5 ms·

I'm not too deep into this world, and you can correct me if I'm wrong but weren't those forks of the ledger due to technological disagreements and not folks sta

by pg_bot 6y ago

I'm not too deep into this world, and you can correct me if I'm wrong but weren't those forks of the ledger due to technological disagreements and not folks starting over from scratch? Has anyone said, we are literally copying the exact same protocol and tech from bitcoin and just say this is another parallel version? As an end user why would you care if coins were in epoch-1 or epoch-2 if they perform the same exact function with the exact same underlying technology?

qnmaster 6y ago
This is a rabbit hole, but the TL;DR is that it's very resilient against precisely these types of attacks.
- pg_bot 6y ago
  How would what I'm describing be classified as an "attack"?
  - qnmaster 6y ago
    Every time it's been done, it's clearly an attempt by the developers to profit. Why else would one duplicate something, hardly change it, but attempt to pass it off as the original thing?
    - pg_bot 6y ago
      I mean technically in this case it's just another copy of the original thing no need/want to try and deceive people. In the long run all bitcoin will be lost. You could also parallelize transactions which I believe is still a problem in the cryptocurrency community.
qnmaster 6y ago
>weren't those forks of the ledger due to technological disagreements That's their PR message, not their goal. They were pretty clearly social attacks trying to coopt the name.