You can be pro or against the IFP for some reasons, but if you are against it because you think that it is a tax or a payment from the miners, you are wrong or worse ... or a liar.
Miners are NOT forced to give all their hash power and then get a cut of 8% of the prize.
So, what they will do will be just giving less 8% of their hash power that are giving now.
They will lose "nothing".
So again it isn't a tax nor a payment.
This without counting that if the money that will arrive to fund the development will be used well, so with the development of new good features, the bch price will probably increase more then 8%.
Miners then will give way more hashing power then now and more of the previous 8% cut.
What if the money from the 8% of the coinbase will be used badly? (no development)
Holders will then sell and miners are NOT forced to mine BCH, they can just go back and mine BTC.
There is a fork every six months, so if the current IFP doesn't work well, other devs can propose their fork without it, or with different address/es easily.
This means that devs must give results every six months to maintain the IFP on their favour.
[link] [comments]
source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/i52lmp/ifp_isnt_a_tax_nor_a_payment/
Comments
Post a Comment