Bitcoin protocol seems to be a system that is finely tuned economically & legally; ABC is reckless with its changes. Just adding DSV has a good chance of making BCH a target of SEC.
Why are you repeating this DSV FUD each day? You already know it's nonsense.
Memo for instance. My answer may came after yours in next block (even if here there is explicit causality because I'm "quoting" you)
Makes me a bit sad because I like the fact you ..
That's not dependent transaction. Posts and answers may come in any order. CTOR doesn't change that.
ABC doesn't look like it's getting bigger blocks anytime soon. Also the REASON for bigger blocks is very important. SV wants millions/day more txns on chain as soon as possible.
ABC doesn't look like it's getting bigger blocks anytime soon. Also the REASON for bigger blocks is very important. SV wants millions/day more txns on chain as soon as possible.
Codebase is the same. Limit is 500x over the demand. Certainly enough until next year. About millions tx/day, from where, who do you think is so eager to use the blockchain?
Nobody posted here about SV announcing they are adding replay protection yet?
https://coingeek.com/original-bitcoin-reborn-bitcoin-sv-bsv-bch-hash-war-ends/
LMAO. I knew they would be the one's adding it. Right again.
Because the more you know Bitcoin, the more likely you are to dislike what ABC has done to Bitcoin. Memo users are more likely to know Bitcoin, thus more likely to disagree with ABC.
The opposite, the more you understand Bitcoin, the more likely you are to like BCH!
At the moment, there is shared BCH history and all memo transactions are on the same chain. In the event of a split, which is more than likely, the community will be divided into 2
Assuming a 50-50 split, a transaction on ABC's chain will not be visible to 50% of current memo users on SV. So lesser users on memo on each chain -> less incentive to use memo