...or...
CSW is about to employ mad ninja judo skillz, to redirect bitmain's hash power to stall the BTC chain. Perhaps. (?)
In terms of known hash power, Bitmain's dwarf's CSW's - at least when you include that currently devoted to BTC. However, CSW has always had enough hash power to achieve his objective.
At the 2017 Aug fork, he had enough to mine the first blocks ensuring the viability of the BCH chain.
In the last few days, his hash power has ballooned to large majority for SV on the BCH chain.
Does he hold more in reserve? How much?
We know Bitmain holds a lot of BCH. This would indicate a commitment to ensure the ongoing viability in BCH. They currently advocate ABC. If they retain that commitment, things could get interesting.
CSW has indicated his intent to bury the ABC fork under the SV fork. In the case that he controls previously-unimagined hash power, currently in stasis...
CSW could deploy just enough hash power to indeed 'bury' the ABC fork. If Bitmain stays committed to the ABC fork, they would need to redirect hash power from BTC to BCH/ABC. Assuming again that CSW has quasi-unlimited hash power in reserve, he can continue to deploy additional hash power to keep ABC buried. In order to ensure the continued viability of ABC, Bitmain would need to redirect yet additional hash power from BTC to BCH. Bitmain in this manner could possibly be drawn into redirecting most or all of its hash power from BTC to BCH.
If Bitmain's hash power is redirected from BTC to BCH, what happens to the BTC chain? Is this enough to stall the chain? When is the difficulty retargeting?
If enough hash power is pulled from the BTC chain, this will slow down tx processing appreciably. This could be accompanied by a large volume of small-value txs (sometimes referred to as 'spam txs'). The BCH community has already developed flooding tools used in the Gigablock Test Initiative. This combination could crowd other activity out of the chain, making it economically non-viable. The net result would be rendering the BTC chain useless for economic activity. If sustained, possibly followed by chain death.
I am not attaching any sort of probability to the above scenario. But it is an interesting thing to think through.
thanksCSW is about to employ mad ninja judo skillz, to redirect bitmain's hash power to stall the BTC chain. Perhaps. (?)
In terms of known hash power, Bitmain's dwarf's CSW's - at least when you include that currently devoted to BTC. However, CSW has always had enough hash power to achieve his objective.
At the 2017 Aug fork, he had enough to mine the first blocks ensuring the viability of the BCH chain.
In the last few days, his hash power has ballooned to large majority for SV on the BCH chain.
Does he hold more in reserve? How much?
We know Bitmain holds a lot of BCH. This would indicate a commitment to ensure the ongoing viability in BCH. They currently advocate ABC. If they retain that commitment, things could get interesting.
CSW has indicated his intent to bury the ABC fork under the SV fork. In the case that he controls previously-unimagined hash power, currently in stasis...
CSW could deploy just enough hash power to indeed 'bury' the ABC fork. If Bitmain stays committed to the ABC fork, they would need to redirect hash power from BTC to BCH/ABC. Assuming again that CSW has quasi-unlimited hash power in reserve, he can continue to deploy additional hash power to keep ABC buried. In order to ensure the continued viability of ABC, Bitmain would need to redirect yet additional hash power from BTC to BCH. Bitmain in this manner could possibly be drawn into redirecting most or all of its hash power from BTC to BCH.
If Bitmain's hash power is redirected from BTC to BCH, what happens to the BTC chain? Is this enough to stall the chain? When is the difficulty retargeting?
If enough hash power is pulled from the BTC chain, this will slow down tx processing appreciably. This could be accompanied by a large volume of small-value txs (sometimes referred to as 'spam txs'). The BCH community has already developed flooding tools used in the Gigablock Test Initiative. This combination could crowd other activity out of the chain, making it economically non-viable. The net result would be rendering the BTC chain useless for economic activity. If sustained, possibly followed by chain death.
I am not attaching any sort of probability to the above scenario. But it is an interesting thing to think through.