/biz/ - Business & Finance

Lets hope they fork off into a alt coin and call it segwit coin or core coin I vote for.

who the fuck wastes their time to make these shill charts... Is it supposed to be a joke or something. If you made this yourself, OP, seek help.

>>7931834
I think its hilarious how the guy censoring people and then changing the rules of the game to ruin billions of dollars of other people's investment in ASIC miners and to force people off the network he doesn't like yet he thinks BCH is centralized. Lol

>>7931954
I like how you ignore the fact that Bitcoin is going to move off POW and literally make itself an altcoin. Why not talk about the real issue here? Oh yeah, because it makes you look retarded for following communists advice for investment related matters.

Obligatory /biz/ reading material:

https://archive.is/kRLn4

>>7931954

>>7931715
bcash > bcore

>>7932030

damn that is some legit psychobabble.

>>7931954
-

>>7932480

>>7931954
>>7932493

>>7932493
>>7931954

Press S to sell your Bcore to buy Bitcoin Cash

S

this thread needs more women

>>7932493
>damn that is some legit psychobabble.
Damn that isn't even an attempt at an argument.

Just a reminder that Bitcoin Cash is also working on Blockchain Sharding, something rarely talked about but massive. It will allow you to download partial blockchains and thus still be able to be a node on your raspberry pi regardless of network size. Check BUIP024 [https://www.bitcoinunlimited.info/resources/buips]) So there is literally no reason to use Bitcoin Segwit, literally not one. Unless you like communism and having all of your hard earned money taken from you by soyboys.

Mining is an energy arbitrage and it will always centralized where energy is subsidized. The future of crypto currency is smart contracts. Everything else is bullshit.

As for the Chinese government... they need foreign currency, and an pervasive asset class that isn't USD. BTC's continued success is probably consistent with their interest.

BCASH IS TRASH

you fucking cashies just want to suck roger vers dick

BITCOIN IS KING!!!!

>>7932835
>Mining is an energy arbitrage and it will always centralized
Centralization means controlled by an authority. You are describing the desire of the market for efficiency. They are not the same thing. Mining tends toward efficiency. Its only if the mining is centralized that it will tend toward inefficiency. So what Cobra is advocating for is centralization of the mining process. Please educate yourself.

>>7931715

BCASH is dead - join the flappening LTC > BCH within two months

>>7933095
In 3 years time Bitcoin Cash will overtake Bitcoin Segwit. I guarantee it.

>>7933123
https://twitter.com/LukeDashjr/status/967504195715850247
The Bitcoin developers are all getting in line behind the POW switch. Segwit coin has no future. If they change off ASIC's it will be easy for a state actor to gain total control of the mining power through hackers and taking control of bot farms. Remember that Windows has backdoors for all their computer products as detailed by Wikileaks and proven by the ransomware attacks.

here we go again with this btc hardfork shit.

what a fucking mess this was last time.

BCH will be king. It doesn't even have many trading pairs yet, and is maintaining 5% of the market share.

>>7933095

The King is dead

Long Live The King!

>>7932030
Bedtime Roger

>>7934248
>Bedtime Roger
Is that all you've got? We have a thread here were we are discussing the fact that Bitcoin developers are working hand in hand with the owner of all major Bitcoin communication platforms to centralize control over the mining algorithm used in Bitcoin so that they can censor whatever users they want off the network and steal their hard-earned profits. And you're response is that? My god, you newfags are such communist bitches.

Oldfag here who never paid attention to this (so newfag). Why do we need a designated p2p currency? Wouldn’t a sufficiently liquid DEX imply currency-agnostic future?

If you want fast transactions and smart contracts, use ETH. If you want decentralization, use BTC. BCH is literally obsolete as there are no categories in which it outperforms the others.

The fact that BCH can continually hard fork without any resistance shows that development is centralized. BTC and ETH are the only coins that have persevered through real governance conflicts, and BTC is the only one which has done so without a dictator.

p.s. LOL at the idea of 0-conf txes meaning anything at all. The whole point of blockchain is that it solves double-spend, and this is reversed by relying on 0-conf. As soon as it is worthwhile for someone to exploit this, BCH's business model will die.

>>7931715
this will completely ruin crypto.

the larger forces at work pushing bcash and roger ver have hurt the entire future of crypto more than any other one incident.

i am not shocked that paid shills on plebbit are forcing this down everyones throats, as we all know bcash is supported by (((them)))

>>7934601
>The fact that BCH can continually hard fork without any resistance shows that development is centralized.
You realize that hard forks are consensual while soft forks are coercive right? With a hard fork you get to choose which chain you follow. With soft forks, there is no choice.
> LOL at the idea of 0-conf txes meaning anything at all. The whole point of blockchain is that it solves double-spend, and this is reversed by relying on 0-conf
You realize Bitcoin Cash has a first seen rule so you can't double spend 0-confirmation transactions. I can tell by your post you only read reddit for your information but there are technical papers on this. I suggest you DYOR.
>If you want decentralization, use BTC.
This is hilarious, you think that a coin with one development team that won't allow conflicting ideas to form is decentralized. And you think that having central authority figures dictate that the mining algorithm needs changed in order to screw honest miners out of hard earned profits is decentralized. Do you know what decentralized means? If one group controls everything about Bitcoin Segwit then its not decentralized.

>>7934667
>i am not shocked that paid shills on plebbit are forcing this down everyones throats, as we all know bcash is supported by (((them)))
So Cobra/Theymos and Luke Dash jr are Bitcoin Cash trolls? What?

>>7934589
>>7934601
>>7934667

This guy is literally a paid shill, just ignore or at least sage.

>>7934667
It hurt the btc price for maybe a month in august but had no effect in the long term. you sound like a child

>>7934768
>anyone who questions BCH is a paid shill
That isn't an argument.

>>7934589
>Wouldn’t a sufficiently liquid DEX imply currency-agnostic future?
You need a unit of account. How can you exchange things without prices? How do you get a "liquid" DEX without currency?

>>7934850

No, I meant the bcash shill here is a shill, I was replying to those guys because its pointless to argue with a shill. Just sage or ignore shills. This is a shill thread.

>>7934936
>>7934850
>>7934768
Bitcoin Segwit supporters unable to comprehend the arguments of others and then promoting censorship. What a surprise! A bunch of retarded communists.

>>7934985
>A bunch of retarded communists.
Not an argument.

>>7934589
I've been thinking about this for the last few days and I actually think this is the way it will pan out. There's going to be several dozens currency coins

>>7935003
>Not an argument.
If all you do is post non-arguments in response to the non-arguments of people on your own side then what can I say to you to argue. Pick one of these posts and argue with any point in any of them. I'll wait.
>>7933177
>>7934743
>>7933098
>>7932736
>>7931715

>>7934743
> And you think that having central authority figures dictate that the mining algorithm needs changed in order to screw honest miners out of hard earned profits is decentralized.
No one with any authority in BTC is in support of switching the mining algo or moving away from POS. Cobra is basically the new Mike Hearn; he doesn't understand what makes BTC valuable, and thinks the current problems require immediate patches or Bitcoin will die.

