/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>4161571
i think it will be $2300usd on the 17th nov

BCH might go up in value but will never be the longest chain with the most accumulated work, and will never overtake bitcoin.

People think it will kill BTC, but if BTC dies we all die. Anyone who bought BTC in the last 3/4 months would be destroyed.

if BCH were to become the main chain it would need over 90 days of chainwork from all current miners put into it for it to overtake current BTC

During those 90 days anyone could extend the current longest chain even with a minor share of the hashrate

>>4161655
Sorry for being a noob but I never heard anyone talk about chainlength as a factor which coin is better, doesn't it just describe accumulated popularity? I mean if a product is new and not that adopted, of course it has fewer users but it can still overtake and destroy competing products?

>>4161712
the only metric that cannot be faked in bitcoin is mining power

since the fork, BTC has only gotten further and further ahead of BCH, and I don't see BCH ever catching up

the longest valid chain with the most accumulated work is what is typically considered 'bitcoin'

There is a reason one is $7100 and the other is $540

>>4161735
Ah I see, thank you!

>>4161655
>muh longest chain
This literally (and I'm using the word literally literally) doesnt mean anything.

Someone's trying to make BCH relevant with all the alts crashing heavily. I don't think Jihan's the one, since it would be a very bold move to sell his BTC stacks as they are mooning. If he is, well, it must be his last bullet.

>>4161655

>if bitcoin dies we all die

If segwit1x dies alts die, bitcoin (cash) will live on.

Bitcoin (cash) is literally the only bitcoin, you can't actually expect it won't surpass an unusable shitcoin right? You must be fudding to buy low.

>>4161818
when I talk about length, what I actually mean is accumulated difficulty.

Bitcoin cash has the "longer" chain because sometimes it prints out 60 blocks/hr

>>4161843
Its people seeing it as a hedge against the fork (idk why they think the fork will kill BTC) and newcomers who think "hey, this other bitcoin is cheap!"

>>4161882
since I've held BTC since august 1st I own equal parts btc/bch. I just can't see it winning. bitcoin as a whole is about concensus. The network effect is very strong. If you think anyone who's bought BTC in the last 3/4 months won't go down without a fight you're delusional

https://theflippening.github.io/open-letter-to-bitcoin-miners-from-another-miner/

>>4161571
Sell that shite and buy btc. Bcash is just trying to grab the brand and will have an ever more aggressive stance the closer B2X gets. The recent pump is totally artificial and is the result of just one or two Korean exchanges being heavily manipulated. The people behind it just want to take control of Bitcoin and turn it into a corporate coin. Honeybadger BTC bitcoin don't give a fuck though, it'll eventually rip off Bcash's head and shit it out.

>>4161953
Say Hi to theymos when you get there, stupid cuck faggot.

If they fix their POW scheme, it could be good

>>4161909
Anyone who bought in the last 3/4 months doesn't matter at all.

Really what differentiates BCC from other high-throughput alts like LTC? When it had just forked off BTC there was a chance for it to surpass BTC in value and claim its ticker maybe (a very small chance but whatever) -- but now?

It’s controlled by a small group of players and the only other notable change they did to BTC, i.e. EDA, massively backfired. (Or maybe it was by design, so they could mine more profitably, who knows.)

>>4162054
So imagine we made a trade but then I took out insurance making sure you would hold up your part of the bargain. Then you don't hold up your part of the bargain. Then I just cash in the insurance. That's bitcoin cash.

>>4162054

Brand name/recognition, non-segwit, actual skilled developers (charlie lee is clueless gook shill)

The fact of the matter is Bitcoin (cash) is growing exponentially fast, I have been watching the transaction volume grow and grow and grow since 1 August, this is only getting started.

If you think BTC isn't in for an epic crash you're very mistaken and you're going to get hurt. You simply cannot have a currency that does not provide a reasonable level of utility, 12+ hour waits and $3+ fees is just not going to cut it.

