Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, panmores said:

Fascinating drama, yet let's hope they mutually hash power each other into oblivion.

This is like The World Cup for me. I don't follow the sport but it's fascinating to watch live. I don't have a team but I end up rooting for one or the other by the end. 

I've been following this hash war and it has lead me to learn much more about bitcoin, the protocol, the economics, the different camps and its history. 

In the end, I'm going to go back to just keeping tabs on XRP. Who ultimately wins the title of Bitcoin is not going to make me a fan of bitcoin but at this point I'm rooting for SV. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is like The World Cup for me. I don't follow the sport but it's fascinating to watch live. I don't have a team but I end up rooting for one or the other by the end. 
I've been following this hash war and it has lead me to learn much more about bitcoin, the protocol, the economics, the different camps and its history. 
In the end, I'm going to go back to just keeping tabs on XRP. Who ultimately wins the title of Bitcoin is not going to make me a fan of bitcoin but at this point I'm rooting for SV. 
To me if all of these forks fail this proves bitcoin resilience. If one of them succeeds the bitcoin project has failed and I don't see any reason why we wouldn't shut it down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, princesultan said:

Compare the attitudes of David Schwartz to those of Craig wright.... Who would you rather have leading your team/company? This alone shows me why I'm happy to have chosen ripple. 

It's not just about the leader though. Would you rather have a good coin with a bad leader or a bad coin with a bad leader?

I don't envy people in the bitcoin camp. It's a tough decision to make. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, LordVetinari said:

It's not just about the leader though. Would you rather have a good coin with a bad leader or a bad coin with a bad leader?

Don't buy into this "leader" confusion/noise re: XRP - that's the PoW/PoS people's problem... You are the leader of your XRP.  :)

One of the nice things about XRPL is that if you don't like someone's idea, they can't rob you or re-write history until you like it...

If nothing else, this points out a key differentiator:  "Hey, come over to XRP - it actually works - and there's no coercive ********." *

Edited by NightJanitor
*BS is a time tested technical term of art.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, NightJanitor said:

Don't buy into this "leader" confusion/noise re: XRP - that's the PoW/PoS people's problem... You are the leader of your XRP.  :)

One of the nice things about XRPL is that if you don't like someone's idea, they can't rob you or re-write history until you like it...

If nothing else, this points out a key differentiator:  "Hey, come over to XRP - it actually works - and there's no coercive ********." *

Most in here like me have already chosen great xrp/great leaders! 

I'm only talking about btc, bch-abc and bch-sv. 

None of my comments have anything to do with xrp. That's for another thread. 

As I said before, I'm fascinated by what is happening. I expect it may affect more than abc and sv. I would imagine that there are people in the btc camp who are frustrated with the path btc is on. btc will never scale. lightening will never work. abc is trying to incorporate oracles and inviting legal issues. sv is actually what Bitcoin, with a big B, is in the white paper. 

The issue true white paper bitcoin supporters are currently confronted with is, good bitcoin/bad leader or bad bitcoin/bad leader?

And for anyone also following the show, abc is currently at 57% and sv is at 43% hash power. 

Also, can anyone confirm that btc hash power of bitcoin.com pool was redirected to bch without contract holders consent? If true, that's very shady on the part of abc!

Edited by LordVetinari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not just about the leader though. Would you rather have a good coin with a bad leader or a bad coin with a bad leader?
I don't envy people in the bitcoin camp. It's a tough decision to make. 
Bad coin with bad leader so it can quickly die of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://coingeek.com/bitcoin-bch-hash-war-will-decided-sustained-not-temporary-rented-hash-power/

Can someone enlighten me please: i've been holding BCH (storing them on my desktop wallet). The wallet has announced that it would support the chain with the most hashpower (which is currently BCHABC). I was expecting to receive the same amount (to the amount of BCH i was holding) of BCHSV as a result of the fork but it is not the case as of now. So basically i was expecting to have both coins from both chains.

I'm with BCHSV vision going forward, so what do i do now to make sure i hold BCHSV and not BCHABC? Shall i  :

1. Dump my BCH i've been holding until the fork (presumably these BCH i've been holding are BCHABC now) and buy BCHSV on an exchange OR shall i :

2. Wait hoping that BCHSV will regain most hashpower following the fork? Meaning that those BCH i've been holding will become BCHSV eventually?

I haven't been following this drama and i regret for not doing so.

I also absolutely agree that this hashwar / fighting undermine all Bitcoin authority which is beneficial for XRP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@WillGetThere I am doing nothing. Any BCH I have in my ledger is staying there. If you're as confused as I am, you might choose to do the same. But I encourage you to check and recheck any information you're getting online. Even mine! 

@panmores Hash is currently at 50/50. Supposedly, ABC has enabled checkpoint. Comments on reddit and Twitter indicate that this means the "war" is over and there are now two coins. Exchanges are enabling deposits and withdrawals but with higher than usual numbers of confirmations. 

BUT, I'm not knowledgeable enough to determine if that is the case. I'm going to do more reading into the whole "checkpoint" thing because just from the little I've read, that function is contentious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×