3 ms·
Less-popular and original, interestingly in this case.
by cachvico 6y ago
Less-popular and original, interestingly in this case.
- chrisco255 6y ago"original" is a matter of debate. For example, which chain is the original Bitcoin: BTC or BCH? Prior to the fork, they both share the same history. The community aligned more behind BTC but surely there's a fork of the multiverse somewhere in the space-time continuum where the community rallied behind BCH and gave it more hashing power.
- jobigoud 6y agoFor ETC I don't think there is much debate. The original Ethereum paper and protocol still describes ETC whereas if you want to implement an ETH node that verifies the blockchain you need to write special code to introduce the block containing the collection of transactions reverting the hack.
- chrisco255 6y agoBoth have forked numerous times from when the whitepaper was written.
- cesarb 6y ago> For example, which chain is the original Bitcoin: BTC or BCH? Prior to the fork, they both share the same history. That one is easy to answer: if you get a node running code from before the BTC/BCH split, which chain would it follow? AFAIK, that old node would follow the BTC side, since BCH changed the proof-of-work parameters in a way that wouldn't be accepted by older nodes, while BTC only changed some validation parameters in a way that would still be accepted by older nodes (the older nodes might accept some things which newer nodes would reject, but the older nodes would not reject anything newer nodes would accept, so the current BTC chain should still be seen as valid by older nodes).