Create account

replied 2078d
We don't really know which node big pools are using. The fact that they don't signal doesn't mean they are not using BCHN
2 / 29
replied 2078d
But they did choose signal around IFP (unless that was a consequence of vote signalling). I imagine they would have the same motivation to do so now?
1
replied 2078d
Basically, Amaury is smart. I can't believe this is just a blind gamble for him. I think he has reached out to at least some major miners and already knows their intent.
1
replied 2078d
No only three smaller pools signaled including bitcoin.com. They are just mining less these days that's why percentage dropped
1
1,111
replied 2078d
There's really no incentives for miners to participate in this scheme IMO
replied 2078d
Actually, mining hw vendors have been profiting a lot historically. I would be interested in their funding background too.
1
10,000
replied 2077d
But a new algo requires the development of new asics right? how to keep the chain secure until then? CPU mining?
replied 2077d
There are other asics/agos used for coins that have hash rates comparable to BCH e.g. X11
1
5,000
replied 2077d
No, ASICs worsen centralization compared to general use hw.
replied 2077d
I don't agree with this, people who buy Asic for a specific algo are way more loyal than general purpose HWs. It's better for security and mining is always centralized because of pools
replied 2077d
Way more "loyal" like the handful of chinese sha256 (majority hashrate) miners who conspired with Blockstream to render the network useless for transactions?
replied 2076d
Well in case of a fork you can never guarantee they stay on your side for sure. I said loyal in this way that they can only mine your coin (not the case with SHA256 anymore)
replied 2076d
But any alog can be built into an ASIC unless you change the algo every 6 months like monero which also creates lots of instability. Also hard to buy hash to fight off 51% attacks
replied 2076d
I believe the BCH community is big enough to pull enough CPU/GPU hashpower together to defend it.
replied 2076d
Precedent is important.. Look at monero's example.
replied 2076d
I'm also not in the favor of SHA256 community. they are probably gonna screw us again with ABC's new IFP. But why don't you bring up your opinion to BCHN folks? Seems like a good time
replied 2076d
I'll try to send them a suggestion over the weekend, although they should know what to do already. I have a lot on my table currently, I'm working on on-chain org management.
1
5,000
replied 2077d
The same miners who exploited the difficulty adjustment bug of BCH after the split, rapid mined and dumped it then went back to collect the backlog fees?
replied 2077d
Not to mention our current problem of these "loyal" peeps who swing mine BCH just to fuck its usability up?
replied 2077d
I think you should re-consider your opinion. 👍
1
20,000
replied 2077d
Monero changed its algo 2 times now. 1 to deter asics and 1 for just improvement. All it needs is a united community and making historical precedence.
replied 2077d
Bitcoincash could retreat to a GPU or CPU mined algo imo to remove the immediate systemic risk.
replied 2078d
meant to write mining hw vendors/big pools and large scale mining ops. (memo's crippled character limit does not help)
replied 2078d
I think the motivation is the same as it was in March. Jiang will get his IFP and Amaury will be his lightning rod for community negativity.
1
replied 2078d
What's for Jiang in IFP?
replied 2078d
He was one of the original architects/proponents.
replied 2078d
What's for Jiang in IFP?
replied 2078d
Your reply has forked!
1
4,096
replied 2078d
Falsely signaling is dishonest, eg another reason to change the mining algorithm.
replied 2078d
I think you're right. One of our major problems is lack of loyal miners. They are all fucking flippers and cash grabs
1
10,000


About Privacy Terms Stats