Segwit1x is in a massive bubble and when it pops a huge amount of that money is going to flow into Bitcoin (cash).

>>4161630
are you sure?

>>4161735
Cash will never be considered "Bitcoin" but that doesn't mean it couldn't take over if Bitcoin fucks up hard.

The real question is why not Ethereum or Dash etc. And an answer is that a lot of Bitcoiners have affinity for Bitcoin Cash (largely due to having received it on the split day).

If Bitcoin dies I can see Bitcoiners moving to Cash
yeah there will be a major crash though

>>4162054
>Really what differentiates BCC from other high-throughput alts like LTC?
The fact that 95% of major adopters in the last 9 years also own Cash and so have skin in the game.

>It’s controlled by a small group of players
Same can be said of Core, especially with Theymos owning bitcoin.org, reddit bitcoin and bitcointalk.
(I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you aren't a Core troll)
EDA has a fix scheduled in a couple of weeks.

real talk, I think the chance of original Bitcoin failing and anything taking over is very low. But if this s2x thing created major confusion, with Coinbase calling one thing Bitcoin and Bitfinex calling another thing Bitcoin... it could get messy.

I got so owned last night on it those fucking koreans, watch out.

https://theflippening.github.io/open-letter-to-bitcoin-miners-from-another-miner/

>>4161981
Triggered?

Bitcoin is Bitcoin.

Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin Cash.

https://twitter.com/JihanWu/status/926076475656126466

https://discord.gg/KJjU7KN come join this group, soon we will make a pump that is huuge, we are currently around 3k members and aiming at 5k members. join if you want quick bucks.

>>4162418

Guess which one he supports, that's right;

Bitcoin (Cash)

>>4162418
How does the segshit mind work?

>>4162478
it doesnt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJAXH2FN9Dc

>this is how bitcoin cash bagholders look like irl

Segwit is blockstream, blockstream is financed by the bilderberg group (AXA insurance and others see the investors for blockstream's site).

China could ban btc since it s segwit like they did to facebook and google and have their own "china bitcoin" which is bitcoin cash used in trading pairs... that could be the catalyst

https://youtu.be/sJAXH2FN9Dc

See that video at the 43 minute mark.

BTrash is completely trash.

Dumm money will take sometime to realize but they will follow when they see the masses are moving away... smart money is already accumulating on BCH since september

>>4163471
>2 hr video with 20k fedora faggot vs no name
Don't even want a tdlw

>>4163860
see minute 43 to minute 46

>>4161571
I'd advise you to take the opposite approach to minimize. Ver & friends do seem to be gearing up to pump their scam token, but they might fail as there's a lot of sell pressure on alts right now.

The best play regarding BCH right now is to wait until it's hard fork and shilling wave, if it does moon with that we wait a little more for hype to peter out and go short on it.

>>4163876
It's like watching a liberal trying to understand conservatism.

>>4163812
Get colon cancer, twit.

>>4163963
nice argument. Doesn't change the fact that Bcash is a Chinese scam coin designed to ripoff retards

Segwit is blockstream, blockstream is financed by the bilderberg group (AXA insurance and others see the investors for blockstream's site)

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/576ac9/bilderberg_group_axa_strategic_ventures_funds/

>>4161735
hey look guys this guys knows the future I bet he also knew darkcoin would be 300$ at one point thanks to his crystal ball

oh wait

miners are happily mining bitcoin for profit but they take this profits and buy BCH, ask yourself why

>>4164815
because is more profitable to abuse the EDA and ripoff retards like yourself by selling you a unreliable token

>>4162344
You are such a raging faggot lmao. Learn how to shill you fucking retarded noob.

