There's a fascinating discussion developing on twitter around a thread Vin Armani is writing in response to a number of Bitcoin Cash figures. The discussion is about the nature of the game that Calvin Ayre is playing. What's Bitcoin SV's motives? Armani thinks it's about taking control of Bitcoin Cash, no matter the costs. And they are willing to mine at a loss for 2 years, or destroy Bitcoin Cash's market value in the process.
Here are some highlights. Keep in mind that I'm skipping a lot and altering the order. Keen to hear people's thoughts.
I figured out back in June that they were trying to split the chain for some reason. It's what made Craig block me (and abandon that particular plan). I didn't fully understand the strategy until now. Now it makes sense.
Ignore Craig. Don't focus on Craig. That's what Calvin wants you to do. That's why he puts Craig out front, because Craig is a blowhard and half of what he says is nonsense. Craig is NOT a poke player.
Craig is Calvin's employee. If you read the reports from the time, it was Calvin who pushed the whole "Craig is Satoshi" narrative. He funded the operation. If Calvin wanted Craig to stop behaving as he is, he could stop him with a single word.
People don't understand what nChain is, but it helps to start with the fact that nChain does not.generste revenue. It is completely funded out.of Calvin's incredibly deep pockets.
And you believe that Calvin is a desperate criminal? That's fine to believe, but I don't think that is an accurate reflection of reality. I have spent time with the man. He is highly intelligent, calm, and calculating.
Now we are on the same page. And now you are on the same page as Calvin and Craig. Read the last sentence:
@CalvinAyre: "Training mind and body for the world’s first #Bitcoin hash war. With the minds of miners now opened to Miners Choice and Nakamoto Consensus, I now believe that hash war will be the new norm. Winning will now be defined by who can take long term pain in protection of your values"
And now statements like this should be crystal clear in their meaning:
I've been trying to explain this
November 15th isn't a BCH "hash war," it's a war for the hearts and minds of exchanges. If an exchange is only running nodes of a particular implementation (say ABC), depositing coins mined from SV post-split coinbase will be impossible. Chain unfollowed by exchanges = worthless
They are willing to completely destroy the value of BCH to "win". They have said as much. This is about winning for Calvin. He doesn't need the money.
We are playing Bitcoin. Bitcoin is an infinite game. You cannot win infinite games. The point of an infinite game is to keep the game going and keep yourself playing.
[…] Poker is a finite game. Calvin is playing Poker, not Bitcoin.
During this event, half of CoinGeek's hash will be running ABC. You can only attack the chain if you are running the software mining that chain. Right now, CoinGeek has 45-50% of total active BCH hash rate. Who knows how much they are planning to rent for battle.
They are betting that it won't take "infinite money." It probably wouldn't takeore than a few weeks of a completely unreliable networkfor exchanges to indefinitely halt trading and the price to effectively crash to pennies. Their bet is the other side will capitulate before that
Exchanges and applications will fatigue first and point exclusively at the SV chain because ABC will be a war zone.
Those exchanges have a fiduciary duty to their depositors to be able to have reliable withdrawals and deposits. That requires pointing their services at nodes with a ledger that is not being constantly reorg'd.
The power on the other side is fundamentally Bitmain. They are in the middle of a huge IPO and their valuation is based, in no small measure on their massive holdings of BCH. They cannot afford to fight & diminish the value of their holdings at this time. It could derail the IPO.
The distributed community will prevail in the long term. That doesn't mean it will win every battle. It doesn't mean that BCH will survive this. Bitcoin will survive. Part of why the distributed community survives is because a network can die without killing Bitcoin.
imaginary_username 1)
[…] if this attack is successful, it'll redefine the entire crypto landscape and possibly destroy the value proposition of all coins, until another genius arises much later and come up with a better consensus and social system.
imaginary_username 2)
I'm not sure people in the industry quite realize how much is at stake here. The outcome will resonate far beyond BCH, even the laziest of BTC whales should be alarmed.
Vin Armani 17)
They can't see it. That's why I said only Calvin and Craig are even aware they are sitting at a poker table. Hard to win at poker if you don't know you are playing.
chopsticks.cash 1)
It's much more complicated game, because it's not a game. Much more is at stake here, we're talking about taking over a multi-billion ($8B-$200B) dollars real world industry with the outcome of becoming the next Bitmain. Things will not go smooth & be simple, it's geopolitics.
Vin Armani 18)
They don't want to be the next Bitmain. They want to be the next Rothschilds. After BCH, their next target will be BTC.
Edit: Updates added.
[link] [comments]
source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9tvj26/game_theory_vin_armani_on_the_machinations_of/
No comments:
Post a Comment