/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>11628415

>Now we are on the same page. And now you are on the same page as Calvin and Craig. Read the last sentence:

@CalvinAyre: "Training mind and body for the world’s first #Bitcoin hash war. With the minds of miners now opened to Miners Choice and Nakamoto Consensus, I now believe that hash war will be the new norm. Winning will now be defined by who can take long term pain in protection of your values"

And now statements like this should be crystal clear in their meaning (pic related).

>>11628425

>I've been trying to explain this

>November 15th isn't a BCH "hash war," it's a war for the hearts and minds of exchanges. If an exchange is only running nodes of a particular implementation (say ABC), depositing coins mined from SV post-split coinbase will be impossible. Chain unfollowed by exchanges = worthless

>They are willing to completely destroy the value of BCH to "win". They have said as much. This is about winning for Calvin. He doesn't need the money.

>We are playing Bitcoin. Bitcoin is an infinite game. You cannot win infinite games. The point of an infinite game is to keep the game going and keep yourself playing.

>Poker is a finite game. Calvin is playing Poker, not Bitcoin.

bitcoin CASH

>>11628432

>During this event, half of CoinGeek's hash will be running ABC. You can only attack the chain if you are running the software mining that chain. Right now, CoinGeek has 45-50% of total active BCH hash rate. Who knows how much they are planning to rent for battle.

>They are betting that it won't take "infinite money." It probably wouldn't takeore than a few weeks of a completely unreliable networkfor exchanges to indefinitely halt trading and the price to effectively crash to pennies. Their bet is the other side will capitulate before that

>Exchanges and applications will fatigue first and point exclusively at the SV chain because ABC will be a war zone.

>Those exchanges have a fiduciary duty to their depositors to be able to have reliable withdrawals and deposits. That requires pointing their services at nodes with a ledger that is not being constantly reorg'd.

>>11628445

>The power on the other side is fundamentally Bitmain. They are in the middle of a huge IPO and their valuation is based, in no small measure on their massive holdings of BCH. They cannot afford to fight & diminish the value of their holdings at this time. It could derail the IPO.

>The distributed community will prevail in the long term. That doesn't mean it will win every battle. It doesn't mean that BCH will survive this. Bitcoin will survive. Part of why the distributed community survives is because a network can die without killing Bitcoin.

>[…] if this attack is successful, it'll redefine the entire crypto landscape and possibly destroy the value proposition of all coins, until another genius arises much later and come up with a better consensus and social system.

>I'm not sure people in the industry quite realize how much is at stake here. The outcome will resonate far beyond BCH, even the laziest of BTC whales should be alarmed.

>They can't see it. That's why I said only Calvin and Craig are even aware they are sitting at a poker table. Hard to win at poker if you don't know you are playing.

>It's much more complicated game, because it's not a game. Much more is at stake here, we're talking about taking over a multi-billion ($8B-$200B) dollars real world industry with the outcome of becoming the next Bitmain. Things will not go smooth & be simple, it's geopolitics.

They don't want to be the next Bitmain. They want to be the next Rothschilds. After BCH, their next target will be BTC.

Can we stop talking about anything not Link related ffs

>>11628459
so bullish BCH or no?

>>11628415
>>11628425
>>11628432
>>11628445
>>11628459
Every online casino in the world will be using Bitcoin Cash SV.
All the transactions will be done on the chain.
A minimum of 128 MB is a must because there are going to be a shitload of transactions and billions of $ coming in to BCH SV

>>11628573
>Every online casino in the world will be using Bitcoin Cash SV.

source of this?

People forget the implications of currency. The entire geopolitical landscape of post WWII was currency. All the people dead, raped and enslaved in the middle east.
The only conspiracy would be the idea that the biggest forces in the world are not involved in trying to subvert bitcoin

It can't really be stopped the people fighting it are delusional and in denial of their obsolescence.

>>11628620
ever since his casino businesses were shut down, deplatformed at the payments level, he's been looking to get revenge
the original bitcoin client had a poker easter egg hidden in it

>>11628620
Not allowed to give any details about it because it might jeopardise my job.
Only hint I will give and it is up to you to investigate it.
>Calvin Ayre

>>11628650
why wouldnt LN be satisfactory for calvin for gambling purposes

>>11628633
This guy seems to understand what is going to happen.
>Probably bigger that the ETF or Bakkt

>>11628662
lightning has the same regulatory characteristics as the current system

>>11628672
how so, the whole "LN nodes are money transmitters" meme?

i dont see how that wouldnt apply to bch nodes as well

>>11628662
R u serious? U can only accept however much btc you "preload" your channel with and have to spend it before being able to receive. Its so fucking retarded

>>11628702
i dont think that's accurate

>>11628690
proof of work

>>11628662
Because LN wouldn't be user ready for at least 24 months and not user friendly for at least 48 months.

