BCH - Stress Test

[Anonymous No.10911879]

BCH Stress Test is live and is breaking records!
10MB BLOCK Mined!
1 Mill txs incoming soon
Check the explores,


PRICE IS PUMPING!

[Anonymous No.10911887]

>>10911879
Desperate cunt, kys.

[Anonymous No.10911892]

>>10911887
LMAO

Denial - CoreCucks are worried!!!

[Anonymous No.10911897]

>>10911879
WoAh!

[Anonymous No.10911939]

>>10911887
Thats a F U to the CoreCucks

[Anonymous No.10911955]

>>10911879
Good. Keep it up. We want to see full 32MB blocks for years and see how well it functions then.

Because if BCH had actual users, the blocks would fill up to whatever the size is. If for nothing else, then to encode ASCII-art lolcats on the blockchain.

My prediction is, that you're screwing it up.

On-chain scales worse than linear (i.e. double the block size gives you slightly less than double the transaction volume), while the adoption rate is going to be exponential for at least a decade. In other words, whatever you scale to on-chain, all the out-of-consensus, centralization and other risks buys you at best a few months.

But again, nobody is actually using BCH anyway, because why should they? In all metrics that BCH-shills claim make it superior, other coins are better.

[Anonymous No.10911990]

>>10911955
Because please tell me and enlighten us , what happens in 2020 when the mining rewards half? and hash increases?

Miners will be forced to increase fees

[Anonymous No.10912006]

Nice to see someone else excited about the stress test.

BTC stuck at 3 tx/s while BCH zooms ahead with 30 tx/s, feels good man.

DO IT FAGGOT ----> https://www.scale.cash/

60 thousand transactions in the mempool at the moment. Expecting the DARI to bounce in BCH's favor, at least today. Should see a spike in hashpower if the miners are quick enough to react.

[Anonymous No.10912009]

>spams their own chain
>spends their own money artificially pumping price
>still no one uses Worst Bitcoin

[Anonymous No.10912027]

>>10912009
>still calling it spam even though only the dumbest of core fanatics still does that
it's not spam if it's paid for and if everybody can still get in at the minimum relay fee (1 sat/byte)

[Anonymous No.10912029]

>>10911990
That's exactly the point. Trying to keep transaction fees artificially low, by increasing the block size indefinitely and offloading this cost onto network operators, makes it hard to secure the network, if the mining reward goes down.

I said it a few days ago in a comment, but the combination of big blocks and tapered inflation rate is an economic Escher stair.

Big blocks with a constant inflation rate (in absolute terms, i.e. 25 BTC per block forever) might work, economically, but not very unlikely technically (see linear vs. exponential scaling).

Btw, if you can't explain from the top of your head what Bachmann–Landau notation is, you're not entitled to an opinion on this subject. I'm not saying you don't know, but there are many brainlets without ANY CS background who think their opinion matters.

[Anonymous No.10912044]

>>10912027
>desperately redefining spam out of existence
>thinking he's fooling anyone
Sad

[Anonymous No.10912062]

>>10912029
the fee market can go suck a dick and so can you. go pop the champagne on the BTC blockchain and enjoy your wallets that use high fees "just in case" even though it shouldn't be needed when the blocks arent full.

[Anonymous No.10912070]

>>10912062
>the fee market can go suck a dick and so can you.

You're the exactly the person I was referring to when I wrote

> there are many brainlets without ANY CS background who think their opinion matters.

That's what's so (financially) dangerous in the crypto-space. Many sub IQ130 guys get talked into buying non-workable bags and then get emotional when confronted with facts, probably because they lack the capacity to understand them.

t. guy with MSc. in physics and CS who then studied economics just for fun.

[Anonymous No.10912083]

>>10912044
absolutely pathetic.

>>10912070
you think you're pretty smart don't you? "if you can't explain from the top of your head what Bachmann–Landau notation is", that's such a stuck up thing to say.

if you two are so afraid of bitcoin cash taking over why not invest in both instead of going deep into your ass?

[Anonymous No.10912095]

>>10912009
>Room for potential growth is now a bad thing
Wew.

[Anonymous No.10912103]

>>10912083
I actually do have both, having inherited it from the fork. Shall we see how that's worked out for us? Pic related. Oh dear. Oh deary deary dear. Bitcoin Cash has never been as worthless as this last week!

[Anonymous No.10912118]

>>10912083
>you think you're pretty smart don't you?

No, I know that I'm pretty smart. I'm just honest. If you get bored with quantum mechanics and became a millionaire in your late 20s, it's a pretty good indicator that you're actually smart.

