/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>11938101
> he doesn't know that hashpower leaving must not exceed a certain speed or BTC gets assfucked.

>>11890497
> the difficulty adjustment will keep an incentive for miners to mine and keep it secure
Which brings me to our final point in this hard knocks school for deluded boomer cunts. What the fuck happens when a supply adequate to issue coercive force in a certain realm exists in such numbers that the base economic incentive for the maintenance of the realm is wholly inadequate to incentivize even a fraction of that supply to act in the interests of the realm? Well that supply goes fucking rogue and starts cutting the realm up into its own little pieces, extracting by force whatever value it can. This equilibrium has been observed for millennia prior to the onset of blockchains with failing economies presided over by incompetent dictators and sprawling martial corps to "keep the peace". Absent the economic incentive to do so, they start doing the exact fucking opposite.
And your shitcoin is predicated on this thing that the sabotage thereof which makes its value worthless now guarantees.
The difficulty adjustment must slowly trend downwards to the point where a small fraction of the existing hashpower in the world can arbitrarily tamper with the chain, and so THAT IS WHAT WLL FUCKING HAPPEN YOU STUPID FUCKING ASSHAT.
Get it through your head; BTC is utterly worthless, and it's worthless because of ignorant boomer cunts like you who wouldn't understand the technical facts of the landscape in a hostile environment if they up and bit you on your depends wearing fucking ass.

>>11846808
>You defended your chain by swapping miner consensus for "community consensus".
Wrong, community consensus does not mean shit, it's market consensus that has and always will prevail in the end. You want to push that it's "community consensus" because then you seem like a noble defender of market or hashpower consensus, but you're wrong. The futures said you were going to lose, and the hashpower proved that you did in fact lose, and you did, in fact lose. There was no "community consensus" involved.
> Also I like how you never retaliated against how the free market is obviously not good at deciding what's best (given how bch lost to btc and the entire s2x garbage).
Resolution is still in progress. And every day we proved those assholes wrong by scaling on chain and left them with egg on their face, the market had to take fucking notice of that. Until nChain came along, joined the time, and scored the mother of all fucking home goals and is now burning cash at a furious pace in a war it is literally unable to win, end of story. Congratulations nChain, nice going, fuck yourself.
> You know what would have prevented this? The miners rallying behind s2x and killing off corecoin
No, you're wrong. Core would've switched the POW, and as the futures showed at a ratio of 10:1, people were cheering on the coretards in their sabotaging of the ecosystem. Miners simply could not stop it. They could either go along with it and make bank off it, or oppose it and be replaced. Those were their only options. They chose the former. And that choice was economically rational.
> because abc sure as shit never would
You clueless fuck, if ABC had convinced the market that it was indeed better, you realise it actually would've killed BTC outright? And your team has done nothing but damage that goal with your idiocy and ignorance? Pic related. Read it and understand how badly nChain fucked the goal it's claiming it has. That event is now much further away because of nChain.

>>11840863
>derp

>>11840864
>derp

>>11806908
reminder that bitmex research are full of shit. https://blog.bitmex.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/2017.11.16-The-implications-for-Bitcoin-of-the-new-bitcoin-cash-difficulty-adjustment.pdf
They repeatedly assume that the same effects on both chains will be carried through despite the fact that they have different DAA's. Their analysis is weak and always slanted in one direction; shill for core. The actual truth is pic related.

>The pill would be a lot easier to swallow if the bch poster boys werent such colossal cunts

That doesn’t fucking matter. Life is not a game about who is nicest. Look at BTC, one of the biggest powers behind it is a neanderthal larping reject pastanigger constantly boasting about his exploits as a murdering gangster thug and demanding that everyone submit to his genius and suck his dick. Nobody ever fucking mentions that shit because we all just like to pretend that he doesn’t exist, but he fucking does.
It’s not about who is nicest, it’s about who is fucking right, and the combative BCH boys are fucking right. Proof of work is a practical substitute for modern warfare, if the vendors of proof of work won’t fight then they’re useless. SV is forcing the issue and hats fucking off to them. It needs to be understood that this is the real deal and we’re willing to fight to protect peer to peer electronic cash in this realm, end of fucking story, and all the larping wannabe feudal daimyos, all the glow in the dark cianiggers, all the fucking mindless npc cunts who just parrot shit they don’t understand because that’s the way the horde is presently spewing, need to fucking get in line and realise the nature of the game that is actually being played.

>>11666260
The original BTC DAA is a vulnerability. the 1mb limit was an admitted temporary limit that was supposed to have been removed over 400,000 blocks ago according to Satoshi himself. Because of the way the DAA works and the massive social media campaign targeted at the stupids, which has been unimaginably successful with the influx of absolute hordes of stupids in context of the stratospheric price rise, there was no other way to ensure that there would actually be a chain other than BTC, because all miners follow profitability.
The BCH DAA works against this effectively by upping its bid for hashpower based on the market price of competitors by lowering the difficulty. It has been successful enough to keep 30k USD+ per hour protection from 51% attacks, so it's pretty safe to say it's successful in general. Which brings us to the next part of the equation, which is that the BTC DAA isn't just a bug that positively protects the old chain, it's also a bug that extremely negatively protects the old chain.
Prepare to kiss your ass goodbye, corecuck.

>>11632924
You're embarrassing yourself kid. You have to go back to /r/bitcoin where you belong.

lol corecucks

>>9732460
> I have never seen Peter rizun gigabyte testnet video, the post.
Can't wait till nobody is mining your shitcoin chain and you'll have to go back to sucking dick in the parking lot.

>>9688549
When you realise you're in a competition with a competitor you can't possibly beat and it has every intention to rip your throat out, of course you're going to call it monstrous.
Doesn't matter. Won't stop it from killing you. This isn't the playground. Compete or be destroyed. We already know which one you chose.

>>9654859

That's correct. But the majority of the "community" does not back BTC.

>>9629824
People already pointed out that would just provoke the miners into destroying the btc chain, but actually it's worse than that. BTC is doomed because of its DAA, pic related.

Reminder. There's nothing wrong with being conservative about the consensus rules on the production blockchain that handles the majority of world trade and wealth storage. Don't let blockstream poison the idea of conservatism in the space because they changed away from the actual original plan to something completely different and claimed that strategy was careful and conservative. It was anything but.
One of my favorite rules of software is what's called the principle of least surprise. Things should be as difficult and complex as they need to be, and no more so, and the plan should unfold from start to finish with the least amount of surprise.
Somebody trying to shoehorn their "cool clever idea" into the blockchain? Even under the mask of conservatism? They can go get fucked. The blockchain should be a massive titanic cyber citadel about which one can firmly reason, in terms of its armor and properties both.
Bitcoin gold, it turns out, was a tent near a volcano made of cotton and packed with jet fuel offering lodging to random pyromaniacs, and many of these "clever new technology" alts with paper thin hashrate in "asic resistant" pow algorithms are in the exact same situation.

>>9584462
Retard.

>>9532069

>>9531440

>>9507424
Death.

>>9441897
Wrong.