>See vid
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prETy3UVdjs

where does Vin talk about all this?

>>11628935
There was a post on Faggit Forum

>>11629272
i have no idea where you're referring. link?

>>11628670
found two morons or one moron samefagging

>>11628533
Regardless of which "side" wins out of the BCH collectives, it's the only one that has a predictable market at this point. That should give you your answer. Just MHO.

Can anyone one here explain to a brainlet whats going on. I'm 100% in BCH and i'm getting quite spooked.

>>11629461
Craig is pledging to go balls to the wall against jihan with shit like https://blockchaind.net/51-attack-blockchain-reorganizations/

he is telegraphing that he does not care if BCH and BTC blow up if he does not get his way
jihan is about to launch a $3 billion IPO and a big chunk of their value is their stash of BCH
if Craig nukes BCH's value through this stunt, the IPO is ruined

ergo, craig has leverage over jihan

>>11629461
bitcoin abc funded by bitmain is trying to introduce canonical transaction ordering and data sig verify
which will make it easier for jihan to sell his wormhole coin.
these changes made nchain develop bitcoin Satoshis Vision which aims to be defined by the whitepaper and unlimited scaling
Coingeek, BMG, okminerand SV pool are mining for SV the rest for ABC and BU.
In the even SV does not win majority hashrate craig has said he will mine at a loss attacking other node implementations until he or them are bankrupt or satoshis vision wins

Personally I can't believe there's even a debate fuck jihan and abc. Tokens can be done in script. Extremely disappointing to see Roger ver saying he will continue to run abc and BU even if they loose

>>11629461
>a brainlet
>100% in BCH
Story checks out

>>11629503
>>11629509
Thanks for the answers, I guess the play would be to simply hold on to my forked coins just in case.

why wouldn't bitmain simply table their fork for another six - twelve months, complete the IPO, and then try again?

>>11629610
csw said he expect the war to take up to two years

>>11629594
if we get the situation where craig is the minority hashpower the bch chain will be unusable until it is resolved.
Craig has said he is prepared to spend $1million a week for two years and he's an absolute autist so I don't doubt it
There's no way jihan will fight that hard when he has 1million bch unless bitmain is an arm of the chinese government trying to stop peer to peer cash which makes communism infesaible

>>11629630
i'm guessing he's not referring to tulip
so, what's in two years? there's another halving... could that be it?

>>11629662
he is referring to the tulip trust

>>11629686
how would tulip's assets unlocking bring the war to an end?
realistically btw i see no way that a war could last 2 years but what do i know

>>11629696
craig would dump the chains he didn't like for sv

good for craig, fuck china and chinese dog eating bugmen.

>>11629686
you mean the wallets that have nothing to do with csw and have been proven as such?
dont trust, verify. the great thing about an immutable public ledger is that bullshitters can get called out on their bullshit

>>11629731
ironic because it hasn't been proven either way. It is very hard to see why craig would be doing all this posturing if he wasn't the real deal. He is not the one introducing new things he just wants bitcoin to be defined by the whitepaper. God forbid 1 out of 2000 cryptocurrencies is actually defined by the whitepaper

but yeah if Craig doesn't have access that won't happen

I think sv is going to win anyway

>>11629764
>It is very hard to see why craig would be doing all this posturing
To make people think he is the real deal?

Where does it say anything about difficulty adjustments after every block in the whitepaper?

>>11628415
lol bcash! baka

>>11629788
craig doesn't want the daa, he wanted a hashwar instead of a bch split
SV aims to put the 2016 adjustment back in when they can

>>11629827
if there's a hash war, and bitmain counters by switching some of their btc mining capacity to bch
and if craig is serious about buying 40 exa hashes
what happens when theres a hash rate flippening

>>11629842
majority hashrate defines the rules
if its craig we get bitcoin sv
if its jihan we get craig attacking abc blocks until he's wins making the chain unusable whilst craig is fighting

>>11629866
sure but what happens if bch hash rate surpasses btc hash rate
anything? i know this happened briefly after the fork

>>11629880
>>11629469

>>11629909
ty

>>11629866
Wouldn't Jihan also have to redirect his hash away from BTC to win the BCH hashwar, and as a result completely crippling BTC in the meantime? Does the hashwar spell out the death of Blockstream coin?

