Slashdot Mirror


Bitcoin Is Forking. Again. (vice.com)

Merely weeks after it was announced that Bitcoin was splitting into two separate entities, the initial version of bitcoin and it's new "bitcoin cash," the network is adding a third version, according to a report. From the article: On Wednesday, a group of bitcoiners scheduled yet another split for the network in November, which would create a third version of bitcoin. So, what makes this version different from the others? Right now, the bitcoin network can sometimes take a long time to process transactions due to so many people using it. This is because the "blocks" of transaction data that get added to bitcoin's public ledger, the blockchain, are getting full. In the weeks preceding the fork, bitcoin coalesced around a solution called "segregated witness," which will change how data is stored in blocks to free up some space when it kicks in later in August. But the size of the blocks themselves will stay at one megabyte on the original bitcoin blockchain. Still, some bitcoiners maintained that the only way to speed bitcoin up for the foreseeable future was to increase the size of blocks themselves. So, a group of bitcoin companies and developers got together and launched a fork called bitcoin cash, which does not include segregated witness. It bumped the size of blocks up to a maximum of eight megabytes. That fork was widely anticipated to be a failure before it happened, but at the time of writing, bitcoin cash is trading above $300 USD per coin, which is comparable to cryptocurrencies like ethereum. Sounds like everyone got what they wanted, right? Oh, no. There's a third group of bitcoin developers, companies, and users who advocate for a "best of both worlds approach." This group includes Bitmain, the largest bitcoin infrastructure company in the world, and legendary bitcoin developer Jeff Garzik. They got together back in May and signed what is known as the "New York Agreement," which bound them to implement a two megabyte block size increase alongside segregated witness via a hard fork within six months of the time of signing. They call the fork Segwit2x. Now, that's exactly what's happening. According to an announcement posted to the Segwit2x GitHub repository, a bitcoin block between one and two megabytes will be created at block 494,784.

66 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. Sounds like by invictusvoyd · · Score: 2

    Its getting closer and closer to paper money.

    1. Re:Sounds like by Train0987 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, paper money is at least backed by something. Even if that backing is only the full faith and credit of the US Government it's still better than being backed by absolutely nothing.

    2. Re: Sounds like by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Informative

      So, nothing tangible or of any real value whatsoever.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    3. Re:Sounds like by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They're cloning the tulips

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    4. Re:Sounds like by Mitreya · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, paper money is at least backed by something. Even if that backing is only the full faith and credit of the US Government it's still better than being backed by absolutely nothing.

      Also, one money.
      You don't see California or New England creating its own US currency in parallel.

    5. Re: Sounds like by Luthair · · Score: 2

      No, you're confusing counterfeits with currency backing.

    6. Re:Sounds like by Jamu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Coming soon... New Bitcoin, Bitcoin Classic, Bitcoin Cherry, Diet Bitcoin, Bitcoin Zero and Bitcoin Life.

      --
      Who ordered that?
    7. Re:Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The US government went a bit crazy with the money printer

    8. Re:Sounds like by bozzy · · Score: 1

      And by extension of the US government's backing, said paper money is backed by lots of large tangibles like real estate and vehicles in the form of loan collateral.

      e.g. My mortgage is payable in USD only. Taking out a loan in cryptocurrency these days would mean far too much volatility over the loan period.

    9. Re:Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What about Australian dollar or the Singapore dollar. A lot of the world is outside the United states

      When they create sites where we all want to go and bitch about things, then we'll discuss your less significant countries and perhaps even their own fiat currencies.

      Almost every fucking day a foreigner comes to this US-based site and reminds us of the rest of the world, and we still don't give a shit, because it doesn't matter asshole.

    10. Re: Sounds like by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3

      The US dollar is backed by the ability of the US Federal Government to tax its citizens to pay off its debts - which it currently does (about $400 billion a year right now). Can Bitcoin back up the value the same way?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    11. Re:Sounds like by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3, Funny

      Does your statement mean that Ethereum is basically Pepsi? And Dogecoin is RC Cola?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    12. Re:Sounds like by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 1

      US Dollars are nearly entirely backed by debt. In the case of paper money, it is Treasury bonds and other suitable collateral, deposited by banks at the Federal Reserve, in exchange for the paper notes they give people at teller windows and ATMs. In the case of checking balances, those are backed by bank loans. Debt instruments are assets, which are bought and sold on the market all the time, but they are unwieldy for buying coffee or gasoline. Dollars are uniform sized units which are more convenient for those purposes.

