Some say it is part of bitcoin, if that is the case then there should not be a price for this or else they will be a competitor.
If they will get their profits through bitcoin only then I can't say they are an alt but more like an option to transact.
Which is it really? Can someone make it clear?

The problem is there will be 2 coins - and the market will decide which one it will attribute more value too.
If people find that BTU implementation suits them, its value might be more than BTC.

danherbias07

legendary

Activity: 3108

Merit: 1115

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Are we getting divided because of this?
I though bitcoin unlimited is just like Bitcoin Core but with better services not an altcoin.
So why are we getting worried about this. Why take it as an altcoin? It doesn't really have a value right?

I dont really know why there is a war here about being the altcoin thing.
I just referred to what I read here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_Unlimited

Quote

Bitcoin Unlimited (BU) is a full node software client for the bitcoin network. Compared to the Bitcoin Core client hard-coding the block size limit to 1 megabyte, from which it is forked, Bitcoin Unlimited removes the limit, allowing the users to determine the block size by consensus.

I dont really know the deeper part of it but I just used my English understanding.

RawDog

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1026

SegWit is the Alt.
BU is the original Satoshi Bitcoin

Please don't forget that again.

dinofelis

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 629

Quote from: gentlemand on March 21, 2017, 09:01:01 PM

Quote from: shinratensei_ on March 21, 2017, 08:19:02 PM

Because the Bitcoin Unlimited is a fork from the bitcoin itself. It's mean if that will disrupt the crypto community.
We do not need the Bitcoin Unlimited coin. It will be worthless in the future.

Well, if I were in charge of Unlimited I would start it off as a fresh alt and forget forking completely. Their blockchain could start in a similar way to Clams, take an image of every BTC balance and start from there.

That is exactly what a hard fork is about: take the balances of the previous coin, and apply a different protocol.

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3206

Merit: 1069

Quote from: Reid on March 23, 2017, 02:11:25 AM

I dont get it.
I have read so much yet I cant still understand.
They say it is an altcoin but alts should have a price right?
Some say it is part of bitcoin, if that is the case then there should not be a price for this or else they will be a competitor.
If they will get their profits through bitcoin only then I can't say they are an alt but more like an option to transact.
Which is it really? Can someone make it clear?

miners decide if the majority move to the other chain there will be a split otherwise not, this majority is 75%

the problem is that even if BU win with 75% of consensus, it will still be listed as an altcoin, exchange say so, this mean thta people will have both chain operative, and double the amount of coins

one for BU and one for core, basically the split will occur because we want to preserve core, this is how i understood it

royalfestus

hero member

Activity: 2408

Merit: 516

Quote from: soul-impact on March 22, 2017, 08:18:23 AM

bitcoin unlimited is not Bitcoin. It is created to destroy bitcoin and destroy the decentralized system. Most of bitcoin unlimited will obviously controlled by the Chinese and when it fully realeases, you will understand how idiot it can be. The chinese will control most of the mining hash rate. Moreover, we can easily start a 51 attack in bitcoin unlimited due to the reason that there are not many small miners anymore

The gang up against segwit for this long still burders me. IMO it is still the best way to go about the challenges, BU supporters idea looks selfish and have hidden agenda. The idea has not been justified for no course. If it result in centralization by the chinese, u wont ever expect an ETF approval with that

user27

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: DomainMagnate on March 21, 2017, 07:58:10 PM

When we can have both btc and BU co exist, why not treat BU like another Altcoin similar to btc?.
Why can't both compliment each other?

I think it would be a good idea to list Bitcoin Unlimited as an altcoin because it is not the original bitcoin. I mean it is pretty much against what satoshi originally thought bitcoin was going to be and it is developed not by the core team.

I’m not commenting on whether or not the fork is superior or not, but the name bitcoin should be reserved for the bitcoin core team in my opinion only.

Bitcoin unlimited should be called bitcoin unlimited into the future, and be traded against the actual bitcoin on major exchanges. Most exchanges have already commented on this as well.

Quote from: Reid on March 23, 2017, 02:11:25 AM

I dont get it.
I have read so much yet I cant still understand.
They say it is an altcoin but alts should have a price right?
Some say it is part of bitcoin, if that is the case then there should not be a price for this or else they will be a competitor.
If they will get their profits through bitcoin only then I can't say they are an alt but more like an option to transact.
Which is it really? Can someone make it clear?

I'd lean to BU as altcoin but others may disagree.

Reid

hero member

Activity: 2912

Merit: 642

I dont get it.
I have read so much yet I cant still understand.
They say it is an altcoin but alts should have a price right?
Some say it is part of bitcoin, if that is the case then there should not be a price for this or else they will be a competitor.
If they will get their profits through bitcoin only then I can't say they are an alt but more like an option to transact.
Which is it really? Can someone make it clear?

Yuuto

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 501

Quote from: DomainMagnate on March 21, 2017, 07:58:10 PM

When we can have both btc and BU co exist, why not treat BU like another Altcoin similar to btc?.
Why can't both compliment each other?