>>11631149
lets hope

>>11628415
DONT U SEE WHY THEY ARE DOING THIS? THE POWER OF BITCOIN IS SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE HANDS OF PEOPLE WITH SKIN IN THE GAME AKA MINERS WHO INVESTED MILLIONS, NOT DEVS

>>11631149
>>11629909

>>11631648
Oh my god, is the damn of blockstreamcore-induced retardation finally breaking?! Is the herd finally waking up?

>>11628690
>meme
It's not a meme you stupid corecuck cunt. Christ it's been over a year now and you still don't fucking get it, they pushed liquid sidechains on you and you still don't fucking get it. Lightning is not a solution to the problems Bitcoin has, it is a solution to the problems the state and banks have WITH BITCOIN YOU STUPID FUCKING CUNT.
All of the problems lightning has *ARE BY DESIGN* it is centralised *BY DESIGN* large lightning nodes are required for any significant payment volume *BY FUCKING DESIGN* it can only transfer non-macro-significant amounts *BY MOTHERFUCKING DESIGN*.
EITHER WAKE THE FUCK UP AND START PAYING ATTENTION OR GO BACK TO YOUR MOTHERFUCKING MCJOB AND DO WHAT YOU ARE CLEARLY FUCKING FIT FOR and stop SHITTING UP THIS PERFECTLY FUCKING INNOCENT BOARD.

>>11631149
If the bulk of BTC hashpower migrates over to BCH, the BCH difficulty will adjust quickly and even out profitability between the two chains.

Miners will then move back and forth between BTC and BCH but BTC will be beyond saving since the mempool will pile up faster than blocks can be found.

Time it with some nice ETF fud and other shit to crash BTC price during this, bcore death is will be fast and swift.

>>11631871
The pill would be a lot easier to swallow if the bch poster boys werent such colossal cunts

>>11631648
This. Lightning turns Bitcoin into fucking PayPal. This bastardization is 100% unacceptable.

>>11632046
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.

So am I supposed to sit in tether for two years? He probably just wants Jihan to shut it down. Then I guess they join forces and take down btc?

>>11632094
>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.
that sounds deep in the rabbit hole. Who are you referring to? maxwell?

>>11632094
Absolutely based.

>>11632145
Maxwell is a low intelligence fucking pawn for the state.
I'm not going to give the cunt the satisfaction of saying his name. Anybody who is familiar with the space knows to whom I refer, and it's irrelevant at the end of the day. What matters is *why is this all fucking here*.
Consider the praxeology of war post the introduction of nuclear weapons. Stupid cunts will either believe or LARP as if global thermonuclear warfare were an event that civilisation proper will, or would wish to survive, but they are fucking wrong, and idiotic speculation about the fucking energy dispersions involved would, if you applied them to a trip into the photosphere of the sun, also lead you to the conclusion that shit's going to be just fine also.
And what the fuck *is* war? If not the last argument of kings? that with which final disputes are settled in the absence of any negotiated settlement? And what does it *mean* if that is now *obsolete*? He who demands the most ridiculous thing and threatens the unthinkable in the absence of its delivery wins? Or we must find an alternative last argument of kings, something which can play out to final stage, and not destroy the entire world and all known intelligent life with it at the same time, and the disputes are settled.
That's what proof of work is, POW vendors are effectively armies, blockchain rulesets are effectively constitutions, and people who transact upon this medium are the new citizens of these prototype economic blocs which are set to supercede nation states. This is how anarchocapitalism finally comes to fruition, this is how both psychopathic powermonger cunts and onions sucking leftist effete clueless motherfuckers simultaneously get the assfucking they so richly deserve.

That is why we are here. That is how you win this game.

Forget about Craig Wright.
All eyes should be on Calvin Ayre.
He is the brain and muscle behind Bitcoin SV, Coingeek and NChain.

>>11632180
thanks. Reminds me of that quote, something along the lines of in WWIII you will not be able differentiate combatant and civilian

The exchanges chose ABC. Looks like SV is toast

>>11632180
War is like a natural disaster, there is not winners and losers. Only victims and survivors.
- some cunt.

