3 ms·

This is the second event involving BCH which is looking very "artificial" for the lack of a better word. About a month ago, BCH started an abrupt up-climb while

This is the second event involving BCH which is looking very "artificial" for the lack of a better word. About a month ago, BCH started an abrupt up-climb while the prices on BTC started to fall dramatically. BTC recovered soon after by hitting all-time highs while BCH prices fell pretty hard. Now we get these talks of insider trading at Coinbase. I don't have much stake in cryptocurrencies and I actually did not mind the BCH fork, hoping that the 2 cryptos can just co-exist. But from what I'm seeing now this has nothing to do with advancing Bitcoin and is just a money grab by Roger Ver.

jerkstate 9y ago
I'd like to see Bitcoin advanced past the congested network and high fees that we see today, and I think Roger Ver does too. He certainly also wants to make money, but what's wrong with that? What I think is objectively bad is a worse product for more money.
hackermailman 9y ago
There's also a good criticism of BCH here: https://medium.com/@homakov/weekly-sync-friction-the-most-important-blockchain-security-metric-1042c0c172b7 https://medium.com/@homakov/weekly-sync-friction-the-most-im... Basically it will be too much bandwidth for most users to bother running their own core, meaning increased centralization for BCH and easy way to kill it in the future through some government action or bug.
- namelost 9y ago
  The thesis of the article is that if bandwidth requirements are too high, then people will stop running full node wallets on their laptops, thus reducing the number of full nodes in the network. In reality, you would have to be insane to store bitcoins with a C++ program permanently connected to and broadcasting your IP address to a p2p network. Now, it may be that many bitcoin nodes are run by insane people who do exactly that, but if the foundation of Bitcoin's security is that its users have no understanding of computer security, then the whole thing is doomed to failure anyway.
  - zeep 9y ago
    I used to do that (I guess I'm a bit crazy).... since then I changed the mac address on my router to get a new IP, encrypted my wallet and deleted plain text wallets...
  - ric2b 9y ago
    Obviously you don't store coins in a publicly accessible node, I don't know where you got that idea. You run the node and connect your light wallet to it, so that you don't need to trust someone else's node to tell you what is going on. I run mine on an old netbook. Some people might store their private keys on the nodes themselves, they shouldn't.
hndamien 9y ago
I prefer to call him Rver.

jerkstate 9y ago

I'd like to see Bitcoin advanced past the congested network and high fees that we see today, and I think Roger Ver does too. He certainly also wants to make money, but what's wrong with that? What I think is objectively bad is a worse product for more money.

hackermailman 9y ago

There's also a good criticism of BCH here: https://medium.com/@homakov/weekly-sync-friction-the-most-important-blockchain-security-metric-1042c0c172b7 https://medium.com/@homakov/weekly-sync-friction-the-most-im... Basically it will be too much bandwidth for most users to bother running their own core, meaning increased centralization for BCH and easy way to kill it in the future through some government action or bug.

namelost 9y ago
The thesis of the article is that if bandwidth requirements are too high, then people will stop running full node wallets on their laptops, thus reducing the number of full nodes in the network. In reality, you would have to be insane to store bitcoins with a C++ program permanently connected to and broadcasting your IP address to a p2p network. Now, it may be that many bitcoin nodes are run by insane people who do exactly that, but if the foundation of Bitcoin's security is that its users have no understanding of computer security, then the whole thing is doomed to failure anyway.
- zeep 9y ago
  I used to do that (I guess I'm a bit crazy).... since then I changed the mac address on my router to get a new IP, encrypted my wallet and deleted plain text wallets...
- ric2b 9y ago
  Obviously you don't store coins in a publicly accessible node, I don't know where you got that idea. You run the node and connect your light wallet to it, so that you don't need to trust someone else's node to tell you what is going on. I run mine on an old netbook. Some people might store their private keys on the nodes themselves, they shouldn't.

hndamien 9y ago

I prefer to call him Rver.