If you think rules coded into BCH software will protect against double-spends, I'm sorry but you don't understand distributed systems. Anyone can change the code their miner/node runs; there is nothing built into the consensus rules that enforces honoring first-seen transactions, and there can never be since there is no concept of first-seen in a distributed system. This is exactly the problem with Ver running the show, he treats it as a business where fundamentals don't matter and everything is perception. This could pump BCH's price work in the short term (and has been) but will fall apart soon enough.

>bitcoin segwit
Its called Bitcoin fucking degenerate. When will you retards accept no one cares about your bags?
>B-but w-we are the real bitcoin!
Yes imbecile, we have a scaling problem, lets just make the blocks bigger ad infinitum! Sometimes i think you fags are really posting from an asylum!

>>7935062
>No one with any authority in BTC is in support of switching the mining algo or moving away from POS.
You meant to say moving away from POW to POS, that's fine, but the lead developers for Bitcoin Core are in favor of Cobra's proposal. You got hoodwinked, its ok, it happens. But you're on the losing side.
>there is nothing built into the consensus rules that enforces honoring first-seen transactions, and there can never be since there is no concept of first-seen in a distributed system.
Two things, Ripple's only method for stopping double spending is the first seen rule so what meth do you smoke to think its impossible? Secondly the only method to reverse a 0-confirmation transaction is a Finney attack. To do this reliably requires you to be a large miner and it risks you losing out on the block reward in the block you mined. So who would honestly risk 12.5BTC on the potential of double spending to get their groceries from the grocery store? It doesn't make sense from a profit standpoint. Sure its possible, but you will lose a shit ton of money if you try.
https://twitter.com/LukeDashjr/status/967504195715850247

>>7935081
>we have a scaling problem

no we don't
it's a non-issue
raise the blocksize and allow moore's law to play its part

>>7935081
>Its called Bitcoin fucking degenerate. When will you retards accept no one cares about your bags?
You call Bitcoin Cash BCash as an insult and get mad when I call your coin Bitcoin Segwit even though it describes specifically the coin I am talking about. Bitcoin Segwit would be akin to calling Bitcoin Cash "Big Block Bitcoin". It is a descriptive name, not an insult (even though Segwit is an insult to crypto).>>7935081
>Yes imbecile, we have a scaling problem, lets just make the blocks bigger ad infinitum! Sometimes i think you fags are really posting from an asylum!
You can run a full node on Bitcoin Cash with a $1000 computer that is capable of receiving 3,000tx/s which is 50% more than VISA. That's with today's technology. So it can grow 3 orders of magnitude today and even poorfags can still run a full node no problem and you will have a network running faster than VISA.

BCRASH will never be Bitcoin
it will forever be BTRASH

bcash will never have LIGHTNING NETWORK

>>7935301
> first seen rule so what meth do you smoke to think its impossible
First seen by who? In a decentralized system, everything is seen at different times by each participant. The transaction first seen by the merchant accepting your 0-conf tx may be different from the one first seen by the miner which mines the block. There is nothing preventing this from being explored, and increasing the block size will increase propagation times making it easier to exploit. The only way this doesn't happen is it the network itself is centralized.

>>7934900
That unit of account is Satoshi right now because BTC has first mover advantage and time-tested network security. Is that all it takes to sustain its #1 position? PoW is environmentally unsustainable right? Thank you

>>7935425
Also you don't need to be a miner to double spend, you just need to broadcast different transactions to different nodes at the same time.

if you buy bcash you will lose all your money

roger ver is a very mentally sick human

roger is a psychopath

>>7935518
>>7935501

The absolute state of Coretards

another day, another thread fylk of paid shilling that gets bumped hour after hour after hour. cashies are getting desperate

>>7935425
>First seen by who? In a decentralized system, everything is seen at different times by each participant. The transaction first seen by the merchant accepting your 0-conf tx may be different from the one first seen by the miner which mines the block.
That's why if you read the manual for Bitcoin Cash you are suggested not to accept 0-confirmation unless you are connected to a network of nodes around the world. Good news is that any company can create such a network and sell this service to retailers around the world for a fraction of a cent payment (only possible through the low fees due to Bitcoin Cash's block size). This "problem" is already solved, the thing is that adoption hasn't increased to the point that the solution is adopted widespread yet.

>>7935419
>bcash will never have LIGHTNING NETWORK
You can have lightning without a malleability fix, or if you want a malleability fix you can use flexible transactions. Read this from the Lightning developers which details how to do Lightning without a malleability fix. (https://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/scalingbitcoin/hong-kong/overview-of-bips-necessary-for-lightning/))

>>7935426
But you said you wanted a DEX without a currency? You don't have a Satoshi unless you use Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash as a currency? What are you actually trying to say?

>>7935568
so centralization, got it. bcash is a fucking joke

>>7935635
>so centralization, got it.
Centralization means you have a central authority in control of something. That word has no relation to what I said. I'm not even sure how to respond to someone as stupid as you.

>>7935688
You literally described delegating trust in transaction finality to a third party. Please try to explain how that system is not centralized. Compared to LN it's a fucking joke.

>>7931715

bitmain shills in damage control
nobody can do anything with bitcoin without majority consensus or it will just end up another shitty fork like bcash

>>7935814
>Please try to explain how that system is not centralized.
Because you can choose any third party you want or set up your own nodes and do it yourself. Or you can just wait for confirmations and this won't even be an issue. Compare that to Lightning hubs in which only a couple of hubs will be able to route your transaction and if they decide not to route your transaction it can't go through. So which is more decentralized? A system which allows you to choose from any third party nodes and/or your own nodes - or a system in which you are forced to use specific Lightning hubs that can choose whether or not to route your transaction. Again see pic related.

>>7935865
Bitcoin Cash has majority consensus of mining nodes which is how the consensus was created to be found. UASF are something new and only implemented because the Core team couldn't get (and still can't) get majority consensus from miners.

>>7935615
I’m going to read up more. I just feel like right now BTC is only used as trading pairs on exchanges. I don’t buy anything with nor store value in it

i dont know anything about bcash but it sounds like shit lol.

just use real bitcoin. and call bcash something else and stop obfuscating it.

>>7936062
>i dont know anything about bcash but it sounds like shit lol.
This is why I'm so certain Bitcoin Cash will succeed. Only people who don't understand it don't believe in it. Just like Bitcoin from day 1.

>>7935921
> Because you can choose any third party you want or set up your own nodes and do it yourself
Same is true if banks today. There are a ton of banks to choose from, so why do we even need crypto?

Also, setting up your own nodes doesn't work if everyone needs to do it. You need to actually have a significant number of well-distributed (topologically) nodes relative to the wise of the overall network. This is also expensive as fuck, and all in an attempt to re-solve the problem that had already been solved by POW.

>>7936152
On mobile with no time to proof read, please forgive typos.

>>7936137

>23 posts by this ID

how much do you enjoy rogers nuts in your mouth?

>>7936137
Lolwat, plenty of people understand Bcash as it is currently just bitcoin with higher block size limit and a screwy difficulty adjustment algorithm.

Blockstream shills are trying real hard in here. BCash will only become more decentralized as more nodes pop up. That can't be said for BTC and the Lightning network.