Perhaps this will not be the case in the decentralized world order. One can only hope.

>>11632282
And the moment a sufficiently intelligent rational person stops believing this, is the moment he starts seeking his own channels to nuclear proliferation so when the psychopaths show up at his door, he can pull the pic related gambit. This nash equilibrium has an obvious endstate, and it is not conducive to the production or accumulation of wealth. Niggers of the world fucking note, put your rock *down* or accept that we're all going to fucking die, *you too*.

>>11632180
Do you think the nation state is already dead? Are they just institutions controlled by said psychopaths

>>11632395
Some of them certainly are, there's no question about that, and in context of aforementioned praxeology of war, at that point, does it even matter? They're all LARPing on an assumption of reality which has only one conclusion; annihilation. Either they accept it's a LARP, put down their rocks and move forward into the future producing and accumulating wealth for a brighter future like those of us who are prepared to submit to this discipline are capable of without recourse to aforementioned nigger rock move, or the entire world is going to be destroyed, anyway. And thus any threat in context has no compulsive force, as it all ends in the same place.
You can't threaten a rational person with death in order to force them to stop breathing. That just doesn't make any kind of sense, and all the theatrical nonsense and distractions in the world will not sufficiently hide this fact from a sufficiently rational person.
So what is left for those of us who are prepared to behave in a civilized fashion? Pick your ventures, jurisdictions and business partners based on shared values. If you know an entity operates by force or fraud, simply boycott them to the best of your ability, resist them like water, flow around their attempts to engage you and put your energy into building a world that actually doesn't terminate in mutually assured destruction. Stay in the shadows and don't allow them to even realize you're a target. crypto gives us this ability and there's nothing that they can do about it.
If there's enough of us, we can save the world. We very well may be the only legitimate hope it has, crushed between the teen power fantasies of rampant psychopaths and the economically incontinent gimmedat mobs who think they can just endlessly demand the prior parasite from the productive force within the economy that actually generates and accumulates wealth, which is the only reason we ever got to where we are now to begin with.

>>11632441
Yes the way forward is made clear. Hopefully we prove to be the exception to the fermi paradox

After reading everything I can about this fork, my take on it:
Craig is probably going to lose this, but not definitely. Impossible to know what will happen. Retards here in /biz/ will definitely not be the best analysts to follow. Exchanges are going to decide the fate, not hash rate. For those holding BCH, best to just hold on to both forks after the split (if it even happens).

>>11632495
> fermi paradox
It's moments like these, although they may be interspersed with megabytes upon megabytes of whinging incomprehensible banal shitcocks, that keep me coming back here.

>>11631648
This desu

>>11632180
It's mr. Popescu, right?

>>11632556
Clearly.

>>11632607
Kinda dissapointed, was suspecting him to dump BCH into the ground as he once threathened, but then again, game theoretically all huge BTC whales are probably in kind of a deadlock and fear to be left behind on a wrong fork.

>>11632633
I guess he's not as confident in his bullshit feudal republic as he constantly pretends, and wants to keep a hedge on the possibility the OG ancaps are right.

>>11632216

So based.

So, the TL;DR here is this?

Calvin Ayre & his puppet faketoshi are hardforking BCH to BSV, thus starting a hash war with Bitmain + ABC supporters. This is all happening while Bitmain’s IPO is up in the air, so it’s strategically timed in that it catches Bitmain flat footed. Bitmain might have to divert BTC hashpower to defend ABC’s BCH chain, which they have incentive to do as they’ve acquired a shitton of BCH and need to protect its value during the IPO process.

This potentially takes a chunk out of the BTC hashrate too as Bitmain moves resources to BCH, but I lose the logical train of thought here when people are saying it will clog the BTC mempool and cause a chain death. Bitmain/Antpool are replaceable in the BTC ecosystem; their complete absence might slow blocks for the remainder of the difficulty period, but I can’t foresee a mempool clog happening since transaction volume is low due to low interest in crypto in general at this point in time. I highly doubt slush or any of the other big BTC mining operations will jump to BCH mining amid chaos like this.

Sounds to me like this will stay contained to the BCH factions unless CSW isn’t bullshitting and does actually have 1M coins on all BTC chains. If he dumps BTC and causes a capitulation event everything is fucked, but I still think he’s bluffing and doesn’t have that much coin.

>>11632684
Right now the majority of hashpower is signalling that BTC is the most valuable chain, and the fact of the matter is that it's simply not and absolutely everybody with half a brain knows it.

