/biz/ - Business and Finance

For a sitrep

>Korean exchange Bitthumb temporarily goes offline for 2 hours

>It being the primarily volume for Bitcoin Cash, the value of Bitcoin Cash crashes from 0.4 BTC to 0.25

>Early investor Roger Ver transfers 25,000 BTC roughly 151 million dollars to an exchange.

source: https://blockchain.info/tx/b26bd6539505b971cbdb02600ce1212824e57650ef7fe2befaff1d2cb82f2462

I think BCH supporters/miners will launch another devastating attack at btc in about 5 days after the bext difficulty adjustment. If they take 80% of the hashpower the difficulty won't be able to adjust for 70 days, mempool will clog up with hr long block times, and the new EDA on BCH will allow miners to abandon the chain once it gets unprofitable but the difficulty readjusts after every block based on the last 144 blocks as opposed to BTC's 2016 blocks. I'm all in on BCH.

>>2244

This has been the most effective attack against bitcoin lately. The only thing that stopped them last time was one exchange going offline for 2 hours- which it was a little silly that a multi-million dollar planned operation didn't consider doing pumps across multiple exchanges to at least appear organic.

However, I don't have a true belief in BCC/BCH so I don't put any money in it.

Can someone step through this with me?

https://theflippening.github.io/open-letter-to-bitcoin-miners-from-another-miner/

It is obviously biased in favor of BCC, but there's some things I want to clarify.

>Due to the constant high fees and network congestion, they introduced an anti-feature called Replace By Fee (RBF)[ref]. The aim of this was to allow users to pay a higher fee for transactions that were stuck and unconfirmed. This broke a critical feature called Zero-Conf which meant merchants could reliably accept a low value transaction with no confirmations as long as it was the first transaction seen on the network.

BUT a few days ago I used Shapeshift.io, and had a 0-conf transaction. They give you 5 minutes to broadcast your transaction, obviously which isn't in the average confirmation time, and very shortly after they get you the equivalent coin and send.

>Another anti-feature added by BlockStream/Core is called SegWit[ref][ref]. This attempts to solve a problem with transaction malleability but in reality this is a non-problem[ref][ref]. It's a complicated mess and adds a lot of technical debt to the code[ref][ref]. The only real reason it was added was to help BlockStream and make their patented Lightning Network become a reality. But Lightning Network is still many months away[ref].

https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning

https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd

https://github.com/ACINQ/eclair

As far as I can tell, these are open source projects with MIT licenses. I'm not a lawfag so can someone clarify how a license such as

>Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy

>of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal

>in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights

>to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell

>copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is

>furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

>The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in

>all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

>THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR

>IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,

>FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE

>AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER

>LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,

>OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN

>THE SOFTWARE.

gives the inventor a type of exclusive rights i.e as in a patent?

>>2248

Also it indicates on a blockchain explorer that a transaction has a fee that is replaceable. If it really was the cause of a problem, wouldn't it just be possible for the merchant to decline RBF type transactions? It largely exists as an option.

If it's a problem how does Shapeshift.io not get jewed by it?

And I just read the shitty description of S2X. That hard fork got shat on because it had no replay protection i.e the same transaction gets replayed on both chains and people may end up spending coins in ways they don't want to. But the criticisms just had to be left vague and the wording had to be defensive.

I'm completely unsure about whether to go with BTC or BCH so instead I've switched most of my holdings to ETH/XMR. Will put some back into bitcoin after this all shakes out.

>>2248

Its a protective patent, they're allowing anyone to use it however they want, the only reason for it is to prevent someone else from patenting it and actually charging or stopping advancement. Like that shitty patent that prevented video game companies from having mini games in loading screens.

>>2252

Can you link to the patent file? I can't find it.

>>2248

>>in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights

>

>>to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell

It says the software can be modified by anyone.

>>2248

I see a lot of varied rumours regarding lightning network from it being blockstream's patent to something of a subscription. I don't really understand the source of these claims. With regards to the LN news I see from Litecoin and similar coins, as far as I can tell it's a lot like a decentralized exchange run on network nodes i.e the atomic cross-chain swaps.

With regards to exchanges, the most I'm concerned with is the custodial risk; but the atomic cross-chain swaps at least sounds like I won't get my OCD triggered when I leave behind 10 sat on an exchange.

Thanks for post!