Over the period, BAB has become a disgraceful token due to its utterly centralized nature. Since it is a fork of BCH, the parent coin has also suffered a huge deal. Basically, the fork was conducted to reward the miners, but the centralized nature of the tokens has cost them!
The community has a different point of views regarding BAB. Some of them say that the team made it ‘less-decentralized’ in the following weeks after the fork. But a redditer also claimed that this crap was always meant to be centralized from the beginning.
What’s up with Bitcoin cash?
Immediately after the Nov 15 fork, there was a virtual war between BSV and BAB. The former happens to be a token for the miners, whereas BAB is mainly for trading purposes and HODLing. Shortly after that, BSV acquired about 2/3rd of the total hash power and threatened to attack BAB’s Proof of Work.
Most of the newbies did not even understand what it meant. But those who did turn their back on BAB.
Not surprising at all!
Why 50% of mining
hashrate by one pool is dangerous?
Currently, BTC.top possesses 50% of the total hash power and this is the reason why crypto geeks are calling BAB ‘centralized’.
Please note that the real problem begins when a pool has 51% of mining power. In fact, that’s when a pool could forge a 51% attack. This is because it has already overtaken the majority of the network and it could easily create its own chain to get the fake transactions approved.
That’s not what we want. In fact, that’s the opposite of decentralization (the reason why crypto was created in the first place).
So with such an immense mining strength, BTC.top requires just another percent to be in the position to launch 51% attack.