    13. Re:Sounds like by Afty0r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even if that backing is only the full faith and credit of the US Government

      Isn't Bitcoin backed by the full faith and credit of all Bitcoin owners?

    14. Re: Sounds like by Tsolias · · Score: 1

      Faith still counts as nothing.(to be more accurate, faith is the fear of war in case someone trades oil with a different currency)

    15. Re: Sounds like by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Please ask someone...

      Well I would, but apparently I am "clearly a moron," so it probably wouldn't do any good.

      Kind of like trying to reason with a self-righteous asshole.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    16. Re:Sounds like by helga+the+viking · · Score: 1

      How so? http://neweconomicperspectives... Banks don't lend reserves. Reserves are driven endogenously by banks expanding their balance sheets making loans. After that they back fill inter-bank swapping of reserves and ultimately go to the FED (US example) to get reserves at the penalty rate.

    17. Re: Sounds like by helga+the+viking · · Score: 1

      Get gold is an industrially massive undertaking. So you dig it up make it pure, create gold ingot's then put it back in a hole (some vault somewhere). Its limited and even gold is not static in value. Pretty much the definition of what money is not. Money is an IOU its an abstraction of debtor, creditor and bank/some form of intermediary/overseer. Fiat money has been around since ancient Mesopotamia (hence all those clay tablets are bank statements/accounting identities).

    18. Re: Sounds like by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

      No, I just know what my Government spends. That's the interest we're paying on our debt, annually. When t-bills and bonds are redeemed, we pay for those. We issue a lot more (to the tune of $1.4 trillion in the FY2016 under President Obama), but right now, we're paying $400 billion a year.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    19. Re: Sounds like by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      So - you can convert USD easily, to any other currency - or commodity - pretty much anywhere in the world. Even at my local grocery store or gas station I can hand them (physically or virtually, via a credit or debit card or check) dollars and they will let me walk away with real, tangible goods. My bike mechanic takes USD in any form I can give it to him. And he can turn around and give those to his suppliers without concern. Can I do that with bitcoin today? No? Then how useful is that as a currency?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    20. Re:Sounds like by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Do tell... what makes this site "US-based"?

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    21. Re: Sounds like by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

      Mine the landfills?

    22. Re: Sounds like by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      Gold is kind of like petroleum -- we've already mined the easy stuff, but the amount STILL LEFT is enormous, limited mainly by how much money it's worth spending to extract. Kind of like how we were officially "running out" of oil when it was cheap, but at 2-3 times the "cheap" price, the US has actually become a net EXPORTER of petroleum (because it's now valuable enough to refine from tar sand, at substantially higher cost than pumping it from a Saudi oil well). The same is true for gold. At current prices, it's sufficiently valuable to extract a few molecules at a time from large volumes of rock or water.

    23. Re: Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just like the dollar

      The support of the US government is nice. However it's not the important bit. The important bit is that you need to pay taxes in dollars. If you want to drive a car around the USA you have to pay your registration fee. If I buy up all the dollars, then I know that eventually people will pay almost any number of worthless bit/main/cash/eriums in order to be allowed to move their cars. The rest of the value follows indirectly from this, including the fact that oil contracts are valued in dollars.

      If you buy up all the bitcoins, everybody else will ignore you and use bitcoin cash. If you buy all the bitcoin cash, they will use etherium. If you buy all of all three, they will just start forking once a day until they have all your dollars and in the end you will starve (though the cryptocurrency developers will have at least one great party and might share some of their nachos).

    24. Re:Sounds like by mad7777 · · Score: 1

      "paper money is at least backed by ... the full faith and credit of the US Government" What does that even mean? Paper is backed by... the promise of printing more paper?

      To be "backed by" something, in my understanding, means that it is a symbolic representation of that other thing. For example, if you store gold at my house, I can issue you a receipt. We agree that I will give this gold to anyone who presents me with this (paper) receipt. Hence, the paper is "backed" by gold. The paper literally says on it "1 gram of gold".

      Cybercurrencies are not backed by anything, but we do have a mathematical guarantee that there is a fixed upper limit on the number of them that could ever exist. This is infinitely more rigorous than any human pinky-promise not to crank up the printing presses.

      Fiat currencies are, likewise, backed by nothing. In case you hadn't heard the news, Nixon took the US dollar off the gold standard back in the early 70's.

      --
      Might makes right irrelevant.
    25. Re:Sounds like by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      "paper money is at least backed by ... the full faith and credit of the US Government" What does that even mean? Paper is backed by... the promise of printing more paper?