The Ayre gambit will result in the bulk of BTC miners having to either accept that they don't get to set the rules in the legitimate Bitcoin while they keep deploying resources signalling for the BTC shitcoin chain because that's what the pleb NPCs have been programmed to swallow. Either they move gear back over to fight, and maybe they win and prove that BCH is Bitcoin and will be legitimately defended, or they don't and they get their ass beat by guerilla warriors on Ayre's side that prove that BCH is Bitcoin and will be legitimately defended. Since both rulesets still qualify for peer to peer electronic cash, there's actually no losing move for somebody that believes in Bitcoin (BCH). Any way you look at it, a war will be fought, the chain will be defended, and nakamoto consensus will have been empirically validated as a dispute resolution mechanism as this scheming patrician points out in >>11632180

In addition, if any significant dumping of either hashrate or holdings happens which negatively impacts the price of the BTC shitcoin, due to the massively pumped up hashrate presently on said chain, it may be a repeat of November 12 2017 but in a much more aggravated sense, as slush is now relative to then a much smaller portion of the total global hashrate, but the hashrate has been pumped up stratospherically high. Given the technical ignorance and fearfulness of the plebs over on the BTC chain, a chaindeath spiral is a distinct possibility as both forces cover their bases on what is really, actually important to them, rather than just playing nice for the stupid plebs.

TLDR; These conniving ancap BCH boys are playing a deliciously complicated game of poker to force the chinks to stop scamming the plebs.

I can't wait for fuckin bitcoin as a whole to just destroy itself. The whole BTC vs BCH thing was funny but now it's BTC vs BCH vs BCHSV, this is exactly what crypto needs. The dinosaur to die, destroying itself in the process while these fuckin nerds argue with each other about irrelevant shit , taking their corporate interests with them, and let blockchain 2.0 flourish. Alt szn is here boys, bitcoin is dead.

>>11632756
This is reaching almost LINK levels of LARP. I think the BTC doomsday theorizing here is extremely unlikely. Essentially you’re saying that no matter what happens in the BSV v BCH hash war, BTC dies? I grant that mechanically speaking, chain death on a 2015 block difficulty adjustment cycle is completely possible, but it has to be triggered somehow, and I just don’t see how this series of events could do that.

Ayre’s gambit is effectively that he can start and win a hashing arms race and kill BCH, making BSV its successor. There are three possible outcomes here:
1) BSV wins and BCH dies
2) BCH wins and BSV dies
3) Both chains live and remain viable

How in the name of the good lord does this possibly affect BTC? A hash war happening on a forked chain isn’t going to magically rile up all the BTC miners into asserting their power and rejecting Core. And all this drivel about “legitimate defense” reeks of emotional idealism. Anyone with half a brain realizes that hashpower is all that matters in a PoW system - you don’t need a “mini nuclear war” to convince people that nuclear weapons work any more than you need a “mini hash war” on a minority’s forked chain to convince people that hash wars can happen on the main chain. I just don’t see any reason that the main BTC chain would even fall under the remotest of threats in this BCH civil war.

>>11632867
these cashies are retarded
they still believe that miners control consensus vs providing a simple service
literally over a billion dollars has been wasted fighting for their retarded theory
but the simple fact is they're wrong and it's built into the consensus protocol

>>11632867
> Essentially you’re saying that no matter what happens in the BSV v BCH hash war, BTC dies?

No, I'm saying there will be waves, and those waves *may* destroy BTC, depending on how big they are, which there is no way of knowing until the war begins. The only invariable on the situation is that BCH will be defended in a hash war and the usage of hash as a dispute resoltuion mechanism will have been empirically tested in anger.

> I grant that mechanically speaking, chain death on a 2015 block difficulty adjustment cycle is completely possible, but it has to be triggered somehow, and I just don’t see how this series of events could do that.

Bitmain moves over enough hashpower to outcompete coingeek, coingeek hires mercenary hashpower to push BSV even harder, escalating spiral until there is no longer adequate hashpower to provide any kind of throughput at all on the BTC chain. That's how.

> Ayre’s gambit is effectively that he can start and win a hashing arms race and kill BCH, making BSV its successor

You assume that BSV "kills" BCH. BSV just *is* BCH in that sense, it is a continuation of the original ledger with slightly different rules. There is nothing too out and out crazy about those rules that would make one reject them out of hand like a permanent 1mb block limit or segwit, ergo if BSV wins, it's just Bitcoin.

