public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chaofan Li <li3939108@gmail.com>
To: "bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Blockchain Voluntary Fork (Split) Proposal
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:46:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANZDnNo2HMWGOZ4torXvpqjbq6SE=NLBLwysJzetrpurWBu+yw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ijnCMrLMjj4_aUv1BO5NiTk9jtMBL6aaN0yg4hwbF6JNms3MmlpNww0-smKeaqqT0dhsfmxlaX-tKoZ6s06g2ZNmgqY4uWnuuFul8e9on6g=@protonmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3871 bytes --]

Hi ZmnSCPxj

I dont think they need to be ENFORCED to be worth the same.
If the two chains’ algorithms are the same , except some identifiers (eg.
btc.0 btc.1), they have no reason to have different value. If so, the
market will adjust the value.

Also, the total supply can be the same. The amount in blockchains  is just
some numbers. The  wallet can display correct amount, according to the
identifiers.

The voluntary split is also backward compatible with old version
transactions, they can be treated as tx for both chains and included in
both chains later. For new version Tx after fork, some identifiers must be
added , to mark the tx is for that chain only. The miners need to choose
one chain to mine.

After several voluntary splits , the Blockchain basically become a
blocktree, new blocks are added to the leaves(eg. btc.00 btc.01 btc.10
btc.11 ), providing even more capacity.

Chaofan


On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 5:13 AM ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> wrote:

> Good morning Chaofan Li,
>
> What enforces that bitcoin A is worth the same as bitcoin B?  Or are they
> allowed to eventually diverge in price?  If they diverge in price, how is
> that different from the current situation with Bitcoin, BCash, Bitcoin
> Gold, Bitcoin Hardfork-of-the-week, and so on?
>
> Regards,
> ZmnSCPxj
>
>
> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email.
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> On January 17, 2018 3:55 PM, Chaofan Li via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Here I propose a simple method to solve the scalability issue of
> blockchain.
> It is more like a financial trick rather than a technical solution.
>
> The technical part is very simple:
> Split ( hard fork ) the blockchain into two or more blockchains (e.g. two
> blockchain A and B), voluntarily.
> The two blockchains are the same except for some identifiers to
> distinguish the two blockchains.
> The coins on one blockchains cannot be sent to the other one or interfered
> by the other blockchain (  considering so many hard forks in the last year,
> the replay protection should work in this situation)
> Everyone get double bitcoins. Each has half  value of original one
> bitcoin.
> Then, we have two almost same blockchains and the capacity of the original
> blockchain is doubled theoretically.
> When sending coin, the wallet should select one blockchain randomly and
> try to send through only  one blockchain (If there is enough bitcoins)
> I think it is a  possible solution, if the community realize  no
> previously owned asset value  is lost.
>
> The method is inspired by the stock split
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_split>.
> When a stock share is split, for example into two shares, the price halves.
> The market capitalization remains the same.
> There is no dilution of every shareholders' total assets.
>
> The bitcoin often emphasizes that the total coin supply should not be
> changed.
> If the total supply increases, the value of a single coin will be diluted.
> That is true.
> However, the bad part of inflation of fiat money is not  diluted value of
> every unit of fiat money caused by total supply increase.
> The problem is the increased supply is not delivered to everyone
> proportional to their previously owned money.
> The increased supply is released through debt expansion.
> The people that can borrow more money with low interest ratio (during QE,
> it was nearly 0) can invest  and get profit.
> Or they don't even need to pay back the debt. The debt is left to
> government, which might never pay back the debt, and some  get more money
> from government.
> Others' money are diluted.
>
> With voluntary split of bitcoin, dilution of anyone's bitcoin assets won't
> happen.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5545 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-22 18:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-17  7:55 [bitcoin-dev] Blockchain Voluntary Fork (Split) Proposal Chaofan Li
2018-01-22 11:12 ` ZmnSCPxj
2018-01-22 18:46   ` Chaofan Li [this message]
2018-01-22 20:40     ` Erik Aronesty
2018-01-22 22:43       ` Eric Voskuil

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CANZDnNo2HMWGOZ4torXvpqjbq6SE=NLBLwysJzetrpurWBu+yw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=li3939108@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox