Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook

The Bitcoin-Cash-civil war: ABC vs. SV

the Bitcoin Cash is ready for the next Hard Fork, but in their ranks there is dissension. Two camps are the Bitcoin Cash ABC and Bitcoin to Cash of Satoshi's

- 181 reads.

The Bitcoin-Cash-civil war: ABC vs. SV
the Bitcoin Cash is ready for the next Hard Fork, but in their ranks there is dissension. Two camps are the Bitcoin Cash ABC and Bitcoin to Cash of Satoshi's Vision. Who can decide the Hard Fork?

By Alex Roos
15. November 2018 share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn xing mail

The pages get their name from the particular implementation that represents your Vision. ABC is so far the most popular Node implementation in a Bitcoin Cash. Under the leadership of Amaury séchet Bitcoin Cash Bitcoin way forkte last year. Then, the decision of the scaling question to the miners, rather than leaving it to the developers or users. This difference of opinion found expression in the User Activated Soft Fork (UASF) and the Hard Fork Bitcoin to Cash.

After the first Hard Fork on 1. August 2017, the Bitcoin Cash Community began with the thought of the Hard Forks to befriend. You need to hit the decision, every six months, there is a Hard Fork. In mid-may, 2018, it was that time again: Bitcoin Cash forkte for the second Time. The block height was your new Limit when 32 megabytes and some OP_Codes have been re-enabled. With the OP_Codes BCH wins, and allows, for example, social networks on the BCH Blockchain. At that time, all were still in agreement. But today, in the middle of November 2018, the Situation has changed dramatically.

the civil war in Bitcoin Cash

in fact, one can speak of a Drama, if you follow developments in the Bitcoin Cash Community. It all began with the Amaury séchet proposed pre-consumer Sensus, the divided the BCH Community. It would remove from the Vision of Satoshi's and not the principles of the White Paper respect, it was said by the Opposition. But that's not enough, the General experimental approach Sechets to Bitcoin Cash encounters resistance. This resistance unite under the name of "Satoshi's Vision", or SV for short. Also, the canonical ordering of transactions (CTOR) finds no friends at SV. So two camps within the BCH Community are now: ABC vs. SV.

the Old comrades now seem to be mortal enemies. Roger and Craig Wright are no longer friends. On the YouTube Channel, Roger, Mr Wright, the official Declaration of war from nChain Lead Scientist Craig. Wright leaves no room for doubt: He doesn't want the proposed Changes, ABC will find their way into the BCH-the Protocol.

Roger Ver's Thoughts on 15th November, Bitcoin Cash Upgrade

watch This Video on YouTube.

There can be only one winner in this battle of the visions. Wright is also willing to monetary losses. In his Remarks, Wright goes so far as to utter threats concerning ABC with a larger Hashrate he wants to attack after the Hard Fork ABC and empty blocks of the mines, so that the transactions are not confirmed. This is also called shark mining. This threat is even more serious, because SV can currently claim between 76 percent and 83 percent of the entire Bitcoin Cash Hashrate.

The differences between BCH ABC and BCH SV

What are the differences between ABC and SV? A detailed listing and explanation can be found in Coin.Dance. In short lists, summarized:

Bitcoin Cash – ABC:

Canonical Transaction Ordering (CTOR) instead of Topological Transaction Ordering (TTOR), the minimum transaction size to 100 bytes Push Only for scriptSig Enable OP_CHECKDATASIG and _CHECKDATASIGVERIFY (DSV) of the Clean Stack must be

Bitcoin Cash – SV:

the block size will Increase to 128 megabytes reactivation of the OP Codes MUL, SHIFT, INVERT restrictions for scripts loosened

At first glance, you can see that SV would like to make less Changes to the Protocol. A fact that appeals to many supporters of the Vision of Satoshi's. In addition, CTOR and DSV are just to many, a thorn in the flesh, is the depth of intervention in the BCH-the Protocol.

CSW is right?

may occur So unsympathetic to the style of Craig Wright, in the BCH Community, he finds a lot of followers. Proclaimed to be so self-aware of the tenant's approach is in line with the original Version of Bitcoin.

Against ABC is still talking, the suddenly reverse the direction that the Miner does not have now, but Say in the case of Protocol changes. It had broken in 2017, but it is precisely this justification of BTC, this right no longer seems to serve production. SV has significantly more Hashrate than ABC.

a look at /r/btc is reminiscent of the debate of 2017. At that time Roger complained, the censorship of the moderators on /r/bitcoin compared to the large blocks and Bitcoin Cash. Today, however, this censorship can be found in to Craig Wright on /r/btc again. A fact that is not just a positive effect on ABC, and the Moderation of /r/btc.

A spectacle you've never

The Drama around Bitcoin Cash provides a welcome distraction in times when the Bitcoin price moves only sideways, and the Lightning Network, as before, twelve to 18 months. A Hash of the war, as Craig Wright has called, there have been in the Bitcoin world. So the BTC-followers are now back on the Bitcoin Cash's attention, and keep track of happy, maybe a pity the cock-fight on the Blockchain. Until you sell even one or the other Coin from the Hard Fork, it is best to wait until the dust settles.

Who can decide for the Hard Fork, it will show in the next few weeks. In the leadership of Satoshi's Vision is just. On ABC the fight before it has begun? Or you will see the first Hash war the story? From the age of 15. November at 17:40 a.m. and is opened to the Ring. May the best team win.

Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.