> 3) Both chains live and remain viable

This one seems the least likely to me. If Ayre insists on a war, ABC isn't going to be able to avoid it.

>>11632901
>bitmain loses 600 million
>insists on losing more fighting a meaningless battle
all while sane miners reap massive profits mining bitcoin
it's literally the most retarded money sink theory I've ever heard of and will not work whatsoever

>>11628415
>Bitmain is holding 1 million BCH, and they have an IPO soon, so they're going to abandon their BCH and let it die for this exact reason
This guy should have stuck to sticking it into old ladies for money, thinking is not his thing

>>11632936
finally bitmains final straw
they're fucked LOL billions of dollars wasted over chink thinking

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

>>11632924
Bitmain won't lose anything unless they stupidly dump their 1M stack on the BSV chain to try forcing the price down. The safest option for Jihan is to let coingeek take over and not fight it. He gets his IPO, continue selling hardware, his bcash stack stays safe, and all it costs is some lost face. Not like he has much left after letting blockstream shit all over him the past year.

>>11632984
he literally can't sell his shit or else he loses 98% of the value
everyone involved with bcash is a scammer kike with shit up to their shoulders

>>11632958
bcash could be destroyed by rented hash power nigger
it's a minor chain on 256 literally kys with your braindead theories

>>11632901
>Bitmain moves over enough hashpower to outcompete coingeek, coingeek hires mercenary hashpower to push BSV even harder, escalating spiral until there is no longer adequate hashpower to provide any kind of throughput at all on the BTC chain. That's how.
This is where I think the logic falls apart. A protracted BCH v BSV hashwar where people are mining at a loss makes that “mercenary” hashpower more expensive to hire the longer it goes on - if it’s even willing to switch chains in the first place - because that hashpower could instead continue doing what it’s already doing: profitably mining BTC. Point being, there is an opportunity cost at play here.

If I’m a miner mining Bitcoin, I want to be paid in Bitcoin. If Ayre & co have enough BTC to pay me, I might consider “mercenary mining” for them on the BSV chain with my hardware. But I’ll only do it if my net returns are greater from doing that than they would be from just mining BTC - note that my net cost of mining BSV includes the cost of switching the software my rigs are using, too, which is a non-trivial effort. The bigger my operation, the bigger a pain in the ass it is to switch, and thus the bigger the premium I will charge for putting up with the hassle.

So Ayre & co will have to spend more and more money to buy hashpower every time they make a “domino” fall, deepening their losses until they run out of BTC to pay the mercenaries with. I don’t think they have the BTC to pull that off.

>>11633018
thank you for explaining it
and if they do have billions to waste real bitcoin hashing power becomes more expensive to rent
if the blocks slow fees start to rise creating more incentive
if the "hashwar" goes on longer than 2 weeks bitcoin suddenly becomes more profitable and more expensive to rent hash from
it''s a lose lose for bfags

>>11633018
> This is where I think the logic falls apart.

That's because you're wrong.

> A protracted BCH v BSV hashwar where people are mining at a loss makes that “mercenary” hashpower more expensive to hire the longer it goes on

How do you think this mercenary hashpower *gets* hired? What do you think caused every S9 circa December to be earning 40 USD per day? Because the price appreciation of BTC put the money directly into their hands. Price appreciation of the assets in question in this scenario do the exact same thing, it's not "mining at a loss", it's securing the chain at the level necessary to enforce the nominated ruleset, and that costs x.

> Point being, there is an opportunity cost at play here.

And that opportunity cost is extremely low because of BTC's stratospherically high difficulty rate coupled with its fairly shitty price. Minor increases in the price of BCH by extension have major impacts on the hashrate in BTC, and BTC doesn't adjust fast, because muh dumbass difficulty adjustment algorithm.

> If I’m a miner mining Bitcoin, I want to be paid in Bitcoin.

Then you're a stupid miner, because that's not what miners do. Miners simply mine whatever is most profitable and liquidate it to then buy the things they think don't suck. That's why Bitmain mines mostly on BTC and yet holds very little of it. It is simply the economically rational play to make, you are using the ignorance of the market against it to finance your intelligence at its direct expense. The *only* thing economically rational miners en masse care about is; what gives me the highest immediate return. This was empirically validated November 12th 2017 when 90% of hashpower abandoned the BTC chain, it's not up for dispute.