>>7936152
>Same is true if banks today. There are a ton of banks to choose from, so why do we even need crypto?
You realize crypto is money, not a bank right? There is competition amongst banks but the money supply is under monopoly control. Hence the introduction of Bitcoin (BCH) as a "Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" not a peer-to-peer electronic banking system. Please deucate yourself.
>Also, setting up your own nodes doesn't work if everyone needs to do it.
That's why most people will use a third party for this like I described. And its only retailers who need this so its a small fraction of all users. Are you even reading what I write?

>>7936218
>Lolwat, plenty of people understand Bcash as it is currently just bitcoin with higher block size limit and a screwy difficulty adjustment algorithm.
That's my point. Bitcoin Cash was created as a hardfork to avoid Segwit, yet you don't even mention that as a reason for its existence. You don't understand the intricacies of blockchains and that's the only reason you are opposed to Bitcoin Cash.

>>7936169
Actually its 26 posts.

If the bankers have turned bitcorn into their golem to fuck with us I'm more than happy to switch to bitcorn crash.
Anybody can recommend me an exchange where trades are paired in BCH that offers most of the top 50 alts as trading pairs tho?
Because realistically Bitcoin cash is going fucking nowhere fast until it has a dedicated exchange that we all use.

>>7936530
>You realize crypto is money, not a bank right? There is competition amongst banks but the money supply is under monopoly control.
We're talking about transaction finality, but money supply. Fiat transaction finality is at the discretion of banks and credit cards providers. Money supply is not interesting in this discussion since both BTC and BCH have fixed distribution methods with no chance of that ever changing.

>That's why most people will use a third party for this like I described. And its only retailers who need this so its a small fraction of all users
So you think it's ok to require merchants to rely on a third party in order to use your "decentralized"network reliable? Gtfo of crypto then.

You guys are idiots. Talking too much about technical stuff you don’t even understand. The only thing that matters is if the product works as they say it does and if the moral values of the product are maintained while making the product to work. Technical stuff is only relevant for a very few people who actually know what they are talking about. Everyone else is sold by marketing and product efficiency. As right now, BTC is way more fun to trade than BCH, ETH is shit along with every single ERC20, LTC is very liked. And the rest of the alts are fine they exist but nobody cares if they die. So, their is no point in not having 90% of your money in BTC, or 50/50 if you bought after the fork and you didn’t sold BCH. The only reason to spend BTC right now is to trade and try get more BTC and that’s it, everyone is playing the long game, even short term trades, because we all know the value of this shit we are buying. This will be huge, when people realice the only way out of inflation is internet coins. #1 BTC #2 BCH #3 LTC

>>7936841
>So you think it's ok to require merchants to rely on a third party in order to use your "decentralized"network reliable?
Its not required you dumbfuck. I explain that in my post. I said its an option. OPTION. Do you know what that word means. It means you can use that method or you can use a method that relies on yourself. You can make shit up all you want, but it just makes you look stupid. Also there is no option for 0 confirmation in Bitcoin Segwit. So Bitcoin Segwit doesn't even compete on this front. So you have BCH which offers many options for 0 confirmation transactions and Bitcoin Segwit which offers none. Then you have BCH which offers many options for routing your transactions and an insurance against censorship and you have Bitcoin Segwit which only has a couple of lightning hubs that can route your transaction and no insurance against censorship.

>>7936841
>We're talking about transaction finality
You realize that in crypto the rules for all aspects of the coin are contained in the money right? So we are talking about money. You brought up banks that have nothing to do with the argument and now you are redirecting again and claiming that I was talking about money supply when I clearly was not. You can make shit up and pretend I said it all you want, that's not how you argue.

The rules for transaction finality in crypto are dictated by the consensus rules of the crypto itself. In BCH you can have finality with 0 confirmations. In Bitcoin Segwit this isn't even an option. Yet another reason why Bitcoin Segwit is inferior.

>>7937267
>The rules for transaction finality in crypto are dictated by the consensus rules of the crypto itself. In BCH you can have finality with 0 confirmations.
This is blatantly false. The fact that you would even suggest this indicates you have no idea wtf you're talking about.

>>7937658
>This is blatantly false. The fact that you would even suggest this indicates you have no idea wtf you're talking about.
What are you talking about? Bitcoin has RBF so you can't trust zero confirmation. Bitcoin Cash has the first seen rule so the only way to reverse transactions are A) spamming multiple transactions at once or B) the Finney attack. Transaction finality isn't blatantly spelled out by the consensus rules, but it is implied.

Okay guys, I've been a supporter of Bitcoin for a long tim, and I've legit hated on bcash.
But if someone can tell me how to open this old wallet, the .dat file isn't in the files, so I figure I encrypted it at some point.., but if someone can tell me what to do, or where I can find out, and I actually get into this, I'll sell all the btc for bch, and same for if a bitcoin guy can tell me, I'll sell the bch for btc. Pic related

>>7936587
shapeshift/evercoin/changelly

>>7937693
if you know the 12 words then you don't need to worry about recovering that file.

>>7937760
What 12 words?

>>7937780
-_-

...or, if you have the private key somewhere...

>>7937802
I mean, I've looked for it, but do you know where everything you messed around with from 7 years ago might be? I haven't found it, at any rate

>>7931715

>>7935062
If you think you can double spend go ahead! Some guy put up a challenge:

https://cryptonize.it/product/amazon-com-gift-card-challenge/

>>7937693
https://99bitcoins.com/question/how-to-find-wallet-dat/
Get the wallet.dat file and load it on another device. Just start bitcoin on another device and replace the wallet.dat file there with the one on your currently on your device. Also you will have to wait for it to synch before your funds show up. Also if you don't want to sync the blockchain you can load the wallet.dat onto another device then open up the debug window and use the command dumpprivkey https://bitcoinelectrum.com/importing-your-private-keys-into-electrum/
Just follow the guides.

lol it's so funny how many crap charts and images bcash threads post one after another trying so hard to matter to anyone.

Truth is no one cares about bcash. Either people are sticking with the current BTC or they are looking at alt coins if they don't believe in the current BTC. No one wants some trash forked coin that isn't doing anything better than alt coins can do.

>>7937959
There isn't a wallet.dat file. I'm assuming I encrypted the wallet so it was saved differently

>>7931715
Would love to see core change POW. That will absolutely end BTC and put BCH on top where it belongs. Then we can all finally move on with building Bitcoin again. There will still be the most brainwashed and retarded in BTC for sure, but I think most of us will be able to progress forward.

Also, there's so much awesome development and merchant adoption happening with BCH that has me so excited about Bitcoin again.

>>7938016
>No one wants some trash forked coin that isn't doing anything better than alt coins can do.
Its the only coin that uses a world graph network that has near instant transactions with near zero fees. Its the only coin capable of adding all privacy features to the coin. Its the only coin capable of adding smart contracts and tokenization for near zero fees. It's the only coin with Bitcoin in its name that isn't succeptible to the Segwit selfish mining attack. Its the only coin that uses consensual means for contentious upgrades (hardforks) rather than relying on UASF which don't give users the option to pick which chain they use. It will soon be the only coin to use SHA-256 which is the most decentralized form of mining as it is impossible for botnets and hackers to gain a large control over the mining and instead forces miners to be honest businessmen.

