A fork like Bitcoin Cash will be a boon for the blockchain community.<p>There is a pretty big subset of the community that believe Bitcoin is a panacea that will replace currencies, payment networks and so on, regardless of how technically inferior the blockchain is to other more mature distributed databases and networks. They believe one day, the blockchain will be just as efficient or even more so. This subset is vocal about the urgency of increasing Bitcoin's block size limit so that we can increase transaction throughput as much as possible and as soon as possible.<p>On the other hand, most developers who have worked on Bitcoin proper (either protocol development or Core node development) believe that Bitcoin is more about financial sovereignty and censorship resistance, not as an in-place replacement of PayPal or VISA. This group wants to find as many ways to scale the blockchain without increasing the block size limit because increasing the size of blocks puts at risk users' ability to validate the chain. This is because larger blocks means more resources required to transmit, validate and store blocks and if you cannot validate blocks, then you are trusting transaction validators (miners) just like you trust PayPal. Risking the ability to validate the chain is risking the financial sovereignty or censorship resistance they value so much.<p>Regardless of how well some claim SegWit2x is doing, truth is once SegWit is activated, we still have to face the 2x hard fork which many people in the second camp will simply refuse to support.<p>Having said all this, Bitcoin Cash represents an earnest understanding that there are two camps in Bitcoin and because of the differing economic visions, they will have different technical visions, so why not have two chains and evolve them independently? Rather than playing tug-of-war and both parties being dissatisfied?
For those unaware, "Bitcoin Cash" is a proposed future fork of Bitcoin. The primary miner supporting it also runs an exchange, so what they are effectively trading is "future promised coins" once they start actually mining the fork.<p>Because so few of % of the total coins are tradeable, I think this results in a similarly volatile "market cap" as many ICOs.
The dangers of tx replay mean that HF's like this can never be safe.
Beware those that would tell you that these forks are safe, they are not.
This is another scam from those that would try to usurp the blockchain.<p>You will be able to replay original bitcoin and abc tx's on each chain, unless you opt-in to some funny new untesed hash.
This will hugely disrupt the minority chain ABC, as the mempools on cash chain fill with other valid tx's from main chain.
Its going to be a bloodbath. Steer very clear!<p>From: <a href="https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/56867/bitcoin-cash-replay-protection" rel="nofollow">https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/56867/bitcoin-ca...</a><p>Bitcoin Cash (aka Bitcoin ABC aka UAHF) provides two methods of replay protection, both of which are opt in. If you do not create transactions which use these features, then your transactions are vulnerable to replay.<p>The first method is a redefined sighashing algorithm which is basically the same as the one specified by BIP 143. This sighash algorithm is only used when the sighash flag has bit 6 set. These transactions would be invalid on the non-UAHF chain as the different sighashing algorithm will result in invalid transactions. This means that in order to use this, you will need to transact on the UAHF chain first and then on the non-UAHF chain second.<p>The second method uses an OP_RETURN output which has the exact string:<p>Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System
as the data of the OP_RETURN. Any transaction which contains this string will be considered invalid by UAHF nodes until block 530,000. This means that prior to block 530,000, you can split your coins by transacting on the non-UAHF chain first with the OP_RETURN output, and then transacting on the UAHF chain second.
Is there a crypto voting ring? I understand why most crypto articles reach the top 10 posts but this one has nothing going for it.<p>* Niche website linked / breaking the news<p>* Non-mainstream crypto-fork<p>* No novel interest / features<p>There's nothing to suggest why this would be upvoted, even among this crypto-friendly crowd.
<a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6hko7c/viabtc_will_allow_you_to_trade_your_segwit_coins/" rel="nofollow">https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6hko7c/viabtc_will...</a><p>^ Here is some information (mostly in the form of a fragment of a video, but also to a much much lesser extent some comments) on what seems to be earlier versions of this plan, which I found useful for context (though I haven't spent the time to work this all out in my head yet...).
way back link:
<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20170722175223/http://www.trustnodes.com/2017/07/22/bitcoin-cash-starts-trading-reaches-high-nearly-900" rel="nofollow">https://web.archive.org/web/20170722175223/http://www.trustn...</a>