Quote from: Cuidler on August 02, 2016, 04:29:58 PM

Quote from: RealBitcoin on August 02, 2016, 03:49:06 PM

The probability of bitcoin hardfork should be the same as breaking ECDSA. That would make me sleep well at night.

Dont confuse hardfork with splitting and both chains surviving. Hardfork is very necessay tool to fix issues with the coin, and hardly anyone expects 1 MB Bitcoin forewer - and you need hardfork for the change to fix this arbitrary choosen size in the past (without any research what size (and why) should be used back then and in the future). So the only issue is when to do the hardfork, and this is where the opinions (and most importantly interests) differs. But talking about hardfork should never happen is wrong, Bitcoin already had a hardfork so Im surprised your still using this coin.

Splitting chains in ethereum happened because it is easier (difficulty readjust much quicker), and a bailout is a big no for many in the crypto world. Would it be ethereum developers and 80% hashrate refused the bailout instead, it is big question if the forked bailout would survive so long with 20% miners and no developer support instead (I guess no because I hate bailouts, thats why my prefference to ETC if ethereum smart contracts even become usefull in future, as they are not safe now).

As I already said above. Comparing gold with fisher price....