Looks like the alt-media are starting to use the "F"-word in regards to Bitcoin Core vs. Bitcoin Cash
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-19/bitcoin-cash-explodes-record-highs-over-900-heres-why On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Steven Schear <schear.st...@gmail.com> wrote: > [Disclosure: I am a strong supporter of L1 (Blockchain scaling) occurring > before any L2 (e.g., Segwit, Blockstream, Lightening Network, etc.) is > attempted. And even then all L2 must be thoroughly examined not only for > technical flaws but for possible misuses that affects the value and utility > of the underlying blockchain assets.] > > Due to the economic and technical nature of Bitcoin and its blockchain its > more than possible that the new fork, widely being called Bitcoin Cash, BCH > or BCC, will overtake its rival fork now commonly called Bitcoin Core. The > effect of this "flippening" could be nothing short of disastrous for those > holding Bitcoin Core. > > Since the recent Bitcoin hard fork we now have two Bitcoins: Core (the > original) and Cash. When the fork happened those holding BTC (in their own > wallets) were also able to claim an equal amount of BCC (for free). This > created a huge supply of BCC. However, many or most people rarely keep > their BTC in their wallets, preferring instead to keep them in online > exchange accounts. As a result, even though the exchanges warned people > they needed to withdraw their BTC to claim the BCC, most of those people > will never get that BCC. Instead it became a windfall for the exchanges. > > When the fork occurred the Cash chain inherited the then current > difficulty factor of the original. When operating nominally both chains > should have new blocks discovered by miners about every 10 minutes. Because > at the outset the mining effort for Cash was only a small fraction of the > Core's. the rate new blocks were found (and therefore the transaction > capacity) initially was hobbled. This was anticipated and the developers > included a means to detect when the hashing power on this Cash chain was > too low and to quickly adjust, in 20% increments, the difficulty factor. > > By far the main driver for miners is revenue. In general they will go to > whatever blockchain they earn the most. Analysis of the hash power being > expended on both chains versus the difficulties and value of each coin > showed that the two were converging insofar as mining profitability. There > is also an anomalous aspect to the sources of the BCC mining power. Unlike > that of BTC, where most of the hashing power is associated with known large > mining cartels, the majority of BCC mining is by unknown parties.There has > been significant variation of mining power over relatively short intervals > on both blockchains. The timing of this variation very much indicates that > the miners were attempting to beneficially manipulate both the value of BCC > vs. BTC and quickly decrease the mining effort for BCC. > > BTC BCH TOT BTC BCH > BTC BCH BTC > ( Hash Power ) ( Difficulty) > ( Block Time ) (mempool) > > 11 August 6600 338 6938 923 115 > 10.00 21 55 > 12 August 6199 416 6615 923 115 > 10.66 20 15 > 13 August 6808 440 7248 923 115 > 9.73 18.46 27 > 14 August 5951 522 6473 923 115 > 11.07 15.82 47 > 15 August 6966 647 7591 923 115 > 9.47 12.85 53 > 16 August 5984 484 6468 923 115 > 11.07 17.14 50 > > > - Since 11 August Hash Power on the BCH chain has increased daily. > - Hash power on BTC chain on the other hand fluctuates from day to > day, by up to 1000 PH and the mempool continues to grow. > > > The table above are snapshots taken at a point in time each day. Their > individual states can be monitored in real time here > <https://bitinfocharts.com/>*. Scroll down to the hash rate. BTC hash > rate is down to 4853 PH. This is more than 2000 PH below the table above > and the mempool <https://blockchain.info/charts> has now exceeded 65MB. A > Death Chain Spiral may have set in but is being "managed". > > This large fluctuation of BTC hash rate could be the miners preventing > difficulty from adjusting downwards, and at the same time growing the > mempool. It is also possible that with over 1000 blocks to the next > difficulty recalculation, we may not see another difficulty adjustment on > BTC anytime soon. > > It is uncanny that we see very little discussion and debate at the very > top. It is as though the NYA agreement have settled everything. However > make no mistake. What seem calm belies what is happening in the background. > Like a duck on the water paddling furiously underneath. > > Over at r/bitcoin talk seems to center around price and technology. > Nothing about any negativity, usability or the growing mempool. Censorship > of robust discussions is just downright deceitful. Especially if it is the > de facto forum. It must quit being a propaganda organ. There will be > consequences. > > The people around Segwit may be frantically on the phone, fax and email > arguing and pleading with the miners. They can see the writing on the wall. > Only 124 blocks were found in the last 24 hours. Block time have increased > to 11 minutes and the mempool is in excess of 70MB. It is "too little too > late". For many of the miners "Revenge is a dish best eaten cold". > > Steve > > > -- Creator of the Warrant Canary and the Street Performer Protocol. Wi-Fi standard spec. creation participant and co-developer of eCache. Director at MojoNation and Cylink. Founding member of IFCA and GNU Radio. Shameless self-promoter :)