      How about future tax receipts?

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    26. Re:Sounds like by mad7777 · · Score: 1

      So... "backed by" means "taxed"? Huh, that is a definition I had not heard before. Probably because you made it up?

      --
      Might makes right irrelevant.
    27. Re:Sounds like by GenTiradentes · · Score: 1

      Paper money is backed by the threat of violence. Cryptocurrency is backed by cryptography.

    28. Re: Sounds like by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Also, if I have paper money, I can give it to a cashier and get tangible goods immediately even when connectivity is down. I don't have to wait and/or pay money to make sure that over 50% of banks think my twenties are legal.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    29. Re:Sounds like by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

      the full faith and credit of the US Government

      What does that mean, exactly? That phrase has baffled me for years.

      If that backing were reduced to, say, 50% of "the full faith and credit of the US Government", what would be different? What about a less drastic cut to say, 90% of "the full faith and credit of the US Government"?

      Or were you being sarcastic, and I missed the joke?

      --
      There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
    30. Re:Sounds like by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

      Actually, we did see it, some years back, in California. Though some California-esque FUBARness, the state government couldn't pay its bills right away, so it issued some sort of chit or voucher or scrip (I forget the details).

      It wasn't money, of course, because, well, it just wasn't, OK? Get off my back!

      So the state was buying office supplies and electricity and whatnot with these post-dated-checks-that-were-not-really-checks-and-were-not-even-post-dated slips of paper.

      Kind of a bummer if you ran a business and wanted to pay your employees, and all you has was chit. I think eventually banks starting lending money, using this chit as collateral. It'd be good as money, once the state government pulled its collective head out of its collective ass and started honoring that chit.

      --
      There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
    31. Re:Sounds like by KingBenny · · Score: 1

      somewhat inevitable since it attracted attention of governments and big biz i suppose. At least a lot of people got to make a lot of money out of thin air ... more or less :D
      to print more when there's a problem ... i think indeed that was one of the things satoshi was trying to prevent

      --
      Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  2. well quite a failure, chain is not dead, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    > That fork was widely anticipated to be a failure before it happened, but at the time of writing, bitcoin cash is trading above $300 USD per coin, which is comparable to cryptocurrencies like ethereum.

    Well it is quite a failure in terms that it was given to each Bitcoin owner, and yet most owners dropped it, resulting in price drop from default 100% (you had N bitcoins and N of BCH "bitcoin-cash" tokens)

    through 50% (two times more BCH was sold then bought) - on futures market

    through 20% - when real trading opened, not just futures,

    then 10%

    now trading at 6-8% of original Bitcoin price.

    Also this does not account for all the people who did not yet bothered to sell the BCH "bitcoin-cash" tokens they are given (e.g. because it's in cold-wallet, burried somewhere, or on address not used in years) - or because it is simply lost forever (all addresses that had N amount of BTC on August 1, were "given" also N of BCH).

    Another metric is hashing power (mining power), it is at around 10% of original Bitcoin's.

    1. Re:well quite a failure, chain is not dead, but by janimal · · Score: 1

      Blockchains seem to split every time there is a contentious upgrade. The blockchain cryptocurrency that wins out will be the one that is most widely accepted. The best way to think about it is that it is a fair inflation. It's (almost) instantaneous and fairly distributed to all those, who hold the legacy coin. Fears of too much dilution are pure FUD. Dilution is only bad, when it robs savers of their money. If savers have double the coins after the inflationary event (fork), then they were not robbed.

      There are other effects, of course, like (possible) splintering of acceptability and therefore utility, but classic inflation is not what is happening.

  3. In the future... by jeff4747 · · Score: 5, Funny

    In the future, everyone will have their own cryptocurrency for 15 minutes.

    1. Re:In the future... by supremebob · · Score: 1

      I'm still waiting for Slashdotcoin! Maybe the trolls can exchange them for karma points!

  4. Good news everybody! by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

    This is good news for Bitcoin.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  5. Split 3X by stevez67 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When one pyramid scheme isn't enough to fuel speculation, triple down on it.

  6. If only bitcoin could die... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If only bitcoin could die ... people would finally stop with all their cryptoshit talking and their scam ICO ponzi schemes....

    1. Re: If only bitcoin could die... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Cryptos are consuming more and more electricity when humanity should save it up... Bitcoin and etheruem miners are RUINING THE EARTH !!!

