Actually the BSV parge blocks are miner created transactions. So they never had to propagate the network before hand, which does not test the network.
No they've successfully tested >60mb blocks sustained for days, accepted through mempools, so far just on the testnet. That's just the beginning, working towards gigabyte blocks soon!!
A quick look on miners distribution at coin.dance can give you an idea why it's easier in BSV than BCH.
Jezus, you are a fucking broken record. First listening to core for a year, now babies with the same shit.
Oh, what we have here? One ad hominem with no rebutal. Sounds familiar to me...
Babies are the new cortardians. What's to discuss here... BCH has three more mining pools than BSV. Congrats, you're winning so hard!
And it never occurred to you that there is no plan to attract short term profit seeking new pools if existing ones use more hash than it gets paid from reward subsidies.
Lol it's hilarious for you of all people to be complaining about technical discussion, as one of the most ludicrous trolls on memo. Go smoke some more crack like your papa Craig, nutso
if y'all are going to complain about them mining more than the market price & also complain about them having all the hash maybe you could at least notice that those are the same thing
I don't understand your answer: who are them? BCH miners are not BSV miners (mostly).
coingeek is mining BSV with more hash than indicated by the exchange market price-- THEREFORE they're the vast majority of the hash on BSV, those aren't two separate facts, they're one
Who cares? The fact that they're such a large portion of the hashrate is the issue, it shows massive centralization. Especially considering they only have one node implementation
Ah, I have not watched their testnet. They have not had a block with more than 18MB transmitted on chain as far as I know. Everything larger on chain was miner generated.
Craig and his pimp Calvin are lying to you, mungojelly.
Faketoshi and his pimp Calvin are lying to you, idiot.
