Quote from: AgentofCoin on October 04, 2017, 10:17:57 PM

Quote from: squatz1 on October 04, 2017, 08:22:50 PM

Quote from: AgentofCoin on October 04, 2017, 07:41:58 PM

Who is behind Bitcoin Gold?
This is the first time I am hearing such a thing.

I guess 2017 will be known for its multiple chain attacks against Consensus?

Well it's already known for this, so why not just amplify it to the point so that we have multiple people trying to split off from the REAL Bitcoin.

Yes, I guess you are correct and it may even go as far as mid to late 2018
at this rate. Next we will have Bitcoin Plutonium and Bitcoin Latinum.

Quote from: squatz1 on October 04, 2017, 08:22:50 PM

Seriously, I don't understand why people are doing this again.
...

IMO, it is predicated on a false belief that chain splits is a form of Bitcoin
"evolution" and an economic determination by "survival of the fittest".

This is incorrect and is a misunderstanding of evolution and how it essentially
works. Economic participants in our community have taken a scientific theory
and applied it to chain splits and think that it should function just as in the
natural world does, with viable branches and nonviable branches. But it never
will determine such, since evolution is based upon the human's inability to
control or manipulate nature and time, and their Bitcoin evolution theory is
fully manipulated by human markets owned and controlled by human
governments. So, they are totally different and will not work as they think.

In nature, when a new trait develops that may overtake in the future, that
advanced trait development is usually due to external environmental effects,
not randomly for no purpose (majority of the time). But the current Bitcoin
chain splits are not from a result of "genetic capturability" or "external threat",
but solely for belief in "more choices".

New Bitcoin chains developing as a response to internal conflicts is not a
correct evolutionary theory, and the evolutionary theory should only apply
with external threats. All internal issues or threats should be dealt with
through Consensus systems like an organism's immune system. Using
evolution theory for Bitcoin's current chain splitting, IMO, is obviously wrong
and has nothing to do with "natural evolution", and more to do with human
desires and egos.

So IMO, all of this is either misguided economic participants or attackers
who are manipulating the misguided economic participants.

I agree with you.
As far as I know, a fork happens only in case there is a basic disagreement, (this is what I have seen with open source software and Linux), if 2 parties disagree on should BTC transactions be faster or not. If both parties agree it should be faster, then the question is how, and it is simple to sort it out and develop the original product.

This kind of the alleged forking is just copying! Just trying to start again the same history of BTC and make a fortune. They are simply trying to go back in time.

If the original BTC is developing to make transactions faster, and the new alleged fork is doing the same thing, then there is no reason for its existence because it does not add anything new.

If someone fork or copy KFC chicken, but call it Golden chicken GFC, it is the same, there is no reason to succeed, or replace KFC.