The third will take full control.

How to counter the Viab-tc orchestrated Bitcoin Split Attack.

With BitCoin United we stand!

First of all, let me make it totally clear that I consider the cloud mining service Viab-tc {Via Bitcoin Total Control} is a roque entity in the Bitcoin realm. Any money that is put into that is supporting its malifide practises. Like that of the Bitcoin Blockchain Split Attack {BSA}. They are attacking, as a minorty, the whole cryptos realm, by threatening to throw the blockchain split bomb. As if they North-Korea of the cryptos world. This is all but a fork dear reader, it is an attack, or so far a threat to enforce a blockchain split. See, just like the rulers over North-Korea say they will do to the rest of the world. It is not the people themselves, but a crazy bunch of inbred crazy human-monsters that believe they can do this. Until some will stop them, for once and for all, of course...

Hard words towards Viab-tc and its supporters? Well, the normal scenario in the cryptos realm is that a true fork is done by first creating a copy of the Free, MIT license, Open Source code. Then change whatever a team of enthousiasts want to change, put in a release date, publish when the Crypto Fork will go live and calculate a genesis block. Everybody can get their copy, Linux users will most of the time compile the code themselves and run it. Then when it supports mining then that will start right after the release of the new crypto. Most of the time mining pools are formed quite fast after that. Or excisting miner pools will see they can support mining a new crypto. Some will complain that such a new coin is bad for the cryptocurency market, but at least it went by the rules. Let the market decide and that is mostly how it is done. It then it is a true fork with a unique network indentity.

What Viab-tc tries to enforce is different though. It wants to take-over an excisting blockchain by force, through causing a split and then get enough mining power to take over control. If they had made a real fork for their Big China Coin {BCC}, they would have created a copy from the Bitcoin sourcecode, changed what they wanted to change and calculate a new genesis block. Rewards would have started again at 50 BCC {Big China Coin} (Not that other BCC: Bitconnect, this one is Bitcoin-ABC sourcecode and calls itself Bitcoin Cash, but that is part of the attack tactics, as I see it.) Of course then also there would be complains like: "Not another Shaitcoin!" Yes, why not, let the market decide. That would be a perfect valid and bonafide way to go at it. And it still can be done that way, by others than Viab-tc, to disrupt their planned attack...

Burning energy is just a waste.

When Slothcoin had a hard time getting Blockchain Split Attacked and looked like Proof Of Work {POW} mining had its best of times, there was an idea to move SLOTH to the Bitshares ledger. Together with another Slothcoin fan {Slothie} and fellow Steem member Juan Miguel Salas, we launched this as an idea to secure the future of Slothcoin. But it the response was, well, let me leave at: not supportive. It is a thing at the Bitcoin talk forum: mining. A paradigm that a crypto is only a real coin when it is wasting lots of energy in a proces called Proof Of Work {POW} mining. And many in that POW realm are rather fanatical about it: "They're taking our mines! They're taking our mines!" And there is no logical argueing with them, really...

Now, in the core of the hardcore POW mining group, there is the Bitcoin purists. An even more fanatic group that wants the blocks to be huge. Only that, nothing more, no innovations, nothing, just BIG BLOCKS. For one that means big bucks, more transactions per block, means more payment per block. The scale of 2 Mega Byte all the way to 32 Mega Byte per block does not make that much difference. It just means a lot more network traffic. More expensive hardware to be able to keep up and that only for 6 to 96 transactions per second. Just to remind you, Steem can do 3333 per second with ease, just like Bitshares. They both outrun Ethereum and Bitcoin combined in transactions per day! And so much more energy efficient in the proces. While Ethereum and Bitcoin just keep wasting it. (Yeah, yeah, I know that fable how it gives value to them. But, no, no, it just burns energy.) So, why bother about BTC?

The conservative Chinese miners.

