Is a BTC - BCC flippening in the offing?

[Steven Schear]

Looks like the alt-media are starting to use the "F"-word in regards to
Bitcoin Core vs. Bitcoin Cash

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-19/bitcoin-cash-explodes-record-highs-over-900-heres-why

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Steven Schear <schear.steve at gmail.com>
wrote:

> [Disclosure: I am a strong supporter of L1 (Blockchain scaling) occurring
> before any L2 (e.g., Segwit, Blockstream, Lightening Network, etc.) is
> attempted. And even then all L2 must be thoroughly examined not only for
> technical flaws but for possible misuses that affects the value and utility
> of the underlying blockchain assets.]
>
> Due to the economic and technical nature of Bitcoin and its blockchain its
> more than possible that the new fork, widely being called Bitcoin Cash, BCH
> or BCC, will overtake its rival fork now commonly called Bitcoin Core. The
> effect of this "flippening" could be nothing short of disastrous for those
> holding Bitcoin Core.
>
> Since the recent Bitcoin hard fork we now have two Bitcoins: Core (the
> original) and Cash. When the fork happened those holding BTC (in their own
> wallets) were also able to claim an equal amount of BCC (for free). This
> created a huge supply of BCC. However, many or most people rarely keep
> their BTC in their wallets, preferring instead to keep them in online
> exchange accounts. As a result, even though the exchanges warned people
> they needed to withdraw their BTC to claim the BCC, most of those people
> will never get that BCC. Instead it became a windfall for the exchanges.
>
> When the fork occurred the Cash chain inherited the then current
> difficulty factor of the original. When operating nominally both chains
> should have new blocks discovered by miners about every 10 minutes. Because
> at the outset the mining effort for Cash was only a small fraction of the
> Core's. the rate new blocks were found (and therefore the transaction
> capacity) initially was hobbled. This was anticipated and the developers
> included a means to detect when the hashing power on this Cash chain was
> too low and to quickly adjust, in 20% increments, the difficulty factor.
>
> By far the main driver for miners is revenue. In general they will go to
> whatever blockchain they earn the most. Analysis of the hash power being
> expended on both chains versus the difficulties and value of each coin
> showed that the two were converging insofar as mining profitability. There
> is also an anomalous aspect to the sources of the BCC mining power. Unlike
> that of BTC, where most of the hashing power is associated with known large
> mining cartels, the majority of BCC mining is by unknown parties.There has
> been significant variation of mining power over relatively short intervals
> on both blockchains. The timing of this variation very much indicates that
> the miners were attempting to beneficially manipulate both the value of BCC
> vs. BTC and quickly decrease the mining effort for BCC.
>
>                           BTC      BCH       TOT        BTC     BCH
>   BTC       BCH         BTC
>                            ( Hash Power )                   ( Difficulty)
>           ( Block Time )    (mempool)
>
> 11 August            6600      338       6938         923        115
> 10.00         21            55
> 12 August            6199      416       6615         923        115
> 10.66         20            15
> 13 August            6808      440       7248         923        115
>   9.73         18.46       27
> 14 August            5951      522       6473         923        115
>  11.07        15.82       47
> 15 August            6966      647       7591         923        115
>    9.47        12.85       53
> 16 August            5984      484       6468         923        115
>  11.07        17.14       50
>
>
>    - Since 11 August Hash Power on the BCH chain has increased daily.
>    - Hash power on BTC chain on the other hand fluctuates from day to
>    day, by up to 1000 PH and the mempool continues to grow.
>
>
> The table above are snapshots taken at a point in time each day. Their
> individual states can be monitored in real time here
> <https://bitinfocharts.com/>*.  Scroll down to the hash rate. BTC hash
> rate is down to 4853 PH. This is more than 2000 PH below the table above
> and the mempool <https://blockchain.info/charts> has now exceeded 65MB. A
> Death Chain Spiral may have set in but is being "managed".
>
> This large fluctuation of BTC hash rate could be the miners preventing
> difficulty from adjusting downwards, and at the same time growing the
> mempool. It is also possible that with over 1000 blocks to the next
> difficulty recalculation, we may not see another difficulty adjustment on
> BTC anytime soon.
>
> It is uncanny that we see very little discussion and debate at the very
> top. It is as though the NYA agreement have settled everything. However
> make no mistake. What seem calm belies what is happening in the background.
> Like a duck on the water paddling furiously underneath.
>
> Over at r/bitcoin talk seems to center around price and technology.
> Nothing about any negativity, usability or the growing mempool. Censorship
> of robust discussions is just downright deceitful. Especially if it is the
> de facto forum. It must quit being a propaganda organ. There will be
> consequences.
>
> The people around Segwit may be frantically on the phone, fax and email
> arguing and pleading with the miners. They can see the writing on the wall.
> Only 124 blocks were found in the last 24 hours. Block time have increased
> to 11 minutes and the mempool is in excess of 70MB. It is "too little too
> late". For many of the miners "Revenge is a dish best eaten cold".
>
> Steve
>
>
>


-- 
Creator of the Warrant Canary and the Street Performer Protocol. Wi-Fi
standard spec. creation participant and co-developer of eCache. Director at
MojoNation and Cylink. Founding member of IFCA and GNU Radio.

Shameless self-promoter :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 7091 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20170819/20cf8a87/attachment.txt>