I don't know why you guys arguing here about these bitcoins when we have nano now
Dinosaurs

>>7938080
>There isn't a wallet.dat file. I'm assuming I encrypted the wallet so it was saved differently
You would have had to encrypt the wallet with outside programs like PGP to lock yourself out of the wallet.dat directory. Even if you did that you should still have the encrypted wallet.dat file. If you used PGP the wallet.dat file just has PGP as a prefix or suffix to it, I can't remember exactly how it works.

>>7938333
Okay, I'll look for a file like that. Thank you anon for the advice

Bcash is a centralized shitcoin.

Just because one person wants Bitcoin to change it's PoW doesn't mean it will. There's a thing called consensus - your shitcoin only got 20% consensus for the fork; and there will be close to zil for a change to the PoW, unless it's another scam for free money.

>>7938309
Comparing BTC and BCH to the all mighty NANO....kek

>>7931715
Scam

>>7938637
Nano can't synchronize at high levels of use. You can't update blockstate with each transaction and scale. It's impossible. Blocks will orphan and nodes won't be synced together.

>>7938779
I know Nano technically doesn't use blocks, so I don't know the correct lingo, but you can't have synchronized block states if it updates with each transaction.

>>7938309
See these posts. Nano can't scale.
>>7938779
>>7938834

>>7938853
Infinitely scalable m8
Dyr

Everything but Bitcoin is garbage

Bcash trying to steal the Bitcoin brand name won't work in the long run. You late adopter fags can buy every shitcoin out there but in ten years only bitcoin will have value

>>7936218
>Bcash is just bitcoin with higher block size limit
wow I couldn't have put it better myself

Now describe bitcoin core/segwit compared to bitcoin in early 2017, and tell me it's bitcoin with a straight face

>>7938997
>Everything but this ancient abortion of a coin is garbage
>how to spot a newfag
Bitcoin Segwit is less Bitcoin than Bitcoin Cash at the moment. They didn't steal the Bitcoin brand, they just refused to adopt segwit and increased the blocksize (pretty trivial change) at the same time.

>>7938779
You can't tell this to people holding NANO, especially those that flocked over from Reddit. They are in complete denial about the future of this coin, and ignore the node-synicing issue all together.

>>7938997
if anyone stole the bitcoin brand it was blockstream. If you seriously think that bitcoin core is more similar(than bitcoin cash, or any other coin) to bitcoin from 2009-july 31st 2017 . . . .you're fucked.

>>7939156
There is a campaign run by the CEO of Bcash (Roger Ver) to steal the Bitcoin name since he raged on the livestream because his shitcoin was called Bcash.

Like I said, centralized shitcoin.

>>7931715
I used to be a BTC maximalist, browse r/bitcoin and be brainwashed.
Now I realize BTC is like the left, with Blockstream being the Jews who brainwash and sabotage them; BCH is the right who gets ad hominems all the time and scoffed at, but is actually right about almost everything.

>>7939354

And soon the goyim will wake up to the jews, like everything, and their kike asses will be thrown into the ovens

>>7939354
This, exactly. The side that attacks constantly with ad hominem and censorship is almost always in the wrong. BTC vs BCH is no exception.

>>7932835
>set dunning kruger effect to maximum

>>7933095
>>7933616
>>7934408

>>7939273
you can't steal something you already possess, friendo. For you to claim that someone is stealing the bitcoin name you would first have to prove exclusive possession by a third party. I have seen no such evidence and, frankly, know for a fact that it cannot exist.

>>7939370
60,000,000 goyim died in WWII

care to rethink your arrogance?

fucking biz. front page must always have stupid ass link shill and a bcrap shill.

>>7932835
What about non-mined coins?

Stellar, Ripple, ADA, etc

>>7940491
no

btc merchant adoption is shrinking bch adoption is growing
there is not a single reason to cap blocks at 1mb (non mining nodes do nothing)
segwit destroys the mining nash equilibrium incentivising the collusion of miners to change the UTXO without owners signatures. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VoFb3mcxluY
You can only trust jihan and roger to not be doing this right now.
why introduce segwit before a blocksize increase when lightning network requires 133mb as specified in the lightning network whitepaper
why introduce segwit at all when it is not necessary for second layer solutions
lightning network will not be decentralized because to solve the routing problem is NP hard
why would anyone want lightning network when it is not a decentralised ledger? the whole point of bitcoin is to scale on chain as that is what makes decentralised uncensorable money which can free all the people in the world from the financial repression of central banks

>>7940536
$1000 says you're gonna get tricked into fighting your own brethren again

>>7940600

In 99% of cases the jews were unceremoniously kicked out of whatever nation they were in. Try looking at more than 1 data point, retard

>>7940617
Guess which case was the most recent? Ever hear of winning the battle but losing the war? I don't think you are planning on the right time scale.

>>7934408
Go to bed Roger

>>7931954
>t. Theymos's henchman
I hope your mum dies you piece of shit

Haha. it's funny how you've stated how BCash's transaction speed is few seconds. FYI, Bitcoin and BCash both have 10 mb block time, so your claim of "few seconds" doesn't make much sense. BCash is also a centralized shitcoin controlled by Roger and his Chinese mining cartel. Also, lightning network can already support thousands of transactions with just SegWit and 1 mb blocks.

I think one of the things bcash suffers from is bad marketing. Right now, nobody knows what the “b” stands for in “bcash”. Why not introduce a mascot? For example, Buzzy the B-Cash Bee. I think it will create a real “buzz”! :^)

>>7940991
>10 mb block time

>>7937906
>I set up an Amazon giftcard worth $1000,- but you pay the equivalent of $2000,- in Bitcoin Cash. ‘
>reversible product

It's purely a PR stunt. Pay $2000 for a $1000 product that's going to be cancelled if you succeed.
Make a 0-conf BCH to ETH exchange if you really think 0-conf is safe.

Psst...There's still time,kiddo...

>>7941106
I’m going to wait for Bitcoin Cash Money, which I believe adheres more closely to the Bitcoin Cash whitepaper and Roger Ver’s original vision for Bitcoin Cash

>>7941041
You clearly need to do more research. 10 mb is block size and not "block time". You can set block size to 1 tb and it still wouldn't mean instant transactions. Transactions still need several confirmations to be considered safe, and in BCash's case, transactions need more confirmations to be considered safe as majority of hashrate is controlled by Jihan and his mining cartel, so 51% attack is more probable. Your claim of instant transactions doesn't mean shit. Bitcoin transactions are also instant, but it's safer to wait for at least one transaction. You BCash shills are very misinformed. You need to do research on your own rather than listen to your daddy Roger, Jihan and their corrupt friends.

>>7940991
>Haha. it's funny how you've stated how BCash's transaction speed is few seconds
What are zero confirmation transactions. Possible in Bitcoin Cash, but not in Bitcoin Segwit.

>>7934743
Smart man

>>7941157
Do more research, kiddo. Zero confirmation transactions occur both in Bitcoin and BCash. Doesn't mean they are secure.

reminder that biz and reddit have no influence on crypto markets so you're wasting your time

>>7941215
Btc has replace by fee making zero confirmation transactions unsafe for any amount, not true for bch

>>7941157
>What are zero confirmation transactions

Unsafe crutch that's only feasible for reversible products or something where customers are known which allows easy prosecution for theft.
Even in the reversible case it's a lot of bother to handle it.
A 10-minute average block time is obsolete and clear disadvantage compared to coins with smaller block times.

