The return to the vision of Satoshi is again making possible the emergence of all kinds of applications and services (such as Yours , the platform on which this text was published) which had been forced to disappear. I mean the dream of a peer-to-peer system cash (cash) mail. Cash. No gold, no layer liquidations, not decentralized computer, or decentralized accounting. Sure it can act as all or some of those things with varying degrees of success, but despite many since the disappearance of Satoshi have tried to change the definition of Bitcoin, its raison d'etre is explicit in the title of the original paper "A system of cash (cash) electronic peer-to-peer" .
In case you have missed the big news, on August 1 this year Bitcoin Cash has been successfully separated from Bitcoin Core and has remained stable (with blocks averaging about 10 minutes of each other in the last month). This has engendered a true competitor for the crown of digital cash, since the distribution of bitcoins Cash was exactly the same as the Core bitcoins at the time of the fork. Which means that if you had a certain amount of bitcoins (BTC) on August 1, 2017, has come to also have that same amount of bitcoins Cash (BCH). Free Pennies from Heaven, so to speak.
Thanks to the successful debut of the function of adjusting the difficulty of emergency (ADE), Bitcoin Cash could take advantage of a power of minority computing and remain a viable currency as a hedge against congestion and unpredictable rates of chain Bitcoin Core . Critics were wrong. It was demonstrated that Adam Back & company were wrong. All that said the hard forks were dangerous and cause a price crash were wrong . Instead crash that almost all 'magicians' predicted for years, after the fork of Bitcoin Cash had the further escalation of the year. The price rose from USD 2,700 to almost $ 5,000 during the month of August.
SegWit was activated on 12 August, when the price was around USD 3600. A month depues that the hubbub around their activation calmed down, the price returned to pre-SegWit levels. Regardless of the contortions that the hardline Core and his supporters do to hide it , two things have been tried, both around which a saw so lengthy debate as unnecessary :
1- The hard forks are not harmful and have no negative effects on market expectations, the price, or the safety of the backbone.
2- SegWit is largely ineffective way to increase as the block size; It is also quite useless as a mechanism for maintaining low rates while increasing the flow of transactions. It's a tricky patch, sold as a panacea, which serves as the basis for future networks to be built over Bitcoin.
I will not be detailed in a long list all the times in the past two years, Core developers have told us a hard fork would be fatal to Bitcoin. I'll spare you the headache, but if you're interested just have to Google it to find at least 10 mentions. The important thing is that now Bitcoin Cash is among us; we finally have a 'hedge' against problems of design, implementation errors and financial losses due to intervention of the leaders of Bitcoin Core .
Before the fork took place, they were traded futures Bitcoin Cash in exchange for ViaBTC. There emerged a price of USD 500 as the market equilibrium for the time of the fork. Since then, the price has fluctuated between USD 200 and USD 970, illustrating the impressive predictive power of the market, even when it comes to anticipate the outcome of an unprecedented event in Bitcoinlandia.
Shaping the future
This event led to the first major Bitcoin conference held in China, which was attended by many foreign visitors and many representatives of local businesses. There, Craig Wright and nChain revealed the next steps in the evolution of Bitcoin, including what he calls "signatures threshold". This technology, if it works as described, may facilitate mixing " coinjoin " chain block, and thus significantly increase the privacy of transactions. It is a welcome change in the roadmap of Bitcoin, which has been focused for most of last year mainly on the ability to scale transactions per second off the chain block. Developers involved in different implementations of Bitcoin Cash tip are doing many of the features that Bitcoin has been neglected for too long allows us to augur a bright future for this currency .
Amaury Sechet of BitcoinABC (one of 4 customers deploying Bitcoin Cash) presented the list of new features that will be added soon to Bitcoin Cash:
Preconsenso
Communication with other nodes in the estimation of transactions for the next block, which allows for a probabilistic measure of confidence in transactions still unconfirmed.
commitments UXTO
Commitment to set UXTOs (record unspent outputs that validates new transactions) at any given time, which alleviates the need for some nodes have to download the entire block chain to operate as nodes full validation .
threshold signatures
Provide the ability to sign with fragments of the private key, which allows you to change the components of the pool of multi-sig signatures without changing the direction, and potentially many other applications.
Gigabit block Testnet
It is already working on a test network with blocks of 1 GB (which would give Bitcoin capacity VISA). Bitcoin Unlimited (one of the implementations of Bitcoin Cash) has begun work on building a testnet for the sole purpose of finding out how big could be a bloc capable of being spread across the network before negative effects in performance or stability.
Whatever the future that awaits Core Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash seems to have its own way and a promising future. Bitcoin Cash has shown that a branch of Bitcoin with their own goals and ideals can secede peacefully and succeed in their own right . But make no mistake: it can be done does not mean it's easy and it will happen again and again. For a successful fork to occur there must be sufficient demand from the community, and fundamental differences of opinion as to what should be the roadmap or the primary objectives of the system. Without this base, the branch that is the product of a fork not be able to maintain its market price support nor sufficient mining.
Compare this simple and peaceful ideology of "Live and let live" with the phrase "We are all together or to" constantly repeated by developers and supporters of Core. "Agreeing to never disagree" in order to sustain the consensus is not a consensus mechanism, but a way to become slaves. Slaves of a fictional notion of consensus, which completely ignores the sense of working trial on the original work of Satoshi. Working test, no meta-consensus through politics!
Wise words
One of the comments Craig Wright did during his talk I found exceptionally deep: "Only when no need to trust someone, you can trust someone." This seemed to me a koan that could only take shape in the mind of the creator of Bitcoin. It's the kind of thing I've ever heard from a developer Core in all my years in Bitcoinlandia. I immediately became obvious. When you have to trust someone (either an intermediary, an escrow, a broker, an arbitrator) in order to get what you need, that's when you find yourself at a disadvantage with respect to it. He has 'sat' as Go players say. It has the prerogative, the advantage, taking advantage of the opportunity to betray the asymmetry of its position. Therefore, you can not fully trust him.
That's the reason why my subconscious always prevented me trust Core developers, who keep telling us that they know what they do , not to worry. Implicitly they tell us we have to trust them to keep the network 'running'. But this problem is not just the confidence that motivated Satoshi design Bitcoin as a work based test system? Are not you supposed to protect Bitcoin what is the profit motive of the miners?
According to Adam Back , no. He has argued for years that we should avoid hard forks and try to resolve differences in real life, in meetings where we put voluntarimente agree not to do anything unless we all agree to do something. Are you kidding me, Adam? That is nothing but a deceptive way to describe a dictatorship. No wonder people call these 'North Koreans' types. "Just that we should never agree to disagree, and when we disagree, let's act until one party to convince the other 100%" It's hard to imagine a more absurdly policy.
Adam always accuses people to act politically. It is not surprising. Obviously you have no idea what is politics, except a vague notion that it is "bad" except when you practice him. What is imposing people Core is a kind of Marxist socialism repackaged for nerds consumption . If we all stick together, we will be better than individually, and nothing will change unless the central committee approves.
0 Comments