>>4165777
>pajeet reading level

Trolling on social media is not a substitute for mining power

>>4161981
BCH supporters are the most reddit thing in existence, just by virtue of the fact that you can't discuss it without them referring to a reddit sub,

You need to go back.

i holding 1:1 bitcoin cash with btc, as you can imagine, I cant stop smilling right now

soon I'll have equals amount of cash, 1x, 2x and btgold

I may be a pussy beting on everything, but I like to be secure

I think the best one is bch, tho

>>4166497
bitcoin is a tree not a branch

highest difficulty chain is bitcoin

There have been many "technically superior" coins vs bitcoin before. The longest chain will win.

bch might pump because dumb people pump things thinking they'll get rich (ethereum classic for example, look at historical eth:etc charts)

The more times btc forks the more it starts looking like bitcoin cash is the real bitcoin

I'm sure there will be many opportunities to profit from BCC in the future from swing trading it but in the long term it's a dead coin.

Branding is all that matters, it's principles mattered then ETH Classic would be worth more than ETH, and if the tech specs mattered then some alts that are superior to BTC/BCC in every way would be the one worth 7k right now.

>>4166640
Great that's why we've decided that we are going to take the name and the ticker soon after the fork.

https://theflippening.github.io/open-letter-to-bitcoin-miners-from-another-miner/

>>4166770

I certainly agree that whoever gets the BTC ticker will win, regardless of tech/mining

https://youtu.be/8RUIgJFsqUI

>>4166770
segwitx2 will ALWAYS be an altcoin, chink

>>4166640

Tech specs absolutely do matter, why the fuck do you think BCH is $550 and growing rapidly? It's faster and cheaper and hasn't been kiked.

It is the original bitcoin and quite literally the only bitcoin after segwit was merged into the segwit1x blockchain.

>>4166846
Would you say you're more of a marxist/liberal or a libertarian/conservative?

>>4166640

oh boy
if anything is dead in the longterm its bitcoin segwit
remember the last time the blocks were full and transactions took ages? ETH almost took over the majority of the crypto market., next time that happen (and it will happen) it will be bitcoin cash waiting in the ranks, ready to poune

>>4166954

The fact that BCC is 550 doesn't matter because BTC is 7k. And BCC was faded into oblivion before it started pumping because are hedging their bets against this other fork drama, not to mention BCC itself is having a fork so it's pumping for free coins too. By the end of November BCC will be lower then 0.06 again and forgotten.

>>4166988
nationalist but guess what we don't have that option in blockchain since everyone around the world is going to mine whatever the fuck they want be it shitocins or bitcoins

the chink miners are forcing non features to increase transaction fees and keep the blockchain slow and ponderous. this is segwit 2x. pretending to fix problems by introducing more necessity for miners and increasing their ability to dominate the network. nodes have no say in post segwit 2x governance, effectively putting all of segwit 2x bitcoin's governance in the hands of 3 chink mining farms. with the current paradigm we atleast have a slight balance of power between core, nodes, and miners. it's like deciding the us government is too slow and making the senate the arbiter of all laws and giving them judicial authority. sure it would increase effectiveness, but then the whole system will be dependent on who? those power-brokers and decision makers. you outside of that have no choice about what they're doing.

>>4167012
That's not how consensus forks work.

>>4167012

>BCH is irrelevant because BTC is more expensivve

you just cant argue against this razor sharp logic

>>4167001

The problem is that if BTC dies, none of these forks are going to replace it, an alt with actually good tech will replace it finally. The fact is that BTC, BCC, BTG, and B2X ALL have shitty tech compared to many random shitcoins. As for BTC chains, whichever has the "Bitcoin" brand name and "BTC" ticker will always win. If BTC dies, other better altcoins will replace it completely altogether.

If I saw that BTC was dieing and I had to get into another crypto, why would be excited about a forked, rebranded shitcoin version of the coin that just died? Why not go into something with relevant tech like ETH or NEO, or one of the coins with actual privacy?

>>4167053
the best solution: legacy bitcoin hard forks and goes to the tangle chain

boom, no need for segwit, lightning, block size changes

nobody will ever do it though because that would probably piss off alot of old money

>>4167012

You're dreaming buddy, BCH is forking to upgrade, not to split into two shitcoins as BTC is doing monthly now. BCH is low because of an intense propaganda and censorship campaign by the (((powers))) that be, but they're quickly losing control.

