Interesting idea and I somewhat agree, still I am not sure if the assumption that BCHwill be a relevant long term us correct. If it isn't then an attack might harm more people then a slow fall into irrelevance.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'll go with a flash crash. Much like Bitconnect.
-
I can live with both outcomes, total wipe out due to a bug or a slow bleed. I just had the impression, that the base assumption, i.e. that a sudden death would harm less people then a slow bleed, is flawed. Math and logic can be surprising sometimes.
-
And this kind of a bug resulting in a chain split, had the potential to also harm BTC owners as it could have
#rekt exchanges. -
I can live with rekt exchanges. I've had much practice already.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
it raises an interesting question: does it matter? If it's harmful for alts, who cares. If it's harmful for bitcoin, it will either die or get stronger in the long run. Either way is ok. I'd rather have a dead bitcoin, than a broken one on life-prolonging measures, like fiat :-)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.