Why Bitcoin Cash Is Adding CTOR | November Hardfork Upgrade

Video quality	The size	Download

Информация о Why Bitcoin Cash Is Adding CTOR | November Hardfork Upgrade

Название	:	Why Bitcoin Cash Is Adding CTOR \| November Hardfork Upgrade
Продолжительность	:	4.39
Дата публикации	:
Просмотров	:	4,3 rb

Oops @ :25 I mislabeled the TTOR acyclic graugh as CTOR and the canonical ordering as TTOR
Comment from : @DecentralizedThought

Yummy 🍽
Comment from : @Weirdomanification

thank you
Comment from : @hthring

Thanks for the video
Comment from : @young-ceo

Came here to downvote the bullshit With CTOR you are destroying valuable information that is the causality between sibling transactions
Comment from : @1Hyena

Would be better to have an explanation of why TTOR is the standard currently
Comment from : @darbsllim

Its always lack of communication about the problems with a change thatvleads to forks, justvread some of the criticisms here, its not a good thing for the long term after all
Comment from : @635574

This seems to be what nChain argues agains, because it is a change to the protocol and existing miners would be against it and its not fully explored for sneaky edge cases But I agree with you the more improvements are made now the better before mass adoption makes them uneconomical or BCH fails to scale due to inefficient block transmission
Comment from : @635574

we may need BCH in a faster bigger cheaper form sooner than we think
Comment from : @iancassie9840

"Bitcoin"-Cash is a scam
Comment from : @randam1481

Andrew Jackson as avatar image :D You're the youtube version of my spirit animal
Comment from : @HowToSandAFloor

The truth is, Bitcoin scales better without CTOR and GraphenebrbrThis is only needed as OMNI based systems (Wormhole) are insecure and cannot handle orphans and re-orgs brbrHence, this is NOT Bitcoin and will be rejectedbrbrGraphine is a Ras Pi solution - it is about having small nodes and it can easily be attacked
Comment from : @reizma

Video did not present the negative sides of CTOR and positive sides to TTOC Opinion on CTOR is biased Don't trust blindly!
Comment from : @przechodzien

Great video! Keep it up
Comment from : @trflw

This video is misleading because it is ABC pushing for this change and it is not a done deal as the videos mistakenly assumes
Comment from : @debtpeon

Why do you draw the network like that at 3:50?
Comment from : @jorgeezy

May be worth reading; wwwyoursorg/content/maybe-optimizing-the-base-protocol-of-bitcoin-cash-does-not-even-make-49134b815729
Comment from : @mpapec

What if it bisn't/b adding CTOR? It's contentious, and to be it being a "done deal" feels exactly the same as Core was acting as if Segwit was a "done deal" This is not good
Comment from : @Devar

Glad to know both side of us agree that the protocol needs to be locked as soon as possible I thought ABC side wanted new features every 6 month
Comment from : @gjun6930

Wow this is great info, thanks Decentralized ThoughtbrDoes this mean a new chain and BCH holders get a new forked coin?
Comment from : @wealthtrekkers

How does it relate to selfish mining?
Comment from : @DaviddeKloet

BCash
Comment from : @Freddan0

Dope! So this is a network layer improvement for data replication Crazy, but I just saw the same convo happening in IPFS and Scuttlebutt but from 2014! Flat vs graph and bloom filters Good to see these things coming together, thanks! 🙏🏿 brbrAs a front end guy, it’s easier for me to think of this as just a low-level real time application, that is decentralized and crypography based
Comment from : @sahidmiller

Great explanation, thanks I find it an easy to follow format What software did you use to make this video?
Comment from : @conradvdp275

Being a visual learner, I really like the way you break down technical info into something easy to understand Great job!
Comment from : @PhilCalfee

Do it now Don’t wait until the network hits is limits Get ahead of the curve Another great video
Comment from : @TheCryptoverse

did you mix up ctor and ttor? @25 sec
Comment from : @lingus11

"L-BTC and Lightning coming soon" hahaha
Comment from : @lugaxker

And why is CSW against it,bragain?
Comment from : @realtonaldrum

You're back!!! <3
Comment from : @blockchain2029

But you can't know what transactions are going to be in the blockbrAll miners that didn't mine the block will still have to wait for the miner that did, to propagate it to them, to see what transactions are in them, and they still have to check itbrThis to me is based on assumptions that all transactions in the mem-pool are always going to be included in the next block, which is still just a assumption Unless you can force all miners to always have to include all transactions into the block, this to me won't work Also, how about it there is spike of transactions and they can't all fit? I have to assume this won't happen as limits should be removed, but still, its valid problem that can happen
Comment from : @-ED-

Thank youbrThe question is to include this or exclude this before the protocol is lockedbrUnless I'm mistaken
Comment from : @taojones4941

Not adding CTOR now seems like it can be used as a trump card by sophisticated miners to gain an edge on the network What I love about Bitcoin is miners decide and its all about hash :)
Comment from : @andreasbsv7496