Create account

If SV/CSW manages to take over BCH I will loose faith in Bitcoin as a concept and will be looking to reduce my position. I think many feel the same as me...
replied · 191d
it seems that some forces are trying to divide the community, make us forget about what unites us and what we believe in... hard times happen. don't give up :)
replied · 191d
The pageant will be over soon, but the'll never stop with the re-runs. Strength in numbers.
replied · 191d
current drama should be motivating everyone to make Bitcoin-protocol as set in stone as possible, to make sure no one in the future is able to repeat this with whatever crazy changes
replied · 191d
Sure - but I see ABC's roadmap as critical optimizations in order to scale to terrabyte blocks.
replied · 191d
i agree. i think we need to do some optimizations before we lock the protocol. definitely agree with SV team that we should do that, but not before the timing is right.
replied · 191d
I disagree – for the foreseeable future, hard forks are needed to implement scaling improvements. What needs to be set in stone is which changes we'll approve when fork time occurs.
replied · 191d
replied · 191d
DigiByte isn't so easily attacked, 5 mining algos.
replied · 190d
I'll be going all in on ETH. As it is, I'm split between ETH and BCH.
replied · 191d
This is what miners are MEANT to do, and miners failed to do this with BTC, why they allowed Core to fuck it up. CSW is trying to prevent the same from happening with BCH.
replied · 191d
Seconded, I will move on to another coin, perhaps see what POS is all about.
replied · 191d
PoS is shit, never go there
replied · 191d
You are probably right, but i'd like to see what it's about.
replied · 191d
Its basically people who have lot of money and they don't need to do any work, just hold most amount of coins, being able to dictate all the rules. That's what PoS is about.
replied · 191d
Hmmm, sounds oddly similar to the current situation with BCHSV POW.
replied · 191d
Except in POW you have constantly invest to keep up and be profitable. In POS you don't, and that is a major difference (and drawback with POS AFAIK).
replied · 191d
How is it similar? BCH SV are miners who have to do the work and keep doing the work of mining, there is nothing PoS there. Them using their money to mine BCH SV is benefitical for us.
replied · 191d
Wrong. BCH SV is a centralization of a few miners under the influence of a lunatic professor and a billionaire. I think it's similar to what you said about PoS.
replied · 191d
PoS doesn't require any work.. PoW does. There is a massive difference there.
replied · 191d
Ok, but your other point was that people who have lot of money are able to dictate all the rules with PoS. This seems to be the case with BCH SV. These are your words, read back.
replied · 191d
WIth POW your money is used up continuously, with POS your money earns you more at a rate proportional to the size of your initial investment/size of network.
replied · 191d
There is a difference in just having lot of money & using this to have power to make decisions, This is PoS based system. When you have to do the work instead, its not the same thing.
replied · 191d
No, its not centralisation. One can create other shitcoins or split the chain but needs to fight it out with SV miners, by putting in their own money where their mouth is & doing PoW
replied · 191d
One entity owning 70%+ of the hashrate is not centralization? What happens after the fork? One entity has 100% hashrate. This is like fiat. An entity has the power to print money.
replied · 191d
You clearly never read the white paper.
replied · 190d
One entity doesn't own 70% of the hash rate.
replied · 190d
Do you need a source? Google?
replied · 191d
Can any miner prevent others from mining also? They can't. That's why there is no centralisation. Central banks are because they are only entity that have ability to create money.
replied · 190d
The person with the power can can orphan new miners blocks.
replied · 191d
With central banks, they are only entity having this power, no one else has it. In Bitcoin this is not the case. That's why Bitcoin isn't centralised even if only 1 person is mining it
replied · 190d
Of it is only a couple pools mining CSW's ShitVision coin then it is centralised. BSV can fork off and take its mining power. BCH doesnt need them.
replied · 190d
You still don't understand what centralisation is. It is power of some entity to prevent others doing what they are doing, its having one rule for one entity & another rule for others
replied · 190d
No that is not what centralisation is. Centralisation is having majority hash under one miner/mining pool.
replied · 190d
Nope, that is not centralisation. As I said, you don't understand this at all.
replied · 190d
they will never understand...
replied · 191d
Maybe so, but the other side is adding opt codes not needed and side chains like wormhole.
replied · 191d
The other side is not "adding Wormhole". Wormhole is a layer on top. Has nothing to do with consensus protocol.
replied · 191d
Wormhole is destroying good money (BCH) which is not good, it doesn't scale Bitcoin, it helps Jihan make profits at the expense of Bitcoin BCH.
replied · 191d
+1. Lots of exciting projects in the crypto world! BCH is the most exciting for me, but I prefer to move instead of waiting for CSW to blacklist my UTXOS.
replied · 191d
ABC's power grab sure backfired spectacularly
replied · 191d
Not me. I still think BCH is the only chance to become money for the world no matter who wins. Everybody wants to scale, and that's the most important thing.