Perhaps for this reason LTC has 2x as many daily transactions as BCH recently.

https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-btc-eth-ltc-bch.html#3m

Reminder that BCH competes against: BTC, LTC, ETH. It has nearly zero chance of success, sorry.

>>7941042
>It's purely a PR stunt. Pay $2000 for a $1000 product that's going to be cancelled if you succeed.
No it won't, the product is sent in seconds. Try it and find out. You'll lose your $2000 BCH because you can't reverse the transaction, but you will get the $1000 gift card. Its not PR, its an actual product for sale for anyone to prove you can reverse BCH transactions. If you can actually reverse BCH transactions then this deal is free money. But if you are lying about BCH transactions being reversible you will lose money. Put up or shut up.

>>7941215
You can reverse Bitcoin Segwit transactions. I've done it a dozen times. So no merchant can accept them. If they did, I would scam the shit out of them. If you think Bitcoin Cash zero confirmation transactions are secure then try this challenge (https://cryptonize.it/product/amazon-com-gift-card-challenge/)) or shut your little bitch mouth.

>>7941242
Even when Satoshi was involved with BTC (when there was no "replace by fee"), zero confirmation transactions were considered unsafe due to risk of double spend. Those risks even exist in BCash, even more than BTC as majority of hashrate is controlled by a single person. So your claim doesn't stand much ground.

>>7941269
>Unsafe crutch that's only feasible for reversible products or something where customers are known which allows easy prosecution for theft.
This guy is accepting them and the deal is if you can reverse the transaction the $1000 is yours. So if the transactions are reversible then prove it and get a free $1000. Guess what, you won't because you're a little bitch boy who makes shit up on the internet. Bitcoin Cash transactions can be reversed, but its economically infeasible (meaning you will always lose more money than you gain). That's how Bitcoin works, with greed incentives.

>>7941326
>Even when Satoshi was involved with BTC (when there was no "replace by fee"), zero confirmation transactions were considered unsafe due to risk of double spend. Those risks even exist in BCash, even more than BTC as majority of hashrate is controlled by a single person. So your claim doesn't stand much ground.
There are two methods for reversing BCH transactions, the first is to send two transactions simultaneously, and it is easily stopped by monitoring network traffic with a few nodes. The second is a Finney attack in which you mine a block but withhold it in order to fork the chain and reverse your transaction, but the Finney attack costs exponentially more than you can stand to gain. Zero confirmation transactions are less safe than transactions with confirmations, but reversing a transaction in BCH means you lose a lot of money on the resources required to do it.

>>7941369
Technically the first method described here isn't a reversal, but a double spend. The second method is a reversal, and also a double spend. Though I'm not sure the Segwit supporters will understand the nuance.

>>7941317
>https://cryptonize.it/product/amazon-com-gift-card-challenge/

"Pay $2000 in BCash and get a $1000 Amazon gift card". This is not how double spend attacks work. Facepalm. Delusional BCash shills. Delusional BCash shills everywhere.

>>7941326
Btc could have 6 trillion times more hashpower than bch but it would still be completely unsafe to do a 0 conf transaction because of rbf. Meanwhile the safe value for btc 0 conf transaction is still proportional to total hashpower

>>7941291
>No it won't, the product is sent in seconds.
>>7941338

Amazon gift cards can be cancelled if the original buyer reports theft (usually due to stolen credit card credentials). So it's impossible to win anything.
Fail at double spend: spend $2k to get a $1k card
Succeed at double spend: get a worthless card

Example:
"Remarkably, all of the fraudulent gift cards got cancelled within two days. This is surprising because the credit card chargeback process typically takes a month. This implies that these were not purchased with stolen credit cards, but that people are buying gift cards, trading for btc, then immediately contacting Amazon customer service to have the gift card cancelled."
https://www.reddit.com/r/localbitcoins/comments/5rvthy/danieletucker_selling_amazon_gift_cards_fraud/

>Guess what, you won't because you're a little bitch boy who makes shit up on the internet.

Start selling something that's actually not reversible like ETH. Who do you think you are fooling with this idiotic marketing?

>>7941400
>"Pay $2000 in BCash and get a $1000 Amazon gift card". This is not how double spend attacks work. Facepalm. Delusional BCash shills. Delusional BCash shills everywhere.
If you can double spend then you can reverse the transaction so you don't pay anything you little bitch. The reason he is asking for more than $1000 is so that he makes mad profit off anyone stupid enough to try. If you can double spend Bitcoin Cash you get the $1000 gift card for free. FFS are you honestly this stupid?

>>7931715
If BTC will switch the POW it will be sooo vulnerable to attacks because currently it enjoys having a dedicated hardware of its own but with cpu mining it could be killed using a rented cloud or super computer, and with gpu mining it could be killed using a single pool.

>>7941454

Good, Fuck bitcoin and the kikes behind it.

>>7941123
not gonna lie, former Bitcoin Cash supporter here but I'll happily be poor for the rest of my life if Bitcoin Cash Money survives along with me.

>>7941442
Double spend involves a much higher risk. This pocket amount being rewarded isn't worth the risk considering Amazon gift cards are reversible. Same applies for Bitcoin. Again. Delusional BCash shills.

>>7941411
>Amazon gift cards can be cancelled if the original buyer reports theft (usually due to stolen credit card credentials). So it's impossible to win anything.
>Fail at double spend: spend $2k to get a $1k card
>Succeed at double spend: get a worthless card
You realize that because the contract stated on the page says you get to keep the card if the double spend is reversed you can sue him if he doesn't have the card sent. On twitter it says the gift card is sent in seconds so he doesn't have time to reverse it (meaning its a digital gift card, not physical). Either way if he does renege on his offer you can sue him for more than the $1k the card is worth. And if double spends are possible then you don't have anything to lose. Or like I said earlier your a little bitch making things up on the internet. So either put up or shut your bitch mouth.

>>7931715
>Bitcoin Cash is the real Bitcoin
Always was. Everything else you've been fed has been rubbish.
>Muh internet connection can't handle 1MB every TEN MINUTES
^ That should've been the ultimate clue that Bitcoin was intentionally getting fucked by (((people's whose interest was in keeping the traditional fiat money system intact))).

>>7941399
that would make them have to actually LEARN, and not just mimic others. And learning, like, hurts, man.

>>7941498
Replace by fee is what makes 0 conf transactions on btc 100% unsafe

>>7941498
See this bitch boy.>>7941519

>>7935589
Pretty sure Bitcoin Cash actually already has a malleability fix. It was implemented last November along with the new DAA.

>>7941519
"Sue him"
Suing them and indulging in a lawsuit will cost more than a few thousand dollars. Not worth it.
"Gift card is sent in second" and can be reversed, so that doesn't mean shit. Again. Delusional BCash shills.

>>7941519
"For anyone confident you can pull a double spend on the Bitcoin Cash ledger: ‘ I’ll tell you what, I set up an Amazon giftcard worth $1000,- but you pay the equivalent of $2000,- in Bitcoin Cash. ‘"

>the contract stated on the page says you get to keep the card if the double spend is reversed

???

>>7941498
>Double spend involves a much higher risk. This pocket amount being rewarded isn't worth the risk considering Amazon gift cards are reversible. Same applies for Bitcoin.
Bitcoin Cash transactions are not equally reversible to Bitcoin Segwit transactions. I can reverse Bitcoin Segwit transactions at will. If someone did this for Bitcoin Segwit I would buy each and every gift card up for sale and take all of the giftcards offered within 5 minutes. To reverse Bitcoin Segwit transactions all you do is send a near zero fee transaction, clear all unconfirmed transactions, then send a transaction with a super high fee. The miners will accept the transaction with the super high fee 100% of the time. I've done it dozens of times already. Its how you get stuck transactions unstuck. Go ahead and make an equivalent offer using Bitcoin Segwit zero confirmation transactions. Spoiler Alert: You won't.

>>7941557
>Suing them and indulging in a lawsuit will cost more than a few thousand dollars. Not worth it.
Then just reverse the transaction and prove this guy to be a fraud. I can reverse transactions on Bitcoin Segwit no problem. If you can do the same on Bitcoin Cash then there is no risk involved with simply proving him a fraud. Go ahead and do it bitch boy. I'll wait.

>>7941498
How about this:

I'll sell 1 BCH for anyone that pays me $1190 in BCH. I think that's a fair price. 0-conf transactions are accepted, I'll send back as fast as my fat little fingers can type.

>>7941569
Oral contracts are legally binding. If he says you get to keep the card if you can reverse the transaction that is legally binding. Also he uses (https://gourl.io/)) to facilitate the exchange and has the sale set up as zero confirmation transaction. So according to his oral contract he is bound to honor the offer.

>>7941592
Okay. Prove it then. Send me a 1 BTC transaction and then reverse it. If you successfully reverse it then I'll send you 0.01 BTC. Free $100 USD for you. Sounds like a deal?

>>7932736
This is great - for a full distributed blockchain. But actually not necessary for a Validating Node.
For a Validating Node, the only thing necessary is actually the UTXO set - because only accounts with balances would be able to spend anyway (hence, those will be the only addresses that need validation).
The trick of this is "syncing" this UTXO set in the first place. There's a few techniques here with various trade-offs. Andresen outlined one, but I don't have the link handy.
But, basically, you could run a validating node on like 3.5GB of space (probably less for BCH because the fees are smaller, hence not as many funds are locked up in addresses that don't contain enough to even cover the fee).

>>7941624
Set up a legitimate account on Cryptonize like this guy and then actually grow a pair of balls and match this guys offer and I'll do it immediately.

>>7941646
>o
Cryptonize == 3rd party
Not Sathoshi's vision. GTFO bcash shill.

>>7932001
>ruin billions of dollars of other people's investment in ASIC miners
>Centralisation

Hey there Jihan! Fuck you!

Moving away from SHA-256 would be fantastic. Any proof algo that can be easily implemented in hardware needs to go, and it needs to be changed regularly. Mining should be doable in nearly any country, on any hardware, not just China. That's what decentralisation means.

And if BCH is as good as you say, who cares? This just means you can concentrate on that. It'll be fine.....right?

>>7941663
calm down dude sounds like you're having a panic attack

>>7941663
Look at that, when you actually have to use a third party to ensure you make a payment you back out like the little bitch you are. How do I prove I made the payment unless there is a third party to witness you fucking beta pussy.

>>7941603
>If he says you get to keep the card if you can reverse the transaction that is legally binding

He states absolutely nothing like that.

>For anyone confident you can pull a double spend on the Bitcoin Cash ledger:

Which means the rest of the sentence is targeted to them

>I’ll tell you what, I set up an Amazon giftcard worth $1000,- but you pay the equivalent of $2000,- in Bitcoin Cash.

Statement of fact about the price and required PAYMENT. A double spend means there's no payment. Therefore there's no obligation to give people who didn't manage to actually PAY a valid gift card.
Even with the possibility of cancelling a card he's still so afraid of losing that he demands a 100% premium. Pathetic.

Start selling ETH for BCH with 0-conf, ie. an eth transactions is generated immediately. Not for 100% more but a reasonable premium. Put up or shut up.

>>7941663
What are you afraid of? Afraid you can't back up the lies you keep making?

>>7941702
>Statement of fact about the price and required PAYMENT. A double spend means there's no payment. Therefore there's no obligation to give people who didn't manage to actually PAY a valid gift card.
>Even with the possibility of cancelling a card he's still so afraid of losing that he demands a 100% premium. Pathetic.
He uses this website and has the payment set up as zero confirmation. If you want me to contact him to make the written agreement more explicit I will.

>>7941671
Both sides agree that btc should go pos

>>7941729
https://gourl.io/ Forgot to add link

>>7941716
>>7941683

I'm not willing to use a third party service that I have never heard of and that is operated by a BCash shill. If there's a more credible third part, I'm more than open to using that, but not a service operated by a supporter of scams.

>>7941671
>Moving away from SHA-256 would be fantastic.
If you move towards CPU or GPU mining, you end up with a situation where your blockchain is vulnerable to attack by other miners that can run the same algo efficiently.
I.e. imagine if BTC went to GPU mining and the Ethereum crowd all of a sudden shifted their mining power, maliciously, at BTC to perform a 51% attack. Not necessarily all that likely, but within the realm of possibility (imagine if Google or Amazon wanted to take down a crypto).
>Mining should be doable in nearly any country, on any hardware, not just China
See problem above. Really, best thing would be to have several nations developing chips. Real problem is China's monopolisation of IC manufacturing. That's a ((())) problem - general technique outlined in The Protocols.
>That's what decentralisation means.
You don't sound like a paid shill, so you should go read up on what exactly transpired that lead to the Bitcoin's forking. No one necessarily wanted this to happen, but there's very good reason that it had to. A timeline of Gregory Maxwell's thoughts (excuses) would be handy here, but I'm not sure anyone's compiled one yet. There was zero sense and zero truth in a lot of what he was claiming.

>>7941774
>imagine if BTC went to GPU mining and the Ethereum crowd all of a sudden shifted their mining power, maliciously, at BTC to perform a 51% attack.
this is the most retarded thing i've read on here today

congrats on this. seriously

>>7941125
you're the retard who said
>10 mb block time
originally
anon was calling you out for being an idjit

>>7941125
You're the one who said it was 10mb block time you retarded nigger.

>>7941215
Every mempool BCH tx has an extremely high chance of making it into the very next block, because blocks aren't full. Propogation time for a new tx to reach all miner mempools is 10 seconds.

So you have 10 seconds to execute a double spend.

>>7941774
It's hilarious how the real culprit Corecucks should blame is the USA government for letting manufacturing move to China. No more Made in America has a toll...

>>7941729
That would solve the reversibility and criminal theft issue (as it is currently, double spending would be a crime) but not the premium issue.
Your claim is that 0-conf is good enough for normal commercial payments.

100% premium for a double spending risk is not a normal payment. The actual risk would have to be <1% for 0-confs to be feasible. Which is not possible to achieve as it requires trusting miners.

>>7941125
I hate it when im 29kilobytes late for work

>>7941797
Offer a rebuttal. Go for it.
If certain parties acting maliciously is outside the realm of feasibility, then how are Luke Jr's claims valid in the first place?

>>7937658
Holy fuck I'm so glad this guy stopped talking

>>7941800
>>7941820
Block time = average time it takes to find a block. At least I used it in the right context as opposed to you fellow BCash shill.
Is it so hard to understand, you BCash shills?

>>7932512
Isn't luke-jr actually 300kb?

>>7941883
>Block time = average time it takes to find a block.
Block time isn't measured in MB. Please consult your shill manual for entry "Block Time".

>>7941891
I'm not sure he officially pushed for it, but he did have an opinion along those lines at one point, yes.

I've been red pilled on BCH not going to argue any points but will be converting my remaining 30 btc when the price hits my target.

LN sucks

>>7941904
I know. Block time is measured in minutes. Seconds. Microseconds.
Where in the hell did I state otherwise? You bcash shills.

>>7941883
How many mb in a day pajeet?

>>7941931

>>7941924
LN was satoschi's idea

>>7941831
>100% premium for a double spending risk is not a normal payment.
This product isn't meant for normal payments. The guy is telling people that if they can successfully double spend a Bitcoin Cash transaction (meaning they don't actually pay for the product) they still get to keep the product. Are you really that stupid? It is a challenge. Double spend the BCH transaction and get a free $1000 gift card. Fail and pay $2000 for a $1000 gift card. Do you understand now? It is a challenge, not an actual normal product listing.

>>7941986
My bad for this confusion. I meant to say 10 minutes and not 10 mb. I don't proofread my posts unlike you pajeets, so such mistakes are bound to happen. Do you bcash happen to have any rebuttals to make other than pointing at my mistakes?

>>7942026
>This product isn't meant for normal payments.

So 0-conf isn't meant for normal payments? Finally you admitted that.

>>7942038
literally like 10 posts pointing out your stupid mistake
>I DIDN'T MAKE A MISTAKE GUYS EVERYONE SAYING I SAID 10 MB BLOCK TIME & QUOTING MY POST IS A LIAR
>oh actually it was my mistake

>>7942038
I already did.
>>7941157

>>7942054
>So 0-conf isn't meant for normal payments? Finally you admitted that.
No this product is a challenge you dimwit. That's what I said. You don't normally sell a product telling someone that if they can successfully defraud you they get to keep the product. This is a challenge, not a normal piece of merchandise for sale, it is a challenge. My god you are a brainless nigger.

>>7941454
Why isn't ethereum or monero or any other non-asic currency under attack right now?

>>7942123
Monero is and has always been dominated by hackers controlling botnets. They brag about this. Are you happy giving most of the mined coins to degenerate hackers rather than honest businessmen?

>>7942099
>You don't normally sell a product telling someone that if they can successfully defraud you
>they get to keep the product

The only way to prevent them keeping the product after the fact is if it's reversible. So you're again claiming that 0-conf is useless for anything else, which makes 0-conf in bch equivalent to 0-conf in btc.

>>7935814
Right, wouldn't want to be (((delegating))) or anything eh goy

>>7942038
>Do you bcash happen to have any rebuttals to make other than pointing at my mistakes?
Sure:
>it's funny how you've stated how BCash's transaction speed is few seconds. FYI, Bitcoin and BCash both have 10 mb block time, so your claim of "few seconds" doesn't make much sense.
What is being implied here is that zero-conf is relatively secure in that you are almost assured that your transaction will be included in the next block (due to higher block size). Where as, with BTC, if a low-fee transactoin is committed it is uncertain whether it will make it at all. If RBF is used, the tx can be replaced entirely with a new tx, making zero-conf infeasible for transactions completely.
>Cash is also a centralized shitcoin controlled by Roger and his Chinese mining cartel.
You'd be better off attacking Jihan. I don't think Roger owns and miners. In any case, development of Bitcoin Cash is far more decentralized than Bitcoin Core and the communities are far less censored.
>Also, lightning network can already support thousands of transactions with just SegWit and 1 mb blocks.
It might - theoretically. But this isn't tested and there are quite a few caveats that are, as yet, unsolved so far as routing goes.
>10 mb is block size and not "block time".
Yes.
>Transactions still need several confirmations to be considered safe
True. But zero-conf under BCH is far safer than zero-conf under BTC for the reasons outlined above.
>transactions need more confirmations to be considered safe as majority of hashrate is controlled by Jihan and his mining cartel,
I don't think this is entirely true - but, in any case, worst they can do is not include your transaction.
>Bitcoin transactions are also instant, but it's safer to wait for at least one transaction
They are replacable by setting a higher fee.
> zero confirmation transactions were considered unsafe due to risk of double spend
Mitigatable by watching for a double-spend. Relay time to most miners within network is < 10 seconds.

>>7942014
That's a stretch

>>7942145
>The only way to prevent them keeping the product after the fact is if it's reversible.
What are you talking about, the product is digital and sent within seconds of receiving a zero-confirmation Bitcoin Cash payment. The question is not whether or not the PRODUCT is reversible, but whether or not BITCOIN CASH ZERO CONFIRMATION TRANSACTIONS are reversible. Why do I have to explain this to you? If you can reverse BCH transactions then you get a free $1000 gift card. So if 0 confirmation transactions are useless like you say you can get a free $1000. So either do it or shut your bitch mouth. Put up or shut up bitch boy.

>>7942203
I'm not sure how he's not getting this either.

>>7942203
Go to bed Roger

>>7941883
>BCash shill
No, I'm all in LINK actually. However, that being said, BCH is the real bitcoin and you know it too, faggot. Now kys

>>7942232
btw my ID has changed because I'm on my wifi now.

>>7942014

>>7942123
1. Other coins have a lot less on stake because they aren't viewed as the global coin
2. Even if it won't be attacked it'll still be reflected in the price
3. Are you really going to take the chance?

Anyway, BTC won't be bitcoin anymore.

>>7942203
>The question is not whether or not the PRODUCT is reversible
>You don't normally sell a product telling someone that if they can successfully defraud

What does 'defraud' means in this context cashlet? To double spend AFTER receiving the product.

>you they get to keep the product.

So the only way to prevent keeping the product after a successful double-spend is if it's reversible.

Go back to r/btc where you can 'win' arguments by downvoting everyone pointing flaws, the only thing cashlets can do.
Meanwhile no merchant is going to accept 0-conf, adoption is going to remain near zero and price will continue to drop.

>>7942232
>all in link
>bch is the real bitcoin

it´s over

>>7942014
Satoshi talked about payment channels between to users (streaming money) but this was to be done with signatures. So that means Satoshi talked about the versions of Lightning that Bitcoin Cash can do (for example with SigHashNoInput). But this version of lightning means you open a channel with each user with whom you transact with thus preserving the one to one ratio of block entries to transactions. Introducing Segwit destroys the one-to-one relationship between block entries and transactions. Segwit also removes the fraud proof nature of the blockchain. Payment channels as Satoshi designed them are nothing similar to Segwit's version of Lightning. Payment channels were ways that two trusted parties (for example a bank and a high frequency trader) could use one transaction and one fee in order to clear a channel after a specified period of time. But it was always meant to be done between parties who trust each other and it was meant to be optional.

>>7942363
nice verbatim copy-past of your previous comment

it's basically a $1000 bounty on executing a BCH double spend. if it's so easy we should see millions of double spends yeah?

