Quote from: AgentofCoin on August 03, 2016, 01:30:22 AM

Quote from: Meni Rosenfeld on August 03, 2016, 12:07:53 AM

...
The only question that remains is are splits good? Its still too early to tell. ... But again, we do not yet know what kind of ripples will propagate from this fracture, and it could end up being too divisive and harmful.
...

Two men enter, one man leaves.

Ultimately, this is a crypto war that mandates that only one chain survives.
The longer it takes to get to a single chain, the higher chance both chains are destroyed.

Nothing good will come from this except the data for future use.

If you take a look at http://coinmarketcap.com/all/views/all/, you'll see that there isn't just one chain, there are 737 chains (that we know of).

Ethereum Official and Ethereum Classic are now, conceptually, no less different than Bitcoin and Litecoin - the fact they have a shared history is irrelevant. Each can take its own path and succeed independently.

Quote from: franky1 on August 03, 2016, 02:05:11 AM

this would leave the minority split with only 10% hashrate which (using some real world stats) actually results in the minority split only making a block once every couple hours, instead of 10 minutes.(its not a block every 100minutes either, its actually longer)

meaning not only will the minority chain be one block each 2 hours =1008 hours (42 days) before the difficulty adjusts
but every 2 hours only ~2500tx are added to a minority block but with 2 hours of users transactions filling up the mempool.. causing a massive fee war of 40k tx's trying to be next in line for space of 2500, then next 2 hours 75,000 tx fighting for a space of 2500.. 2 hours later 112,500tx trying to fight for a space of 2500
meaning in just 6 hours the fee war will disincentive people from using the minority split. both due to delays, headachs of rebroadcasting and higher fees

1. It's a temporary setback - both in terms of time to confirm and transaction capacity.
2. You're assuming Bitcoin's protocol will remain unchanged. If a split is made, at least the hash function should be changed, and the difficulty reset, rendering this moot.
3. As I've said multiple times, you need to actually prepare for the split to prevent such problems from occurring, not just do it as a knee-jerk reaction. Ethereum Classic got it wrong, but got lucky because Ethereum is already better equipped to handle splits.

Quote from: Yakamoto on August 03, 2016, 03:01:08 AM

Chains splits are terrible. Whenever a hardfork is required, everyone should switch chains, none of this "ETH and ETC" crap. It ups the value of the new chain (when you're lucky) while decreasing the value of the old chain, until it most likely finds a value of equilibrium at some point. That is, of course, assuming that you got that far in the first place. To my knowledge, a majority of the time a chain split results in the currency failing due to either sell-offs or other similar things, and no-one cares about the second chain (or the first) at some point. Ethereum got lucky, and now we have a great investment tool until the two chains equal each other in value and one of the chains gets absorbed.

I'm not sure if you've read my earlier posts but I think you're missing the point. If it is universally agreed that a hard fork is required than of course everyone should switch. A split is for when people can't agree - one side says we need 1MB blocks and the other says 20MB, one said says rollbacks are required and the other says rollbacks are forbidden. If the disagreement is strong enough, there really is no other option than to split.

So far there has only been one case of a major cryptocurrency splitting - Ethereum vs. Ethereum classic. So far it's going well. Experience from split attempts of junk currencies tells us nothing.

Quote from: 7788bitcoin on August 03, 2016, 02:57:24 AM

Just side track a bit:

The reason for Ethereum hard fork, and the subsequent split was to reverse the losses of DAO hack.
Now, with over USD$60 million lost in Bitfinex hack, maybe this give us a "valid reason" to hard fork and reverse the losses? Tongue

1. Bitcoin is much more decentralized than Ethereum
2. theDAO lost about 10% of the market cap, Bitfinex lost 0.5%.

Because of this, nobody in their right mind would agree to such a rollback.