The truth is hard I know but BTC is literally unusable as a currency and is thus valueless. It's gigantic bubble that can only pop, and soon.

>>4161571
You did well Anon
BCC i the only actual alt along with ETH
Since money skelly wants to turn ETH into DOGE with unlimited supply. BCC is the one to alternate Bitcoin

>>4162164
never trust anyone who's "sure"

>>4167012
the fact that you think BCC is splitting into 2 coins due to the hard fork just shows you're an uninformed dumb sack of shit.

Hardfork =/= chain split

>>4167064

I'm not saying BTC is relevant because of the price, I'm saying the price is high because BTC the relevant one because of it's branding.

I only brought up the price because YOU implied BCC being $550 made it relevant.

>>4167096
>>4167126

I'll admit I don't actually know the details of the BCC fork since I don't follow BCC news (since it's irrelevant) but I can guarantee there are a lot of plebs out there who thought was I just thought and are buying in for "free coins", hence pumping the price.

I agree with you guys that BCC probably deserves to be the one to succeed. I've just been in crypto long enough to know tech doesn't matter. It must not matter, because BTC, BCC, BTG, and B2X all have garbage tech compared to other alts and the flippening into ETH or Monero or something would have happened long ago if tech mattered.

>>4167053
I don't see how increasing the blocksize which is the current bottleneck that is keeping the fees high and the network unusable would perform the opposite function. It definitely attributes to centralization but as mining hardware becomes widely produced competition should emerge over time. Regardless the miners are incentivized to have a functioning network. In fact the better the network runs the more they make.
The flip side of the coin is developer centralization where they keep a low blocksize to ensure the main chain remains functionally unusable. This is to profit from side chains which Adam Beck has admitted in an interview. They are gimping bitcoin and selling offchains to the highest bidder. Meanwhile you won't see the Lightning Network for at least a year, how will the network function with no scaling solution until then?

>>4167247
because it increases the fees to the miners

>>4166603
Bitcoin Cash is also going through a fork you know.

>>4166497
Don't forget Silver

>>4167267
wont split tho you dumb fuck

Vinny Lingham
In light of the recent death threats that I have received, I realize that Segwit2x is a bad idea and I publicly revoke my support for it.

https://twitter.com/vinnylingham/status/926152976149839872

>>4167085
Because everyone else should still have stakes in the other forks if they held their coins. The only losers would be alt coin holders and gamblers.

>>4167255
You have to pay more to get included in the block when the blocksize increases and there's less competition? I don't understand.

>>4167224
Agreed, tech don't matter. ETH has one of the best tech and team of developers but it won't get to btc level

>>4167299
It could split if miners continued to mine the original chain.

Ultimately it will inevitable split if some miners want a new non segwit non BCH bitcoin.

>>4167085
this guy gets it
if btc dies, there will be no strong leader, the status symbol will be gone, the digital gold will never be mentioned again, there will be tens of shitcoins competing to become world used currency but guess what? none of them will because they will be to volatile as people will speculate on them trying to get rich, seriously if btc dies, crypto market becomes stocks 2.0

i won't buy anything with bitcoin in the name, because its all garbage tech.
But if cash failed, I see no reason why 2x would succeed where it failed.
Cash has an 8 MB limit which is 4 times better than 2x's 2 MB limit.
Yes the MB limits are stupid and arbitrary, but that just shows how retarded the btc ecosystem is right now.

If any of the bitcoins "win", i see BCH of having the best chance.

are users going to put up with $10 tx fees on core for another year or 2?
are users going to put up with $5 tx fees on 2x for another year or 2?
will security breaches be found using signature removal?

6 months after 2x "wins", they'll run into the same problems of centralization and high tx fees. Either buttards will come to their senses or move to BCH because it has "low fees" and "instant transactions"

BCC has the same problem at a bigger scale as well. Are block increases gonna be the permanent solution forever? What happens when blocks are 10 GB and only a few supercomputers in the world can even handle mining?