    2. Re:If only bitcoin could die... by GNious · · Score: 1

      I'm sure TrumpCoin will take over and everyone will leave BitCoin behind.
      (Yes, TrumpCoin exists....)

  7. eventually, a good idea is diluted by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    for the "best of both worlds"

  8. Bitcoin's worst nightmare by timholman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The "success" of Bitcoin Cash has shown the way, as it is currently worth > $300 without impacting the price of BTC. Free money, right? So it will be seen as a no-brainer to keep doing hard forks, as long as different parties in the BTC ecosystem see some advantage to it.

    But at some point, all of these hard forks will make it abundantly clear to everyone that there is nothing special about any cryptocurrency. They're all made up out of the ether. They may provide some marginal utility for currency transfer across borders, but as investment vehicles (which is what is driving the current price spikes), putting your money in a cryptocurrency is like getting involved in a bidding war for a patch of tulips sitting in the middle of a infinite field of them.

    BTC is "special", because there are only 21 million of them, right? Except maybe if there are 210 million, or 21 billion, or 21 trillion, because hey, here comes another hard fork of the blockchain by some group that wants to get rich quick. At some point the whole cryptocurrency mania collapses as everyone realizes just how limitless they really are. That is something that the people pushing BTC do not want to happen, but it is inevitable.

    There are interesting times ahead for cryptocurrencies.

    1. Re:Bitcoin's worst nightmare by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      There is something special about gold though- it can't be created out of thin air. Its limited. So is fiat currency from a government- they don't just print an extra trillion to cover their debts, because if the supply goes up, it inflates and they know this. The same is not true for cryptocurrency- there is nobody in charge and capable of preventing runaway printing, and there's an advantage to doing so (even if that advantage comes at the cost of devaluing the original currency). So the GP is right- expect a lot more of these.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    2. Re:Bitcoin's worst nightmare by helga+the+viking · · Score: 2
      QE is not / never will be inflationary. Thats the problem with using a homeopathic term 'printing money' without context:

      Quantitative Easing (QE) involves the central bank buying treasuries (or in some cases private sector securities) from the private sector by paying with newly created reserves.

      Quantitative easing simply swaps one type of asset on private sector balance sheets (typically treasuries) for another type (deposits backed by bank reserves, or simply bank reserves if a bank did the selling.)

      QE effectively changes the duration mix of outstanding government liabilities toward more short term liabilities and less long term ones. As such, it is roughly equivalent to if the treasury had previously chosen to issue relatively more T-Bills (short duration) and less bonds (long duration).

      No sectors (or entities within sectors) see any change in balance sheet equity as a direct result of QE. Therefore, there is no meaningful increase in the private sector's purchasing power or propensity to spend. At the level of each individual household or firm who might sell to the Fed during QE, decisions regarding investment portfolio composition tend to be made independently from decisions about how much to spend versus hold in an investment portfolio — so a change in the portfolio mix (cash, bonds, stocks, etc) won't cause more spending. Also, treasuries are almost as liquid as "money" and anyone previously holding treasuries could have easily sold them to support any planned spending.

    3. Re:Bitcoin's worst nightmare by helga+the+viking · · Score: 1

      Metal is a commodity not a currency. Currency has been around since the beginning of the bronze age before most 'metals' were around. Sorry to disappoint but every time federal government spends by legislation (eg: congress says 'make it so') that is creating currency. Every time a bank account of a federal employee is credited it is done by treasury as a legal mandated timed obligation. Likewise every time taxes are paid thats taking currency out of circulation and deleting it. Its purely a post-rationalisation not a literal transfer of funds that say 'tax dollars pay for X spending'.

    4. Re:Bitcoin's worst nightmare by Gavagai80 · · Score: 2

      Metal is very useful for practical purposes. Gold became valuable originally because people wanted to use it, not hoard it.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    5. Re:Bitcoin's worst nightmare by Mr307 · · Score: 1

      Of course there is inflation, too much money chasing limited supply of goods. Macro scale, bubble after bubble after bubble goes pop. Micro scale, you wont find a single person here saying they actually want prices of things they buy daily to keep climbing, but they sure do keep climbing.

      So yes, you can claim no inflation on super special magic double bond accounting paper, hold it up for everyone to see, and point at the special bold words on the page, but for regular people there definitely is inflation.

  9. After the singularity... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Bitcoin will be able to go fork itself.

    1. Re:After the singularity... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Bitcoin is getting to be forking ridiculous. Go short now.

