The only benefit of increasing the size would be to make it even cheaper to embed data (it is already cheap enough imo). The downside is it makes it cheaper to attack/bloat the chain.
The size was made just big enough to to where it is the cheapest way to embed data without bloating the UTXO set.
Sure. But I see no reason not to increase OP_RETURN on BCH as well. I guess it is the miners who decide if they want to mine a huge OP_RETURN tx. Yes?
The only benefit of increasing the size would be to make it even cheaper to embed data (it is already cheap enough imo). The downside is it makes it cheaper to attack/bloat the chain.
Are you the real legendary twatter? Also just wanted to test this new messaging feature out.
quick note: Cash Accounts just entered beta - go test it at https://www.cashaccount.info/ - public, decentralized, open aliasing system for all. :)
This is seriously badass
it sounds like competing between miners is slowly eroded with one protocol-change at a time; feels like not long from now WHC-nodes/miners will fully replace BCH-miners
They are still competing to find the proof of work first
Whoops another fuck up forever on the blockchain
Coming soon...
1696
65 MB block mined with BSV. Largest ever. Cant wait for 128MB!
bigger plan, BSV was phase 2. On their own they don't necessarily risk bitcoin - whichever chain fulfills it - but together they make a perfect death blow in the long run."
🤔
mkay, so the bandwidth usage is shifted from block propagation to mempool syncing; it would be interesting to find out how many fewer bytes get communicated in no-DS attempt scenario.
Its more about spreading the workload. Instead of getting a whole block and validating it ASAP before passing it on, you create the block over time and just send the PoW proof at end
Instead of minig on the block they will be deciding on what should be in a block. What a waste of time.
It is a way to keep mempools in sync. That way when a block is mined the whole big block doesn't need to be sent to everyone. Instead you basically just need to send the proof of work.
Sorry, I'm not very familiar with the python ecosystem, this is the first time I've had to do anything with it. Where is the readme file usually located?
ABC made a brand new LOW today. Why bag HODLers don’t get it?
Can't we all get along :]
Ok, thanks. So what is the danger of #wormhole to BCH? Just the burning process?
It helps BCH by increasing the number of BCH txs. More txs = more fees for miners = more security for everyone. And burning makes everyone else's BCH more rare and thus more valuable.
Don't know enough about omni to comment specifically, but if, for example, omni tx is much faster than crippled BCH, then, onmi wins.
Omni txs are BCH txs, just with some extra OP_RETURN data attached (same with memo). The post you just made is a BCH tx. You can't cripple BCH without also crippling memo and omni.
I read the article and the comments. It is possible that CTOR does not benefit omni and wormhole directly. However, if CTOR manages to cripple BCH progress, then o&w benefit indirectly
O&W transactions will always cost more than regular BCH transactions (much like how memo txs will always cost more than normal BCH txs), so not sure how that would be the case
because it makes way for omni to work better. this is the equivalent of forking bitcoin 100x more than all the alt coins in ETH.
I followed their process: start "with the 160-bit all-zero hash value" and loop "upward with step-size 1 until an address ended with substring 'whc'".
You did not read the blog.
I explained this many times - it is Jihan who controls the keys.
Did I ask you to?
I seek to have BCH as global money, I do not ask for support for me. I want people to do what is in their rational long term interests
That is it.
Sir, when are you going to move coins out of the wormhole burn address? You are a month past your deadline
How the fuck do you write something on someone's profile?!
That would be kinda cool. Like writing on somebody's wall on facebook.
