• Breaking News

    Monday, February 17, 2020

    Home Unlabelled Bitcoin Cash Regarding Bitcoin.com’s stance on the recent block reward diversion proposals

    Bitcoin Cash Regarding Bitcoin.com’s stance on the recent block reward diversion proposals

    February 17, 2020

    Bitcoin Cash Regarding Bitcoin.com’s stance on the recent block reward diversion proposals

    Regarding Bitcoin.com’s stance on the recent block reward diversion proposals

    Posted: 17 Feb 2020 06:25 AM PST

    in response to Roger's recent video, I agree that last bullet point is ridiculous. How much a project is "in need of money" should be an irrelevant factor. If anything it shows how UNsuccessful that organization is. Whoever put that rule in there has no business sense.

    A free market doesn't force you to fund poor services. Government laws do this. They interfere with the free market.

    In my opinion this funding is a bad idea as it's too controversial. It opens up the possibility for a split, and there are bad actors who would love to take advantage of this opportunity.

    As discussed, BCH only has about 3% of the global SHA256 hashrate. By creating the option to change the rules of the network with a 66% miner vote, this allows bad-acting miners (BTC or BSV miners) who want to guide BCH in a bad direction an opportunity to use their hashrate for a LIMITED time (just during the voting period) to cause LASTING effects well beyond the voting period. Once activated, it no longer requires their hashrate but the rules stay in place.

    To a bad actor, this is the "gift that keeps on giving" (in a negative sense).

    If I was Calvin Ayre for example, I'd throw every bit of hashrate I had at BCH during this time period to try to derail its decision. It would be worth it because after the vote the decision is lasting.

    Normally, hashrate does not get longterm benefit from short term investments. It gets the benefit of a single block mined at a time.

    If BCH didn't share its hashrate with BTC and BSV this wouldn't be as much of an issue. But it does.

    Fund BCH another way.

    Also shared here: https://read.cash/@ColinTalksCrypto/regarding-bitcoincoms-stance-on-the-recent-block-reward-diversion-proposals-5513abcd

    submitted by /u/ColinTalksCrypto
    [link] [comments]

    BCH Games

    Posted: 17 Feb 2020 01:09 PM PST

    Bitcoin Cash IFP Author, Influential Mining CEO to Chinese Bitcoiners: Decentralization is Key

    Posted: 17 Feb 2020 10:14 AM PST

    ��

    Posted: 17 Feb 2020 02:46 PM PST

    Cryptocurrencies prepare next move after torrid weekend

    Posted: 17 Feb 2020 01:31 PM PST

    What is the best thing you have bought with Bitcoin cash? read.cash | Market for my family

    Posted: 17 Feb 2020 09:32 AM PST

    Mid-February BCH Latam Update

    Posted: 17 Feb 2020 01:07 PM PST

    Bitcoin ABC's funding plan is still aligned with free market economy

    Posted: 17 Feb 2020 08:44 AM PST

    "A pure market economy has no barriers to economic exchange: you can sell anything to anyone else for any price. " (Amadeo, Kimberly, 2018)

    I'm not posting this to look knowledgeable on the topics of economy, I'm not. I just simply believe that we should not interfere with developer's decision about their projects in this space. If we create a space that people keep criticizing each other about their business, we are recreating regulations and policies common in the government body.

    There's this argument that node implementations are different than products and businesses. That's a reasonable concern but community didn't necessarily fund ABC when they ask for it, so why we think we could have a say about their method of acquiring the fund?

    Let me just mention the fact that ABC is not in a monopoly. They can still ship any code they want and miners have the option to switch to other node implementations that does not require funding. If ABC is doing a good job and miners really want to use their software, they should follow their terms and if they think it doesn't worth it they can switch. It's free participation.

    I personally agree more with what Roger mentioned earlier and I would still prefer that there would be an option to opt-out of funding plan for miners. However, I think the whole community bashing the developers that worked hard for years to bring BCH to this place is just bad for all of us.

    As long as a node implementation is not in a Monopoly, respect their decisions about their code and let the free market decide.

    submitted by /u/p0ok3r
    [link] [comments]

    Advanced BCH Monitoring with Tasker (Part 6: Bitcoin Cash SDK for tasker)

    Posted: 17 Feb 2020 10:41 AM PST

    Is bitcoin still good to buy and make money in 2010?

    Posted: 16 Feb 2020 07:12 PM PST
    Read more
    at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment