One of these coins isn't like the others.

submitted by /u/MemoryDealers [link] [comments]

source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/esm4ic/one_of_these_coins_isnt_like_the_others/

A concern with the proposed miner funded development plan

Lets assume that:

- the proposal continues as stated in the article and the coinbase reward donations are NOT added to the bch block validation consensus rules. Miners will instead forcibly orphan a block that doesnt support the donations every time one is mined.

- BSV hashrate is static because NChain is the only people mining that chain.

​

Basic rational economics dictates that if btc or bch is more profitable to mine at any given time then hashrate will flow to that coin until the profitability between the two hits equilibrium (again after difficulty adjustment adjusts mining profitability). Otherwise the miners are mining for less profit than they could be.

The bch hashrate probably wont drop by the full 12.5% but it is safe to say that it will drop. Wouldnt a combination of a lower hashrate and some verbal agreement to spend mining power to orphan non donating blocks make it easy for some malicious entity (doesnt matter who) to point a portion of their mining power at BCH (since it is a minority sha256 coin) to generate non donating blocks with the intended goal to be to waste BCH mining time by forcing the donation supporting pools to now have to work to orphan them?

Additionally ABC has implemented an additional work requirement for reorgs. If i understand how that works correctly... if the malicious miners do come in and mine non reward blocks, get lucky and get multiple in a row. then it would be very difficult to rewind the chain and orphan those blocks.

What happens then? just continue and accept some lost coinbase rewards? halt the chain until they can reorg? extend the donation time limit that number of blocks?

This seems to be a fairly large flaw with this funding plan.

Either the donation is actually optional (no attempt to orphan the non donating blocks) or this needs to be a hard fork (consensus enforced). a miner soft fork does not work here

edit: clarity/grammar

​

edit: it would seem /u/markblundeberg also wrote about this problem here: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/esebco/infrastructure_funding_plan_for_bitcoin_cash_by/ffapqej/ credit to him for beating me to post

submitted by /u/GregGriffith
[link] [comments]

source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/esmc6r/a_concern_with_the_proposed_miner_funded/

Old guy meets alien tech

submitted by /u/SomebodyWhoWasMe [link] [comments]

Save space in your pocket by holding only one card: OZTCARD ! . Loyalty cards, Debit/Credit cards and all your Cryptocurrencies can be held in it ! .

submitted by /u/Flashmoni_ltd [link] [comments]

source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/eslzqo/save_space_in_your_pocket_by_holding_only_one/

Need help! Regained access to an old wallet

Hey guys,

some months ago I met a guy who told me that he had 1.7 BTC on an old blockchain.com wallet where he had no access to. He got the blockchain.com-wallet-id and a password, but the password isnt working. He had no email access either because it was n old throwaway account.

Today he came over to my house and I tried to help him gain access again, I found his seed-phrase in his documents and so we regained the access to the wallet. But the wallet was emptied. There was no transaction in the history, just straight up empty.

Is there anyway to check if coins have been moved from his wallet? Is there anything else we can do?

We already contacted blockchain.com support. I already told him that the coins are 99% gone, but maybe theres still a chance. Maybe you guys can help us :)

Sorry for my bad english, Im not a native.

submitted by /u/adolfqt
[link] [comments]

Congress takes a step toward a de minimis exemption for everyday cryptocurrency transactions

submitted by /u/AstarJoe
[link] [comments]

Great news!! Number of Bitcoin Addresses with One or More Coins Records Remarkable Increment

submitted by /u/spiffyXD [link] [comments]