The cryptos realm evolved around Bitcoin. Even though the technology of it did get a bit outdated. Slow, hard to scale and just making the blocks bigger is not a real solution. It will only get a few transactions more per second, for a lot more blockspace. So, around came the SegWit idea. Open sourced, just to debunk one of the lies that has been spread. SegWit is able to make more efficient transactions, freeing up room in the blocks. Almost doubling the amount of transactions per MegaByte block. So when an agreement was reached in New York about doubling blocksize to 2 MegaByte, this means, combined with SegWit that it quadrupples the amount of transactions per block. Still, a transaction can not really be free on the Bitcoin blockchain, because Proof Of Work mining is very expensive. And the miners want a good price for the blocks they find. While the BTC reward per block keeps halving after a while.

SegWit would make more things possible, even offline instant payments, that can be very low in value and even without transaction costs. No Proof Of Work mining needed, only at a point where a certain amount of BTC gets locked and unlocked on the blockchain. It is a very clever bit of programming, that can even interact with other blockchains that support Segregated Witness {SegWit}. But, some miners, mainly based in China, where sceptical about that idea. They wanted bigger blocks, that means more income. Because these offline payments could function for a long time, while they would not get anything out off it. Only when the Bitcoin gets locked and unlocked, it would be of interest for them. Or they could start an offline BTC payment channel service... An entrepeneur looks ahead and adapts to a new situation right? That is what progression is about. And because a certain group of miners is afraid they will lose income and control, Viab-tc set up a blockchain split attack scenario, that is supposed to create the Big China Coin. A small elite that is going to rule over the masses, hm, talking about governmental control, this does stink a bit...

HODL your private keys, three horses with just one bet.

Thanks to Bitshares it is possible to move any crypto/coin to its DPOS ledger. With high speed troughput, about 10000 transactions per second and more to come. Confirmations not taking an hour or more, but like 3-2-1-DONE! With a decentralized exchange build in, its own wallet, a Point Of Sales that supports an already excisting one, with a plugin and with the same technolgy that evolved into Steem and EOS. While, just like Steem, Bitshares can move forward to EOS, once that is up and running. Now, while the roque entity _Viab-tc is planning the Blockchain Split Attack {BTA} on Bitcoin, Stan Larimer, the godfather of Bitshares, and father to our well known developer Daniel Larimer, came with a brilliant idea. Let us move Bitcoin really forward by letting it run on a fast, stable and easy to scale DPOS blockchain, called Bitshares! That news put a big grin on my face and laughing outloud I reSteemed the posts about it... This was what some Slothies had in mind for Slothcoin. But it works even better for Bitcoin!

Now, I had another idea to counter the Viab-tc orchestrated Blockchain Split Attack. This would mean forking the BTC-ABC sourecode at Github, change a bit of code so that it would generate a new genesis block. Announce it as a new release at Bitcoin Talk, just calling it: Big China Coin. And go live with it a few hours before the Split Attack was planned at august the first at 12:20 UTC. Because it would start a true new blockchain, with blocks that get orphaned by the SegWit version of Bitcoin. And the transactions would not change the ones on the real Bitcoin Core network, it would just disrupt the Viab-tc attack. While maybe more miners would go for the real fork. Changing the network identifier in a next hardfork, so that there would be a real Big China Coin. But then came the brilliant idea of moving Bitcoin over to the Bitshares ledger and I knew that the best thing to do now, was to make sure to secure the private keys. Because they can make you some extra value, if a split does occur.

Bitcoin United, just needs private keys.

It is time to register for a Bitshares membership account. That I already did. Because if for a reason there will be a split after the attack on august the first by Viab-tc cloud miners, then Bitshares will release: Bitcoin United. It will be capped to about 16.5 million BCU {Bit Coin United}. And all you need to claim your BCUs is your current Bitcoin Private keys. Now, if the exchanges like Bittrex, for instance, promise to support this, then it is still safe to hold your BTC there. As they have the private keys to all the addresses they have. All they need to do is activate them on the Bitshares network after august one 2017. All it will take is to enter the right private keys that you have your Bitcoin in and presto, you have it now in Bitcoin United too. No matter if transactions go weird between the Core and the Viab-tc version of Bitcoin. You will have substantive BCUs and then the cryptocurrency market will decide... Did Viab-tc kill POW mining by wanting to take control by force?