>>7942363
>What does 'defraud' means in this context cashlet? To double spend AFTER receiving the product.
Correct.
>So the only way to prevent keeping the product after a successful double-spend is if it's reversible.
I'm assuming English isn't your native language because this again makes it seem like you are talking about whether the product is reversible. If you are talking about reversing BCH transactions and think it is possible then do it and you get a free $1000. That is challenge. I hope you realize I keep responding to you even though you don't understand the challenge to show everyone how stupid Bitcoin Segwit supporters are. If English isn't your native language I guess its not your fault, but I'm still not sure what you are trying to say unless you are just retarded. The challenge of the product here is this. If you can reverse a BCH transaction you get a free $1000. So if your argument is that BCH transactions are reversible then go and claim your $1000.

>>7942474
Stop spinning cashlet, it's not working:
>>7941157
>What are zero confirmation transactions. Possible in Bitcoin Cash

THAT'S the issue. No, they are only safe for reversible transactions which makes BCH equivalent to BTC in that regard.
Which you admitted to in >>7942099. Your 'challenge' demands a 100% premium for risk and sell a reversible product.

>show everyone how stupid Bitcoin Segwit supporters

Meanwhile all you are doing is showing how dumb cashlets are. Please screenshot this thread and submit it to r/btc, I'm sure you're going to get lots of upvotes.

>>7942705
>THAT'S the issue. No, they are only safe for reversible transactions which makes BCH equivalent to BTC in that regard.
>Which you admitted to in >>7942099 (You). Your 'challenge' demands a 100% premium for risk and sell a reversible product.
I feel sorry for you. The challenge demands a 100% premium in order that the man making the challenge can take money from idiots like you. If BCH transactions were reversible the risk of paying the $2000 would be zero. Also the product is not reversible as he uses a crypto exchange facilitator that gives him the ability to set the number of confirmations after which the product is sold. He set the confirmations to zero. So if you can get the transaction broadcast the product is yours. Again, I know you don't understand, that's ok. Some parents drop their kids, it happens. But the fact is that if Bitcoin Cash transactions are reversible then you could accept this product and receive free $1000 gift cards. If you don't believe me then set up the exact same offer for Bitcoin Segwit. I'll reverse the transactions myself and make a few thousand dollars while only paying a few dozen bucks in fees. Go ahead, place the exact same offer under the exact same conditions for Bitcoin Segwit. I'll wait.

>>7943016
>engage me in the manner I demand under the circumstances I require
>welp looks like I win again

>>7943236
Its the exact same challenge posted for BCH that he thinks is meaningless you fucking faggot. This is about that time that I'm not sure if you guys are actually BCH supporters in disguise trying to make your side look like retards. I really don't know at this point. He is stating that Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Segwit have the same security for zero confirmation transactions. If true he can mirror the challenge posted for BCH and he won't have to worry. Are you that stupid that you don't understand or are you really a BCH supporter in disguise trying to make Bitcoin Segwit supporters look stupid?

>>7943594
What’s BCH

>>7943632
My god. This board. Lol. First guy doesn't understand the challenge offered by the amazon gift card guy. You don't even understand what Bitcoin (BCH) is. I'm assuming you are a troll or you are this retard>>7942705 samefagging.

>>7943679
You mean bcash? That’s 40% of my stack dawg

>>7943679
Bitcoin is BTC

>>7943739
>You mean bcash? That’s 40% of my stack dawg
Another LARP'ing faggot, what a surprise. One thing I can guarantee about you is that you have lost money in crypto. I guarantee it. Quit making shit up. It doesn't gain you the respect you are so severely lacking in your life.

Glorious
To think I sold all my LINK to buy this dip

>>7943810
Put 40% in bcash b/c I respect Roger Ver. A lot of people say it looks like his mother dresses him but I think it takes courage to wear those shirts with all the buttons

He's not advocating for moving away from POW, just to change the algorithm to reduce the centralized mining issue (caused by Jihan/Bitmain).

Moving from Sha-256 to Equihash would be fantastic move.

>>7943988
>He's not advocating for moving away from POW,
I think everyone here already understands that.
>just to change the algorithm to reduce the centralized mining issue (caused by Jihan/Bitmain).
Again, this is pretty much in the top of the thread. I don't think Proof of Stake was even mentioned.
How much are they paying you?

>>7943760
BTC = BlocksTream Coin.

>>7944189
I thought it was that Nakoti Ichimura dude

>>7944116
Okay, so what's the issue? Not gonna lie I would benefit greatly from Bitcoin moving to a GPU minable algo as I have a 1080Ti mining farm.

>>7944328
Right, I'm an evil miner these idiots villify. If they POW switch to basically anything at all, great, I'm diversified across it, I have tons of different asics, and if it's profitable to mine something I have the gear for it, and that gear mines whatever is most profitable in any time period. I'll be happy to mine for them on 1080ti's instead of S9's if that's what they want, I'll still sell their shitcoin and use it to buy stuff that doesn't suck though.

LTC is mooning because BTC has resolved itself to suicide by changing the PoW and LTC is viewed as a substitute.

>>7945200
That doesn't make any sense, because LTC believes everything that core is doing is optimal. It is like saying that North Korea is the last hope for making communism work after the collapse of the USSR due to its failed policies.
Miners and proof of work are not the problem, core is.

>>7945676
You missed the point. It's not that LTC is doing something better, it's BTC which is now a riskier hold. Who knows, maybe someone over at Blockstream is manipulating the market.

>>7946038
How can BTC be a riskier hold than anything else when BTC crashing would crash the entire market though?

Bcash would've been great in 2015. Now there are at least a dozen superior coins out there anyway. Bcash is just a waste of time, if you're not deluded it's obvious it will never be Bitcoin. It's better to focus on innovative coins with good tech.

>>7946643
You're missing the entire point. BCH is the real vision of the original BTC. BTC just said they plan to change the whitepaper to better reflect their new vision/changes they've made. How anyone can argue that isn't fishy as fuck is beyond helpless.

>>7946120
BCH spiking would crash BTC.

>>7946038
Once again, doesn't make sense, the flaws in communism re-appear no matter the implementation, just as the flaws in the core strategy will re-appear no matter the implementation, and LTC has a lot of ground to cover just to get into the exact same position BTC is in right now, at which point in time, it inherits the exact same set of problems LTC has right now, so there is absolutely zero point in anyone using LTC as a hedge against BTC, and BTC is certainly not a riskier hold.

>>7931715
Bcash performing like shit pic related

Market dominance over time:
>1st place: Bitcoin - gaining dominance
>2nd place: Ethereum - gaining dominance
>3rd place: Ripple - decline
>4th place: Bcash - decline
>5th place: Litecoin - gaining (slight & stady)

>>7945676
It does, because LTC has a solid team, while Blockstream is full of drooling retards.

Why didn't anyone kill them yet? I'm sure a mining venture or a whale could fund the operation. Because they are about to kill the fucking crypto market.

>>7946960
LTC is the real vision of BCH. That’s why I call Litecoin Bitcoin Cash (LTC).

Ferrari 125 S is the real Ferrari

>>7947079
lol zoom out retard, btc dominance dropping like a rock

>>7947568
To be replaced soon by Bitcoin Cash (symbol: LTC)

_____ _____
[_____][_____]

REEEEEEEEDDITT
_____
[_____]

Litecoin is just more segwit scam coin. Get the real bitcoin get Bitcoin Cash