The harsh redpill is that at some point, something segwit-esque is needed, OR a coin with fundamentally better tech will have to replace Bitcoin.

>>4167342
well with an autistic communist dev who doesn't give a fuck about the price of course it'll never go up

>>4167475
Well everyones kinda banking on our technologies getting better overtime to compensate. What a long shot that is.

>>4167356

It could split into 50 coins right now but it won't because that's fucking retarded. Segwit1x, segwit2x, segwit gold, segwit silver in 2017 and segwit infinity+1 in 2018 will invariably strip BTC of any sort of value if Bitcoin Cash hasn't completely dominated the crypto market by then.

>>4167522

Judging how how slow tech improvement has been in the past few years I'd say tech is not/will not improve at nearly the speed that the crypto market is expanding.

For tech to keep up with crypto at this point we'd need a "new paradigm" like the quantum computing meme, but quantum would also destroy most cryptos.

>>4167522
>Be me in 2050
>Get home from long boring work
>Put on my Windows Optics
>Desktop interface boots up
>Get ad telling me Call of Duty: Space Warfare 4 is on sale for only 10000 satoshi
>Get excited and look at wallet.
>Just received paycheck of 200000 satoshi's from work
>Select with eye tracking and brain wave measuring sensors to buy the game
>Window pops up "Processing purchase..."
>"Processing purchase..."
>"Processing purchase.."
>"Processing purchase."
>"Processing purchase.."
>"Processing purchase..."
>Goes on for 30 minutes
>"Purchase verified!"
At least I got my vydia

>>4167475

You realise Bitcoin Cash users aren't inherently against offchain scaling? It's just the unnecessary arbitrary 1MB limit that is completely fucking BTC, that 1MB limit is only there for the private company called Blockstream to profit from by forcing people onto their payment channels (bank clearing houses).

This means you'll be using BTC to pay someone through an intermediary, which means you'll be paying fees to the miners and then fees to the clearing houses (banks).

This just simply cannot compete against P2P currencies, no matter what propaganda gets forced down your throat.

I wouldn't mind off-chain scaling for micro transactions but only if I wish to use that network, if the fees are low and the transaction is small, sure I'll use it to buy a coffee, but if I'm buying a car I want that on-chain with minimum 3 confs.

What you don't seem to understand is that segwit was not designed to be second layer for users, it is a dirty workaround to turn BTC into a banking layer.

There are no genuine second layer solutions yet other than flextrans I believe, which may be implemented on BCH.

Don't quote me on flextrans because I'm unsure as to how that works so far.

TLDR:
BTC is a shitcoin controlled by kike banking clans
BCH is the genuine article, 100% bitcoin.

>>4167667
Bitcoin cash has 0 conf so those types of transactions would actually be instant.

>>4167559
If you think forks strip bitcoin of value you are beyond retarded.

>>4161571
Should i keep my bitcoins? Split them up? Or sell them now, wait for the crash in a couple of weeks and buy low?

>>4167819
Don't sell your bitcoins. The gamble could literally ruin your portfolio if you are wrong about the crash. Bitcoin ATH'd again. The fork may dip it a little or it might just stay the course.

>>4167794
I think bitcoin could be worth over 10k by now if blockstream didn't ruin everything

>>4167759

I agree with you about segwit but I just think BCH is a shitcoin aswell and everything related to Bitcoin at all should be replaced by an actually good altcoin. Unfortunately it will never happen because of branding though. And the only way the BCH chain will win is if it somehow gets ahold of the "Bitcoin" brand name and "BTC" ticker.

>>4167850
Wait two weeks.

>>4167850

Dude bitcoin would likely be sitting at 20-50k by now without Blockstream. Their involvement has drastically reduced and even shrunk merchant adoption and driven a lot of people away from crypto.

>>4167858

I think you're valuing the ticker too much, but hedge your bets if you're smart. It won't take much more than a bit of lost confidence for BTC's price to come tumbling down.