> if you can't explain from the top of your head what Bachmann–Landau notation is", that's such a stuck up thing to say.

Yes, it's very stuck up. It's like all these stuck up physicians who say "if you can't explain from the top of your head what systolic blood pressure is, don't expect me to take your opinion on medical issues seriously".

> if you two are so afraid of bitcoin cash taking over why not invest in both instead of going deep into your ass?

What makes you think anybody is afraid of BCH taking over? How is bringing forward of arguments against the technological and economic Ansatz of BCH communicating fear to you? I just feel sorry for you, that you got scammed by the BCH guys.

[Anonymous No.10912140]

134 thousand transactions in the mempool and growing, really nice to get this proof over witch that bitcoin cash works

>>10912103
maybe don't be a little bitch and look a bit into the future? check who supports BCH and all the things going on with it. there's been so much misinformation in 2018 about BCH i would have been more surprised if it didn't go down. btc is a behemoth, going to take years to take it on

>>10912118
would you mind taking the cock out of your mouth before speaking at least? you're being extremely rude man.

[Anonymous No.10912162]

>>10912140
I actually HAVE looked into who supports it etc, and have reached the conclusion it's a meme. JW? RV? CSW? Hash wars inbound? Copy pasting from bigger coins? Puh. Lee's.
>btc is a behemoth, going to take years to take it on
It's been 10 months since Operation Dragon Slayer was meant to cause the flippenning over the course of days, maybe even a week. How many years instead are you asking for now?

[Anonymous No.10912187]

>>10912140
> really nice to get this proof over witch that bitcoin cash works

This is not proof that BCH works. Like I wrote before, keep it up. You've got to have full blocks for years and still have a workable blockchain. Then you can claim that you proved it works. This takes a lot of time.

> would you mind taking the cock out of your mouth before speaking at least? you're being extremely rude man.

Being real can be rude. But wouldn't you rather an expert tells you the truth? Again, think about the medical analogy. Would you let someone who's an expert in medicine like Ver or CSW are experts in CS diagnose you, if you're ill?

I like Ver. Politically were COMPLETELY on the same page. But technologically and economically, he can't tell the difference between his asshole and hole in the ground.

I can't say anything nice about CSW. He's simply a fraud who doesn't even know how the Bitcoin address format forks. Pic related.

[Anonymous No.10912198]

>>10912187
>I can't say anything nice about CSW. He's simply a fraud who doesn't even know how the Bitcoin address format forks. Pic related.

works, not forks, obviously.

[Anonymous No.10912224]

Cashies think one day of spamming their own blockchain is going to make a difference.
Bitcoin is still 46GB ahead of you cucks.

Stress test, my ass.

[Anonymous No.10912240]

Why is this dead
https://txhighway.com/

[Anonymous No.10912261]

>>10912240
>zero BCH traffic
CSW coded it

[Anonymous No.10912270]

>>10912240
My guess is, that the nodes that are participating in the stress test are all hosted within the same cloud service provider, ala AWS, while the node that delivers the data to this website is a genuine full-node by some independent guy who just doesn't receive all this transaction data.

Goes to show how centralized BCH is and how little this stress test actually proves.

[Anonymous No.10912280]

>>10912240
https://txhighway.CASH still works, lmao

[Anonymous No.10912348]

>>10911879

Who cares? Nobody uses it & there's a ton of shitcoins that are better in every way.

[Anonymous No.10912355]

>>10912070
this

[Anonymous No.10912359]

>>10911892
>CoreCucks
1bch=0.08btc,
your shitcoin's bugs get fixed by core devs....you guys are fucking delusional

[Anonymous No.10912392]

>>10912270
>My guess is, that the nodes that are participating in the stress test are all hosted within the same cloud service provider, ala AWS, while the node that delivers the data to this website is a genuine full-node by some independent guy who just doesn't receive all this transaction data.
That's really interesting would love to see this discussed (obv it's impossible to discuss anything on biz)

[Anonymous No.10912466]

>>10912118
>I know that I'm pretty smart. I'm just honest. If you get bored with quantum mechanics and became a millionaire in your late 20s, it's a pretty good indicator that you're actually smart
Yikes.

[Anonymous No.10912772]

>>10912466
I'm here to save you brainlets from yourself and argument by authority works pretty good on your kind.

[Anonymous No.10912843]

>>10912224
>BCASH PLS
>Salty corecucks on suicide watch

[Anonymous No.10912861]

>>10911879
kys fomo hyping piece of shit

[Anonymous No.10912875]

>>10912772
Saying that you're smart is not argument by authority.

[Anonymous No.10912886]

>>10912029
>Bachmann–Landau
Just say Big O notation

[Anonymous No.10912969]

>>10912875
It's the best I can do in this direction within the paradigm of a pseudonymous conversation.

[Anonymous No.10913000]

1Mil tx?
That should be fun.
I'll keep an eye on things.

Anywhere else besides:
txstreet
txhighway
txsubway
?

[Anonymous No.10913018]

Kek they are filling up the BTC mempool right now
The end of today should have some interesting stats for everyone to see.

[Anonymous No.10913037]

>>10913000
Goal is 5 million in 24 hours.
Current Mempool Size: 159318 transactions
Seems a lot of miners haven't increased their self-restricted blocksize yet.

Current record is this 15 MB block with 67352 tx in it:
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/block/545978

Latest blocks can be seen here:
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/blocks

[Anonymous No.10913052]

>>10913037
Thx anon I'll check it out
That 15 MB block happened while I was asleep, still very exciting though. I see there's a 13-14 MB block lining up right now.

Why not 7million transactions?
Anyways, exciting times... and this is just the beginning of what a real Bitcoin is capable of.

[Anonymous No.10913062]

BCH up 11% in the last 24 hours, didn't even notice until now.
https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-cash/

>>10913052
it's just some vague random goal to get people into participating
the 15 MB block happened 1 hour ago

[Anonymous No.10913077]

>>10913062
Yeah I was asleep 1 hour ago, that's the NEET life.
Price action is fun too, maybe BCH is leading the market this go around?
We'll see what happens.

[Anonymous No.10913093]

>>10913077
probably just a pump and dump

[Anonymous No.10913101]

>>10913018
not sure what you're looking at but its going to take a tad more than that to cause problems

[Anonymous No.10913151]

>>10913093
Life is a pump and dump.

>>10913101
We'll see

[Anonymous No.10913169]

Jikes, Dogecoin up almost 60%... Sure is a green start of the month, imagine if all the trade bots broke due to the BCH stress test and are now buying like crazy.

[Anonymous No.10913206]

>>10912029
>Trying to keep transaction fees artificially low, by increasing the block size
This is backwards. Keeping capacity low is artificially keeping fees high.

Low fees shouldn't be a problem for miners if there is an increase in transactions. Why is this wrong?

[Anonymous No.10913289]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12-V_rDPkoY

Oh shit, almost missed that he made a clarification video.

[Anonymous No.10913331]

>>10913206
That's some very naive thinking and only works as long as there's a high enough block reward.
Here's an easy example.
Someone found a block a height x+1 1 minute after block #x. There's no block reward anymore.
Because the mempool got cleared by block #x just a minute ago, there's not enough tx fees to make propagating the block #x+1 worth it. The miner waits instead (maybe only 2 minutes) until there are enough fees.
But this obviously increases orphan rate, as someone else might have found a block at height x+1 while the other miner waits.
Another problem is given here https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2016/10/21/bitcoin-is-unstable-without-the-block-reward/
It would actually be really nice to have a constant backlog of settlement transactions (from sidechains or the ln) in the mempool.

Monero solves this problem with the tail emission of 3 xmr/ minute and dynamic block size.

[Anonymous No.10913356]

>>10913206
>Low fees shouldn't be a problem for miners if there is an increase in transactions. Why is this wrong?

Of course mathematically it's a wash. Having relatively few but expensive transactions vs. having relatively many but cheap transactions.

The problem with the latter approach is, that transactions are actually never cheap. Validating (which is not mining) and storing them, as well as bootstrapping new nodes has a cost.

In a sense, large-block-low-fee advocates are making a similar mistake as Proof-of-Stake people do. (PoS inevitably transformes into PoW, as you're going to expand CPU power to calculate the best position in order to win the next block using your stake.)

They are hiding costs in a convoluted process, rather than allowing them to be as explicit as possible.

Explicit costs (like USD per kWh, satoshi per byte) allow for rational economic calculation, while hidden implicit costs (what does it cost to bootstrap a new node 15 years down the road if blocks are x MB large?) make this impossible and lead ultimately to the destruction of the system.

Kind of like how if the factors of production are privately owned, you can make an informed decisions on how to produce stuff (which is capitalism), while when they are state/publicly owned, you can't and you waste resources, leaving people to starve.

[Anonymous No.10913957]

>>10913331
>>10913356
Good posts. I don't want to leave them un(You)'d.

[Anonymous No.10915130]

I just sold all my BTC.

Bitcoin finally can scale

[Anonymous No.10915313]

>>10915130
Now we need to prevent it to split by abc/nchain