> The bigger my operation, the bigger a pain in the ass it is to switch,

No, you can have n thousand rigs all pointed to the same proxy / pool, it's absolutely trivial to switch them extremely quickly, and miners already do.

>>11633050
>>11632958 is right, you're embarassing yourself, you really should just shut the fuck up before you make it worse. I pity you.

>>11633067
>This was empirically validated November 12th 2017 when 90% of hashpower abandoned the BTC chain

let's see how long bfags can sustain hashpower without EDA boosting 100k+ coins into their chain outside distribution consensus

>>11633087
Keep up shit for brains
https://jaredschlar.blogspot.com/2017/11/todays-bitcoin-highlights.html

>>11633105
retard
>>11633104

>>11629639
Chinese arent communist wtf it's probably much more capitalistic than western countries

>>11633157
This is exactly what I meant by megabytes of incomprehensible banal shitcocks in relation to >>11632540 it's just fucking hilarious how dumb corecucks are now, how do they even remember to breathe?

>>11633179
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBnRO7qmfUU&t=4s

>>11633181
100k+ mined outside consensus retard nigger
your chain is a god damn joke
using EDA abuses anomalies as proof is pajeet status

>>11628459
What I don't get is this: Let's say "attack" the ABC chain.. what damage could they possibly do here? They still have to follow concensus for other miners to consider their blocks valid. They could, perhaps, "undo" a found block by mining two ahead of it, but this would then require 66% of the hashpower, no? If exhanges required, say, three confirmations, would this not make the proposed attack unfeasible unless Fake Satoshi and Co controlled the VAST majority of hash power?
pls respond

>>11628729
It's probably worse than this desu. Some problems in LN aren't yet solvable.

>>11633236
> outside consensus
> literally within the difficulty adjustment algorithm
wew lad, corecucks really are plumbing new depths of brainlesseness these days. It's a good test of the theory that the longer you find people believing something retarded, the less intelligent those people are likely to be.

>>11629639
>Craig has said he is prepared to spend $1million a week for two years and he's an absolute autist so I don't doubt it
I don't think he has that kind of money. As Calvin's pet, maybe that'll happen though.

>>11633002
>>11633010
Greg, pls go.

>>11628432
>poker is a finite game, but bitcoin is not
True, but have you ever properly played poker? Its a game of patience, the games go fucking on and on.

>>11632145

szabo

>>11633188
youre fuckin deluded if you think this isnt the case for western countries as well

it's just that china has no need to hide what they do.

>>11633270
lots
https://blockchaind.net/51-attack-blockchain-reorganizations/

>>11633297
real bitcoin is 8 hour no blocks and then blocks every 20 seconds OK GOT IT
trigger that like 10 times and you got 100k free bcash for jihan
keep holding those bags stupid faggot

>>11628533
yes

>>11632094
>>11632310
>>11632441
>>11632540
Based as fuck. Thank you for continuing to post here. It is more than the retarded supermajority of this board deserves, but you should know that there are plenty of us out there that are 100% on the same page. What we have right now is just the latest skirmish in a war for the future of all of Western civilization.

>>11633105
That says 50%, not 90%. Either way, with blocks being found less often, anyone who can put obsoleted miners back into use, or anyone who returns to the chain is now twice as likely (at 50%) or nine times as likely (at 90%) to earn the block reward even accounting for the lengthier time twixt blocks.

>>11633067
You claim that miners mine that which is immediately profitable to them, but aren’t even mentioning that liquidity is a huge factor in that. Isn’t it completely obvious that exchanges are going to take a wait-and-see approach until the dust settles? That would mean there’s no liquid market for BSV until a clean split has clearly occurred. In turn, that means mercenary hashpower would not have any reason to stop mining BTC unless paid in BTC for their effort. Mining BSV to keep it would be pure gambling, as there would be no guarantee that it would ever be sellable.

You assume that a new hashing equilibrium gets created, yet point out no plausible sequence of events by which it can be reached. “Ayre will buy it” is just handwaving - for him to be able to buy it, the people with the rigs need to be willing to sell it, and I see no incentive for them to sell it without absolutely gouging him on price and making this whole attack much more costly and far less sustainable.

I can’t foresee a world in which this hashwar significantly impacts the BTC hashrate. Miners on another chain don’t give a shit about the politics of a minority fork. November 12, 2017 can’t happen again unless the BTC chain itself is in crisis, which it clearly is not.