Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin Cash Starts Trading

trustnodes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 93 posts

Re: Bitcoin Cash Starts Trading

#61

Post by Frogolocalypse »

stale2002 wrote: post #39
hudon wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two problems with your argument: 1- You imply that only one camp wants to scale. Actually, both camps want to scale. The only difference is that the "big blocks" camp do not think a user's ability to validate the blockchain is worth keeping. 2- The size of the network is irrelevant to the government's ability to censor transactions. The only thing that stops them from having power over the network is decentralization…

"You imply that only one camp wants to scale." No. Go read what official Core developers like Luke-jr and Blue Hair Matt are saying. They think that the blocksize might ALREADY be too large, and actually want to DECREASE the blocksize. They also explicitly do not want to scale, because that would mean that transaction prices go down. They literally want block fees to be high so as to create a "fee market".

> They think that the blocksize might ALREADY be too large

That's because the block-size is only a small part of scaling.

Re: Bitcoin Cash Starts Trading

#63

Post by manquer »

kalleboo wrote: post #58
vgb2k11 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But its still the wrong explanation. Think about it: (i) Miners, not average users, hold the voting power. (ii) When the 1 MB block-size is congested (like it is now), miners make significantly more money on transaction fee's. (iii) Increasing the block-size increases supply and reduces demand for priority processing in the block, hence, reduces transaction fee's. Which explanation truly matches your view of reality…

> (ii) When the 1 MB block-size is congested (like it is now), miners make significantly more money on transaction fee's. One thing I've not understood is, if the miners want more money from fees, why don't they just say "we're not accepting into blocks any transactions with fees lower than X"? If just one large miner with 10% of the hashrate does this, that instantly puts any transaction with a lower fee than that a…

This is how priority transactions work.Increasing block size would allow more transactions per second. Less people would then pay for the premium of fast transactions as the normal transaction is fast enough

Re: Bitcoin Cash Starts Trading

#65

Post by Jabanga »

hudon wrote: post #20

A fork like Bitcoin Cash will be a boon for the blockchain community. There is a pretty big subset of the community that believe Bitcoin is a panacea that will replace currencies, payment networks and so on, regardless of how technically inferior the blockchain is to other more mature distributed databases and networks. They believe one day, the blockchain will be just as efficient or even more so. This subset is voc…

>There is a pretty big subset of the community that believe Bitcoin is a panacea that will replace currencies, payment networks and so on, regardless of how technically inferior the blockchain is to other more mature distributed databases and networks

But they don't believe it's technically inferior to more mature distributed databases and networks..

You're transposing your own opinion onto theirs.

Re: Bitcoin Cash Starts Trading

#66

Post by jeppebemad »

TD-Linux wrote: post #4

For those unaware, "Bitcoin Cash" is a proposed future fork of Bitcoin. The primary miner supporting it also runs an exchange, so what they are effectively trading is "future promised coins" once they start actually mining the fork. Because so few of % of the total coins are tradeable, I think this results in a similarly volatile "market cap" as many ICOs.

Thank you. I was about to ask for a clarification on the below statement from the article, but that now makes sense.

"At that point, anyone who currently has bitcoin gains the same amount of BCC, while retaining their BTC."

Re: Bitcoin Cash Starts Trading

#67

Post by runeks »

jeppebemad wrote: post #66
TD-Linux wrote: post #4

For those unaware, "Bitcoin Cash" is a proposed future fork of Bitcoin. The primary miner supporting it also runs an exchange, so what they are effectively trading is "future promised coins" once they start actually mining the fork. Because so few of % of the total coins are tradeable, I think this results in a similarly volatile "market cap" as many ICOs.

Thank you. I was about to ask for a clarification on the below statement from the article, but that now makes sense. "At that point, anyone who currently has bitcoin gains the same amount of BCC, while retaining their BTC."

> "At that point, anyone who currently has bitcoin gains the same amount of BCC, while retaining their BTC."