Can the Blockchain Split Attack on august the first gain control, some have asked me. Well, despite of some viab-tc shill attacking others who do their best to expose the truth, the truth is really out there. For one, at viab-tc a small group has already bought cloud mining contracts for the Big China Coin {BCC} and have been mining with the BTC-ABC client since 23rd of july. At a very low hashrate, 0.14%, compaired to the 7 Exa Hashes of the whole Bitcoin network. Then the value claim that has also has been shouted a lot by the viab-tc shill: "The market dont lie!" Yes, true, so let us see what that so called Bitcoin Cash Future is doing. Only trading 742 BTC in 24 hours, that is not so impressive, the other BCC, BitConnect does 1270 BTC in 24 hours. Also be aware that a company like viab-tc can still price manipulate it a lot... And still it goes at about 20% of the price of Bitcoin. So keep your private keys ready, even if it does not seem likely for a real split to happen.

SegWit has massive support but...

The roque cloud mining service viab-tc has already miners going at the BTC-ABC deamon. True, only 0.14% of the total Bitcoin network mining power. And they cannot simply switch their clients mining power over. They could, but that would be really stupid, although they do not seem to have any morality challenges so far, otherwise they would have created a true fork. No guts that bunch. So the viab-tc attackers might go totally rogue. That would mean about 5% of the total mining power. That they are signalling complete SegWit now, with the Bitcoin blocks their miners found is just to keep the blockchain as up to date as possible. Or they expect that their blockchain split attack will fail and just want to keep those contracts they have. But no matter what, they could do something stupid with their miner contracts, as they control it. By all means...

Then there are two pools that I do not trust, besides the roque viab-tc. And those are the pools BW and F2. They keep up with the blockchain by signalling BIP91, that will still get their blocks accepted, but why do they not go full SegWit? This might be a tactical move too. Wait until the first of august, 12:20 UCT, then decide what to do. If there is a first block found for the attacking Big China Coin version, then I think they will switch over. But maybe not if the their pool miners stay. Because if the attack fails, meaning no split, then the value of the Big China Coin {BCC} will drop almost instantly. And no new mining contract will be bought to mine at the viab-tc cloud mining service. It will damage their reputation, even more than it already has been. After all, they orchestrated this whole attack. Not having the guts to create a real fork. Big mouth, aggressive shill tactics, spreading FUD {Fear, Uncertanty, Doubt} and hurting the whole cryptos realm. now that is going to backfire on them...

Maybe it is time for Bitcoin United anyway.

One positive thing about this all is that what this shows is the weakness of POW mining in general. Even if the split will not occur, which is quite reasonable to assume because of the extreme high difficulty that every split block still would need to overcome. And the first split block would need 101 confirmations to really be able speak of 12.5 Big China Coins. So it is improbable the attack will cause an actual blockchain split. Yet anything is possible. But then those who have their private keys within reach can move over to Bitshares and claim their BCU, or BitCoin United. Capped at 16.5 million, released of the energy wasting POW {Proof Of Work} mining. Done with the manipulation and attacks of centralized miner groups that can apparantly hold the whole crypto community hostage.

So, maybe it is time to create BitCoin United {BCU}. Be done with those slow confirmation times, those fights over old obsolete energy wasting technology. Let us unite now, no matter what that old slow technology where there is cock-fighting all of the time. (Just have a look over at Bitcoin talk.) The modern technology is Bitshares, Steem and in 2018 EOS will change the game for good. For many in the cryptos realm BTC is a commodity that is used to exchange others against. But if that semi-standard has a hard time to secure and stabilize its functioning in the cryptos realm, then maybe it is time for a better choice,the DPOS solution: BitCoin United, as united we stand as one! All it needs is your BTC private keys to get BCUs. And as far as I'm concerned: Make it so!

Have a great one!

The Inspector General, movie 1949, where Danny Kaye first plays a shill, but shows he has a conscience.

screenshot is Public Domain/ CC0 licensed