  10. The eventual result... by tonique · · Score: 2

    The eventual result will be the will be a separate forked bitcoin for every potential user and then their true value will be seen.

  11. Re: 8==N=I=G==C=O=I=N==D ~~-_. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In that case:

    8> This is white nationalist coin. :D This is alt-right Nazi coin.

    Im sure this will get modded down by some over sensitive little Trump supporter.

  12. "it's new" by nowsharing · · Score: 1
  13. What I don't understand... by ilsaloving · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What I don't understand, is why bitcoin is being valued so stupidly highly. To me, this kind of instability is frightening. The risk of losing value is so high that only a fool would invest.

    And yet in the real world, I'm the fool because if I had bought bitcoin earlier on, I'd be filthy rich now.

    1. Re:What I don't understand... by helga+the+viking · · Score: 5, Insightful

      like any ponzi scheme: the best time to invest was way back when it started... or now. Quick ;-)

    2. Re:What I don't understand... by pots · · Score: 1

      And yet in the real world, I'm the fool because if I had bought bitcoin earlier on, I'd be filthy rich now.

      This is wrong-headed. When you starting thinking this way, remind yourself: "The best possible investment is buying winning lottery tickets. Not the losing tickets, those are for suckers, just buy the winning ones."

    3. Re:What I don't understand... by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      The South Sea Bubble https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    4. Re:What I don't understand... by quantaman · · Score: 1

      What I don't understand, is why bitcoin is being valued so stupidly highly. To me, this kind of instability is frightening. The risk of losing value is so high that only a fool would invest.

      And yet in the real world, I'm the fool because if I had bought bitcoin earlier on, I'd be filthy rich now.

      The question is what's the true price of Bitcoin? Everyone thought that back when it was trading at $100, and now that's a distant memory.

      I think I'm going to drop $1000 into bitcoin and etherium, it's money I can afford to lose, but if one of those cryptocurrencies goes legit big time then at least I'll be able to stop kicking myself.

      --
      I stole this Sig
  14. Re:Another day another coin by CaptnCrud · · Score: 1

    dammit! I was hoping for a more clever logo. They should rotate the hash lines more like this: =G=oatce Coin

  15. unbelievable by mattack2 · · Score: 1

    This is forking unbelievable.

  16. for anywone that cares: by helga+the+viking · · Score: 1

    Once you realise bitcoins are a commodity.

    The coin that wins will be the commodity that is most useful. You need a lump of tin, gold, platinum or perhaps something like silicon instead?

    As with most metals they are in small particles with impurities deep in the ground. Then you have to use a lot of energy to extract them in useful quantities and have the right equipment. Assets required to mine bitcoins are a server farm of hardware and a measure of energy.

    they behave like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Considering most of the debate about which coin will win is probably none of the above. The coin that will win probably does not exist now and will have more than these 3 can offer for the great hordes of unwashed masses. The one that wins will be the one with most coercive uses probably tied to a utility purpose (ownership of said coin will be tied to getting something everyone wants). In the way touch screens were not popular until tied to Apple phones/pads. Or i-tunes gift cards.

    The best outcome for it to act like currency for users will be acceptance, price stability not which type of bit-coin is worth the most versus USD but which one can be stored knowing it has stable purchasing power 1+ years from now, and end user experience that is user friendly Otherwise the 3rd intended fork is of relevence only to people who need to use it as a conduit to avoid bank fees (dump into coin, transfer it and excahnge for a currency at the other end), speculators, miners and enthusiasts.

  17. Re: 8==N=I=G==C=O=I=N==D ~~-_. by gDLL · · Score: 1

    Nice ascii art. Lefti/commi coin: :O

  18. Re: 8==N=I=G==C=O=I=N==D ~~-_. by supremebob · · Score: 1

    Well... Paypal won't take their money anymore. If the Neo Nazi's are already moving their sites to the dark net, it only makes sense for them to start using cryptocurrency as well.

  19. The true utility may be (will be?) by Sqreater · · Score: 2

    The usefulness of these forks may simply be that they allow an algorithm to determine at the moment of your transfer what coin has the greatest transaction speed at that moment for that transaction, so there will develop an abstract "Bitcoin of Bitcoins," environment. If you fold the other major coins in to such a "Coin of Coins" environment, money transfer goes to a truly mind-boggling level of abstraction. It would be like having one blank credit card that represents the best credit card deal at the moment for that particular purchase.

    --
    E Proelio Veritas.
  20. You've got to be ... by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

    You've got to be forking kidding me!

    --
    There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.