Re: double spend as a feature

as long as the coins existed prior to the fork, right? New coins in
either fork are specific to the fork? Those are the assumptions I
based likening the situation to spinoff semantics on: having a
transaction in the parent chain is pre-spinoff; after the fork a
transaction shared by both chains can be spent in either, but each
chain has its own separate transactions going forward. I can't receive
a transaction in chain B and then spend that in chain A, can I?


On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Melvin Carvalho
<melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 25 July 2016 at 06:15, David Nicol <davidnicol@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I suggest that conceptually it's a game changer.
>>
>>
>> Based on the messages in this thread, it looks like Ethereum
>> accidentally effected a "spinoff" distribution.
>> http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/spinoff.asp Not a game changer at
>> all, unless you were previously playing a game where cryptocurrencies
>> had a restricted set of options compared to corporations.
>>
>> The subject line hype about "double spend as a feature" is misleading.
>
>
> "A spinoff is the creation of an independent company through the sale or
> distribution of new shares of an existing business or division of a parent
> company"
>
> Doesnt seem to me quite the same thing.  The chain forked, and the
> public/private keys are active on both chains.  Thereby allowing users to
> spend the same coins twice.
>



-- 
"It's like a whole other country."

Received on Monday, 25 July 2016 20:40:41 UTC