A lot of exchanges has already made statements in public that they will only honor Bitcoin Core as the actual bitcoin, and Bitcoin Unlimited will only be listed as an altcoin to trade against the BTC.

This sounds like a great idea to me and will probably appeal a lot to the speculators, as Bitcoin Core vs Bitcoin unlimited will probably become the next biggest altcoin trading pair.

I doubt bitcoin unlimited will ever become “bitcoin”. It will always known as “bitcoin unlimited”, whilst being listed on bitcoin and altcoin exchanges as the symbol BTU instead of BTC.

xypos

sr. member

Activity: 532

Merit: 250

Quote from: DomainMagnate on March 21, 2017, 07:58:10 PM

When we can have both btc and BU co exist, why not treat BU like another Altcoin similar to btc?.
Why can't both compliment each other?

Well it is a fork of bitcoin itself… And it is a direct competitor of bitcoin so it is really hard to see it as an altcoin.

There is a lot of infighting right now happening across the bitcoin community because of this hard fork discussion. Honestly i’d rather have the decision made sooner than having people spreading FUD and talking shit on both sides on a daily basis.

The Bitcoin Unlimited supporters will probably push to get BTU as the actual BTC, after the hard fork if their coin is listed as an altcoin on major exchanges.

mrcash02

hero member

Activity: 1190

Merit: 525

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

Quote from: electronicash on March 22, 2017, 03:04:47 PM

isn't BU a ticker for Bullshit?
whoever supports this bullshit is pretty much dying to have a ton of bitcoin to which they are now trying to derail everything just to put panic to everyone. of course they don't just want it to drag down to 1000. less than $100/btc is much better so we can grab a stash and once again try to get ETF approved.

At this moment BTC price is falling like an inverted rocket. I don't think this was the most smart idea to execute. Total instability on Bitcoin price and many investors are in doubt know about what to do, what means they can stop using Bitcoin and going back to fiat again. The procediments for laymen investors aren't clear enough. Angry

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1004

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: d5000 on March 22, 2017, 02:44:26 PM

There is one more advantage: You would have a very small blockchain at the beginning. Bitcoin "beginners" wouldn't have to download 107 GB and that would be a competitive advantage.

But the reason why I would like to see a "BU altcoin" is that it would be a way to test it thoroughly "in the wild". As many Core supporters (including me) have doubts that its consensus will work as expected, it would be the opportunity to the BU team to show that it works well. In this case it's even possible that at the end Core adopts it and the "original BTC" would come with BU rules.

Not illogical but I am doubtful you would be able to compel the supports of BU with the "advantages" of forking off.

electronicash

legendary

Activity: 3066

Merit: 1049

Eloncoin.org - Mars, here we come!

isn't BU a ticker for Bullshit?
whoever supports this bullshit is pretty much dying to have a ton of bitcoin to which they are now trying to derail everything just to put panic to everyone. of course they don't just want it to drag down to 1000. less than $100/btc is much better so we can grab a stash and once again try to get ETF approved.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

Quote from: d5000 on March 22, 2017, 02:44:26 PM

But the reason why I would like to see a "BU altcoin" is that it would be a way to test it thoroughly "in the wild". As many Core supporters (including me) have doubts that its consensus will work as expected, it would be the opportunity to the BU team to show that it works well. In this case it's even possible that at the end Core adopts it and the "original BTC" would come with BU rules.

cough testnet cough

run it on testnet.. oh look now you have your own separate network to test it in the wild

d5000

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 6249

Decentralization Maximalist

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 21, 2017, 10:29:23 PM

Quote from: gentlemand on March 21, 2017, 10:25:29 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 21, 2017, 10:09:23 PM

No one who really supports BU would support that, as we obviously want the legacy blockchain and everything that comes with it, including an undiluted asset. We want Bitcoin to scale , not an alt.

But let's assume that the Unlimited alt works great and people find it more useful than Core. Over time more and more people move across and it usurps Core. [...]
In that scenario it started off with a snapshot of the original chain and eventually it squirts past it out of pure merit and in circumstances with no baggage whatsoever.

I could agree with that. You might even say that it would be even more respected and 'cleaner' since it would have none of the tainted history of Bitcoin (mt gox, etc).

There is one more advantage: You would have a very small blockchain at the beginning. Bitcoin "beginners" wouldn't have to download 107 GB and that would be a competitive advantage.

But the reason why I would like to see a "BU altcoin" is that it would be a way to test it thoroughly "in the wild". As many Core supporters (including me) have doubts that its consensus will work as expected, it would be the opportunity to the BU team to show that it works well. In this case it's even possible that at the end Core adopts it and the "original BTC" would come with BU rules.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1004

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: cabron on March 22, 2017, 09:40:36 AM

Isn't BU an altcoin already? its an alternative coin so its an ALT.

No, although apparently some exchanges offer futures on it ... IF there is a network split.

Topic: Why not treat BU as Alt? (Read 2340 times)