Connect with us

Bitcoin Cash

Bitcoin Cash [BCH] to be allocated to CoinEx customers; 80% of the total revenue involved

Priyamvada Singh



Bitcoin Cash [BCH] to be allocated to CoinEx customers; 80% of total revenue involved
Source: Pixabay

A member of the Bitcoin Cash [BCH] community and a Redditor, Kesh4n started an r/BTC forum today, wherein she notified that the cryptocurrency exchange CoinEx will pay out long-term dividends in BCH for CET [CoinEx Token] holders. The eligibility for receiving BCH dividends from the company is the possession of at least 10,000 CET, the user informed.

Kesh also stated the rules of allocation, saying that if the CET holdings of a person are on CoinEx, then the exchange will calculate the dividends into BCH and allocate directly to the corresponding accounts. She added:

“Otherwise, the dividends will be calculated into CET and allocated to your CET wallet addresses elsewhere.”

The total dividend amount to be allocated is believed to be the 80% of the total CoinEx monthly revenue, whereas the rest 20% will go into the development and other projects lying under the company. The interval of allocating the BCH dividends will also be on monthly bases.

Another eligibility rule for claiming the dividends is that one has to hold only the released CET. Any CET that is not issued or released and comes from mining will not be included in the dividend program. Regarding the duration needed for the funds to be credited, Kesh wrote:

“Dividend time: Your dividends will be allocated in 7 business days at the beginning of every month. The final date may vary or be delayed depending on the financial settlement.”

Recently, a popular proponent of Bitcoin Cash, Faketoshi aka Craig Wright attempted to shut down the CoinEx platform. CoinEx is a subsidiary of Bitmain, which is on the opposing side of the BCH chain split drama and wants to implement the Wormhole protocol against Wright’s nChain.

What pushed Wright to the edge was a statement made by CoinEx that Bitcoin SV [Satoshi’s Vision], the implementation proposed by him for BCH is an “altered version of Bitcoin Cash protocol”. CoinEx stated this as Bitcoin SV does not have the replay protection and will put the network in a place of vulnerability as BCH is a hard fork.

Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter

Follow us on Telegram | Twitter | Facebook

Priyamvada is a full-time journalist at AMBCrypto. A graduate in Journalism & Communication from Manipal University, she believes blockchain technology to be a revolutionary tool in advancing the future. Currently, she holds no value in cryptocurrencies.


BSV STN is mining 1.4-gigabyte blocks; Is this a scaling solution or a journey towards centralization?




Source: Unsplash

Bitcoin SV, the fork of Bitcoin Cash, has set up an STN [Scaling Test Network], specifically intended to test on-chain scaling for large blocks, which also acts as a standard network in the latest update of Bitcoin SV. It was noted that the STN was mining blocks that were more than 1 GB in block size, a development that was celebrated in the BSV camp after a Twitter user, @two2wheel2life, tweeted,

BSV has a total of four such networks defined, i.e., Mainnet, testnet, regtest, and STN. According to the website, STN was implemented to reduce the impact of scalability testing on testnet and to preserve testnet as a network for testing of applications built on top of Bitcoin SV, without requiring testnet users to make significant hardware available.

Block 11891 on the STN was 0.95 GB in size and processed a total of 9530 transactions in the block. Block 11901 was 1 GB in size, and block 11902 was 1.4 GB in size, which could possibly be the biggest block mined on the STN.


Is Bigger Better?

The question of bigger block sizes has sparked quite a few debates, be it Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, or Bitcoin SV. It was one of the reasons why Bitcoin Cash forked from Bitcoin and why Bitcoin SV forked from Bitcoin Cash.

However, does massive block size really solve the scaling problem without any drawbacks? The Operations Manager of STN, Brad Kristensen, had some interesting things to say to AMBCrypto about the recent achievements of the STN.

Brad stated,

“We’re very pleased with the results, and I think it’s a strong signal of what is to come from Bitcoin SV on mainnet as we continue to increase adoption. The STN is running the same public release available right now (0.2.0). Anyone can join the STN to test their applications /services.”

According to BSV’s roadmap, the first upgrade for the project will be ‘Quasar,’ which is proposed for July 24, 2019, and will concentrate on scaling by increasing the default block size hard cap.

Centralization or scaling?

Andreas Antonopoulos, a prominent Bitcoin advocate, had a different opinion on the rise in block size for Bitcoin SV. When AMBCrypto reached out to him, he commented,

“Large blocks have a centralizing effect on mining and node operators. It is unlikely that the main BTC chain will increase the blocksize as it has taken a different path for scaling, via layer-2 payment channels (Lightning Network) and on-chain optimizations (Segwit, Schnorr etc.).”

As stated by Antonopoulos at the ‘Bitcoins in Bali’ meetup on June 27, 2017, if the block size is increased in orders of magnitude at a rate that is proportional to the increase in user base, a difficult problem will emerge wherein Bitcoin transitions from a decentralized to a centralized system.

Additionally, Antonopoulos said,

“If my block takes 11 minutes to validate, then i’m off the blockchain, which means fewer people can validate independently, which means the system becomes centralized. With which one of these increases, fewer people can participate in the validation process, fewer people can participate in storing the data, and fewer people can participate in being independent actors. We go from a system that is decentralized to a system that gradually gets more and more centralized.”

The above gives a clear idea of what could happen if the block size increases. However, Craig Wright announced in one of his Medium articles of his plans to increase the block size, giving his opinion on the same,

“The reality is that scaling on-chain is much simpler than anyone likes to admit. There is nothing special to be done in order to achieve this, it is just allowing commercial systems to compete and to remove the false idea that home use and hobby nodes need to be subsidized”

So, how will BSV fare? Will it still be successful after implementing larger blocksize or will it accept the centralization that comes with increased block sizes? Only time will tell.

Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter

Continue Reading