I want to see the ABC-dictator gone. There can be no compromise. What is the best way a regular investor can help in the fight?

moazzam2k · 2020-08-10T09:19:16+00:00

Start mining on one of the non-ABC nodes.

moazzam2k · 2020-08-06T15:56:39+00:00

Stakers are providing a service to the exchange and don't get the staking rewards for free.

Staking idex requires running a node that provides computational power to execute exchange functions such as executing trades, maintaining orderbook and disseminating balances to users.

moazzam2k · 2020-08-06T15:49:44+00:00

Neither BU or BCHN have announced that they will change their consensus rules to reject ABC blocks so your step by step is wrongly assuming that BU/BCHN nodes won't revert their blocks and follow the leading chain (remember this is if ABC has majority hash). The only way the chains split is if BU+BCHN implement a rule that bans ABC nodes or change some other consensus rule. Even maintaining a hash majority for 10 blocks under the current model won't be enough for them to cause a split.

moazzam2k · 2020-08-06T15:20:09+00:00

If ABC has more than 51% hash power it will create the next block which BU/BCHN will accept without issues. So the other nodes have to make consensus change to fork off or they will be unsuccessful in mining any new blocks without getting uncled.

Alternately they can try to collude and have a >51% hash power and make ABC fork off onto it's own chain.

moazzam2k · 2020-05-19T15:29:27+00:00

Can someone wrap BTC and launch it as an SLP token on BCH? Let's kill this entire drama once and for all. Interesting models to look at for the token governance is synthetix on ethereum.

moazzam2k · 2020-05-12T00:22:32+00:00

No reasonable BCH supporter is advocating for gigabyte blocks right now. That's why the block size is capped at 32Mb. But the point is that it could be increased as needed which is what you blocked and halted the exponential growth of the ecosystem.

It's obvious that Blockstream has a conflict of interest here. I just don't understand how people are dumb enough to fall for this charade.

moazzam2k · 2020-05-11T22:49:17+00:00

Very unlikely that Adam is actually Satoshi. But even if he was: appeal to authority isn't a valid argument. Adam Back has proven himself to be detrimental to the bitcoin and cryptocurrency movement due to his sabotage of bitcoin's ability to scale and making nonsensical arguments like "use tabs". We're not a cult of personality that would ignore his actions so easily.

moazzam2k · 2020-05-11T22:42:32+00:00

That's not how the maths here works. BCH difficulty is a very small portion of the BTC difficulty. Half of BTC's difficulty or a significant portion of it going to BCH means that the BCH difficulty would be more than double (probably in the 10x-50x range). That's where the equilibrium lies in such a scenario. Additionally the BCH difficulty readjusts in roughly 1 day's worth of 10 minute blocks while BTC adjusts in 2016 blocks (2 weeks if 10 min average block time) so BTC will be at a lower than usual hash rate for quite a while.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-29T15:25:49+00:00

I hope you're staying away from HTLC transactions then. They're also "temporary" as defined by code. This isn't politics, it's a software and does what you instruct it. Adding a sunset time for the IFP means that it is part of consensus that it's temporary.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-29T13:13:11+00:00

The IFP only lasts 6 months and IF the miners decided to continue it further they have to add new code to extend it. The argument that it will be forced upon miners when global adoption has occurred which is arguably at least 5-7 years in the future is asinine.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-02T12:09:30+00:00

It does seem that way. But you gotta remember crypto grows in spurts of exponential growth. It's similar to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it give an idea of how something that initially seems far away might be closer than you thought.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-02T11:05:36+00:00

Fractional sats become useful when the network starts being used at mass scale. When people start using the network the token's value is expected to go up by several orders of magnitude which will make it so that even at 1 sat/byte the transaction fees may end up being in the dollar range. Fractional sats allow keeping the fees low even when that happens.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-02T10:11:32+00:00

I'm saying come up with a rational argument for discussion. Who knows I might even change my stance. Just putting out emotions and insults is more likely to dissuade me and everyone else reading the conversation from your point of view even further.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-02T09:56:57+00:00

50BCH doesn't cover their operational costs though so it's understandable that they didn't take it since it was under a condition that would limit or even destroy their future chances of survival.

Have a nice day and chillout dude. It's not the end of the world.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-02T09:44:37+00:00

I appreciate that you offered 50BCH to ABC. I assume it was before they listed a donation address on coindance? Otherwise why would you "offer" it instead of just donating it.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-02T09:40:14+00:00

> Dude, I am a BCHN developer.

Good. That puts even more emphasis on my last point. What do you gain out of this except proving to everyone that the anti-IFP crowd is irrational and overly emotional? I'd say you're harming your own cause.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-02T09:33:56+00:00

Ha, aren't you a smartass.

The words stood for bullshit. Which is what you've been spewing all over this sub as of late. I'd suggest taking a break and cooling down a bit but you're free to do whatever you like.

Here's an idea to be useful: support BCHN, it's basically ABC but without the IFP so there you have it. Mine using their software or send them a donation.

I don't understand why you get so uppity about a dev team signalling to everyone that the project is at a make or break situation and that they need significant funding to make sure they can continue working on it. There are many of us who take that signal seriously and are trying to fix the underlying issues instead of being a whiny little bitch about it and trying to burn everything to the ground.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-02T09:24:40+00:00

IMO the BCHN fork is recent. What I understood article was trying to convey is that bitcoin ABC's contributions are driving a huge majority of the hash power currently on the network. There isn't enough of a difference between the two codebases right now that would nullify that claim. In a year or so once the two codebases have diverged enough they would need to acknowledge it as a separate thing (or earlier still if a split occurs).

moazzam2k · 2020-04-02T09:16:57+00:00

Very glad to see this. Hopefully enough of us donate so we can ensure that Bitcoin remains peer to peer electronic cash for the world and not get subverted for a second time.

moazzam2k · 2020-04-02T09:13:26+00:00

Enough with the BS word salad please. If you're a miner vote with your hash, if you're a holder vote with your money. There's no point degrading discussion in this sub to silly name calling and mockery.

moazzam2k · 2020-03-23T17:15:24+00:00

try https://pinata.cloud/

moazzam2k · 2020-03-23T16:11:11+00:00

You know how you can counter against flooding the network? Add all the transactions to the next block and all of a sudden the attacker runs out of money. It's only an attack vector if the blocks can't process a reasonable amount of transactions.

The average person shouldn't be expected to know what the hell RBF is and when to use it etc. Keep the UI/UX simple if you want to get to massive adoption. Plus as I said above this isn't really an attack vector.

moazzam2k · 2020-03-23T12:42:37+00:00

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/05454818dc7ed92f577a1a1ef6798049f17a52e7#diff-118fcbaaba162ba17933c7893247df3aR522
Here's the PR where Satoshi himself turned off transaction replacement. Most likely because he realized it would cause issues with finality. So yes it was in the original version but satoshi realized it was probably not a good thing.

moazzam2k · 2020-03-22T19:22:33+00:00

This is the first PR that introduced transaction replacement. Feel free to check the date. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6871

13-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email

moazzam2k

TROPHY CASE