Create account

1060d · Bitcoin Cash
Only 6 blocks in the last 5 hours. 1h 20m between two of them. Over an hour since the last block. What happened to hashrate?
MarchewkaCzerwona
replied 1060d
Few hours ago, there was over 20 blocks mined in one hour. Now we have opposite. It looks like some miner is testing how much he can stress network by swinging hash power btc<>bch.
replied 1060d
This wouldn't be possible if BCH mining was diverse and not concentrated. #ChangeThePOW
replied 1060d
Might just be variance, but activity from the last few hours is nearly all from 'known' miners with activity from 'unknown' miners has dropped off significantly.
replied 1060d
I did turn off my equipment, I gotta by some new miners soon. These miners are not profitable with the solar panels I have, I need new stuff. I am sure others are having same problem.
replied 1059d
You can send unsustainable miners to #Venezuela and we get the running here for you, you earn 50% of the revenue. In this paradise the electricity cost is so low. #realbitcoinclub
replied 1054d
Probably we still lack miners for Bitcoin Cash. Is it running smoothly now?
replied 1054d
Difficulty adjustment should even that out. This was referring to a time when there was temporarily an unusually low hashrate.
replied 1054d
Keep reading issues with the blockchain
replied 1060d
That's what you get when you have only 1-2% of the SHA256 network....SHA256 miners choose and secure BTC.
replied 1060d
If you only have a small group of miners on your network then one mining OP going down or going back to BTC means no or slow blocks on BCH.
replied 1060d
A better DAA can fix that. It is a control-engineering problem that is entirely solvable even in an environment such as this.
replied 1060d
Lipstick on a pig. BCH needs a POW algorithm change.
replied 1060d
I develop for a BCH fork (DeVault) and we use the LWMA algo.. It's worked out well for us and we experience much much larger variations in our hash rates due to being a micro-cap.
replied 1060d
We're still a sha256 coin though.. (LWMA is a difficulty algorithm)
replied 1060d
How would that not be vulnerable in the same way? You're trying to predict what people will do rather than solve the technical problem I think.
replied 1060d
The community is big enough to defend the network.

Having 1-2% of the total SHA256 hashrate is not a technical problem, but it's a huge systemic risk.
replied 1060d
In my unhumble opinion, calls to change the POW or decrease block times are attempts to infiltrate BCH & damage it from the inside.
replied 1060d
That's Coretard level retardation.
replied 1060d
I don't necessarily think that's your motivation, but I think that's the origin of the arguments.
replied 1060d
This kind of ignorance lead to the failure of BTC. Their propaganda was that "every attempt to rise the blocksize limit (direct on-chain capacity increase) is an attack on #Bitcoin".
replied 1060d
My, aren't you saucy today. Well, think what you wish. The block size limit was a hack to protect the fledgling network that was no longer necessary, so I never would argue to keep it.
replied 1060d
Please come back when you improved your reading comprehension. Most people believed that rising on-chain capacity is an attack. this is why we are on a minority fork with little hash.
replied 1060d
Ultimately, most of the big decisions from the original bitcoin were good. You still haven't explained how a different POW would prevent the same problems. I suspect you cannot.
replied 1060d
What same problems? it would instantly make the network a lot stronger and better proposition for investors/users. It would enable a positive feedback loop imo.
replied 1060d
No, it doesn't. What BCH needs is more adoption and price and hashrate will come with it.
replied 1060d
Clueless.
replied 1060d
BCH has so little hash behind it that it discourages adoption in itself.
replied 1060d
Meanwhile, I think it's apparent that the community is big enough to throw enough CPU/GPU miners behind a new algo to liberate and defend the network.
replied 1060d
Personally, I would deploy 192 cpu cores and/or 30 GPUs if it was changed.
replied 1060d
replied 1060d
Yes. That is one valid proposal :-)
replied 1060d
Has this happened before? Does it mean low amount of tx?
MarchewkaCzerwona
replied 1060d
Almost exactly 24 hours ago very similar thing happened.
replied 1060d
This happens a lot, even on BTC (moreso in the past though). Smaller cap coins have much larger variations in hash and experience these events often.
replied 1060d
It means low amount of hashpower.