This is quite important, because it means that all Bitcoin holders effectively are given BCC for free, which they can sell on an exchange. Thus, the BCC market risks an immense flood of BCC sellers who very suddenly earned a tidy profit out of nowhere, which could crash the BCC price completely, because the market is so shallow, relative to the BTC markets.

In fact, I think this is quite likely to end up being the death of BCC: a constant sell-pressure from BTC-cum-BCC holders, who just want to cash out in dollars. This can end up forcing market makers out of the BCCUSD market, because they can't risk holding too much BCC with a constant sell-pressure like that.

The BTCUSD market has grown from a small stream to a small river and, when the BCCUSD market opens in earnest, this small BTCUSD river will be connected to the tiny stream that is the freshly born BCCUSD market.

Re: Bitcoin Cash Starts Trading

#68

Post by Frogolocalypse »

jgord wrote: post #52
hudon wrote: post #20

A fork like Bitcoin Cash will be a boon for the blockchain community. There is a pretty big subset of the community that believe Bitcoin is a panacea that will replace currencies, payment networks and so on, regardless of how technically inferior the blockchain is to other more mature distributed databases and networks. They believe one day, the blockchain will be just as efficient or even more so. This subset is voc…

Its a commonly voiced, but false dichotomy - increasing blocksize 4x or even 8x will have negligible impact on the security or decentrality of Bitcoin. It will just allow more transactions through, which will allow fees to fall to levels where normal people can use it for normal transactions. The use of bitcoin as a currency is being throttled by the artificially small blocksize. We can have more than 3 transactions…

> increasing blocksize 4x or even 8x will have negligible impact on the security or decentrality of Bitcoin.

Incorrect. It will make running a full node for almost all consumers in Australia impossible at any price.

> hopefully SegWit2X will be the sane compromise

Segwit is the compromise and we are finally going to get it. If you want to install the 2x hard-fork to china-coin, you are welcome to. Everyone else will just continue using bitcoin. Now with segwit.

Re: Bitcoin Cash Starts Trading

#69

Post by Frogolocalypse »

jgord wrote: post #53
vgb2k11 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But its still the wrong explanation. Think about it: (i) Miners, not average users, hold the voting power. (ii) When the 1 MB block-size is congested (like it is now), miners make significantly more money on transaction fee's. (iii) Increasing the block-size increases supply and reduces demand for priority processing in the block, hence, reduces transaction fee's. Which explanation truly matches your view of reality…

Its a transient equilibrium during growth, not a zero-sum game. We could see lower fees and miners earning more : Hypothetically, if blocksize went up tomorrow by 8x, then potentially fees might drop by 4x and volume of transactions go up by 8x .. then miners will be making 2x in fees per block, for maybe 2% extra cost. That has other flow on effects - if fees are lower bitcoin can accommodate people using it as a da…

None of the nodes users, which define and police consensus in bitcoin, is interested in reducing the security of the network to allow miners more control. This is the fourth failed coup attempt of the bitcoin network, and the only thing that it has demonstrated, is the resilience of the network against large corporate centralization attempts. Segwit might very well be the last architectural change of the protocol.

Re: Bitcoin Cash Starts Trading

#70

Post by Frogolocalypse »

jgord wrote: post #54
PeterisP wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because solutions that are practical for getting 2x or 10x the capacity aren't sufficient, since getting used in big capacity requires a vision that can give a thousandfold increase, and increasing the block size can't ever provide that in a practical manner. If you want to scale a huge cliff, going to fetch a 20 feet ladder will not help you.

I think that its quite possible that we can see scaling of 1000x on the linear blockchain, without fundamentally changing the economic/security properties. Increasing blocksize is just the first thing to do of many engineering optimizations. If you want to climb Everest, you first need to reach base camp. Even if LN works great and scales beautifully, we will still need that 100x increase in the blockchain that it se…

> I think that its quite possible that we can see scaling of 1000x on the linear blockchain

In order for your fantasy to become a reality the tens of thousands of current users of the core ref nodes would have to uninstall their node clients and permanently remove their ability to ever validate their transactions on the blockchain. That is never going to happen.

Post reply on HN